From: Ouko joachim omolo
The News Dispatch with Omolo Beste
THE HAGUE SPECIAL TAKE-1
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2013
As Deputy President William Ruto faces the International Criminal Court (ICC) charges today, as Kenyans we must examine our consciences and admit that when it comes to post-election violence in the country all of us are guilty.
ICC cases against Ruto, President Uhuru Kenyatta and Journalist Joshua arap Sang are only an effort to help pull Kenya back from the brink of chaos after the disputed election in December 2007 which set off widespread protests and ethnically fueled fighting, killing more than 1,000 people, 6000 displaced and dozens of people seeking refuge in a church in Eldoret were burned to death by a mob, believed to be Ruto’s supporters.
According to witnesses, the mob was mostly Kalenjins, Luhyas and Luos, Mr. Odinga’s tribe, which makes up about 13 percent of the population. They overran Kikuyu guards in front of the church and then pulled out cans of gasoline. There were no police officers around. The Eldoret area had become a killing zone, targeting Kikuyu communities.
Against the background that Uhuru Kenyatta has been accused of using Kikuyu street gang called the Mungiki to be take revenge. The Mungiki were sweeping through the slums of Naivasha and killing mainly Luos.
In Kibera, a slum of one million people near Nairobi, thousands burned buses, homes and shops. Click here to see More Photos » . In several cities across Kenya, witnesses said, gangs went house to house, dragging out people of certain tribes and clubbing them to death. In Mathare, a slum in Nairobi, Luo gangs burned more than 100 Kikuyu homes.
As the riots spread, the government took the first steps toward martial law on Sunday night and banned all live media broadcasts. It had been predicted that the vote would be close, and the final results had Mr. Kibaki winning by a sliver, 46 percent to 44 percent.
Although according to observers witnessed election officials in one constituency announce on election night that President Kibaki had won 50,145 votes. On Sunday, the election commission increased those same results to 75,261 votes.
The electoral commission chairman, Samuel Kivuitu, despite protests declared Mr. Kibaki the winner, with 4,584,721 votes compared with 4,352,993 for Mr. Odinga — a spread of about 2 percent.
Even though there were irregularities, the commissioners said, it was not their job to deal with them- it was the judicial system to provide peaceable avenues to address these complaints. Mr Odinga refused to go to court, saying Kenyan judicial systems cannot be trusted. Mr. Kibaki was sworn in almost immediately after the results were announced.
Voting followed tribal lines, with a vast majority of Luos going for Mr. Odinga and up to 98 percent of Kikuyus in some areas voting for Mr. Kibaki. In Kenya voting along tribes do matter very much, and is not likely to end soon, not until in 50 years to come.
The early results showed Mr. Odinga well ahead and more than half of Mr. Kibaki’s cabinet losing their Parliament seats and therefore their jobs. It is here that Raila alleged that votes have been stolen, hence violence.
Election observers said the president’s party had changed tally sheets to reflect more votes than were cast on election day. In some areas, there were more votes for the president than registered voters. Western governments, including the United States were calling for a vote recount in vain.
The research by the youth agenda revealed how electoral violence took different forms. The main ones were fatal attacks, physical assault, verbal assault, destruction of property, obstruction, incitement to violence and hate speech.
Post-election intensified in ‘92 elections, the first after the country’s return to multiparty politics in 1991, the country witnessed unprecedented election-related bloodbath as a result of the politically instigated ethnic clashes.
The clashes instigated by the then Moi-KANU regime claimed the lives of over 700 Kenyans. This was repeated again in 1997. The 2002 general elections were, for instance, relatively violence-free. The elections were a stack contrast with the 1997 and 1992 elections which were undoubtedly violent.
It explains why in Kenya politicians often switch parties based on expediency. The one of Uhuru Kenyatta was an extraordinary one. The launch of T.N.A. also gave him a platform to reject the I.C.C.’s mandate to prosecute him.
In a speech he made during the launch, Kenyatta pointed reference to “sovereignty,” a popular argument against cooperating with the international court. Politicians from the camps of Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto have denounced the court as biased.
But then court prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, countered that Kenya had failed to conduct any credible investigations into who organized the violence. On the contrary, he said, the government had orchestrated a campaign to halt any serious inquiry of the killings, rapes, and persecution of unarmed civilians.
Take-2 continues tomorrow
Fr Joachim Omolo Ouko, AJ
Tel +254 7350 14559/+254 722 623 578
E-mail omolo.ouko@gmail.com
Facebook-omolo beste
Twitter-@8000accomole
Real change must come from ordinary people who refuse to be taken hostage by the weapons of politicians in the face of inequality, racism and oppression, but march together towards a clear and unambiguous goal.
-Anne Montgomery, RSCJ UN Disarmament Conference, 2002