Skip to main content

DEMOCRACY IS NOT FOUGHT WITHIN THE CONFINES OF COURTS


The landmark ruling by the Supreme Court on Saturday the 30th left many bewildered by the outcome which of course was a ruling that replicates the ’92, ’94 and ’97 rulings. It confirmed the fears that democracy is not fought within the corridors of the justice. Clearly in many worlds we have seen how the democratic tendencies have been squashed by the courts. Al Gore of USA, Morgan Tsvangirai of Zimbabwe and the Ugandan Democracy are just but examples.
The events of the 2007/08 are still vivid in the mind of Kenyans just as those of the 94 genocide in Rwanda. Nobody wishes the swamp of bloodletting carpeting the sovereignty of this country. This coupled with harsh economic times that were achieved after the post election violence of’08 has rather sent the country into a dumb silence. it has seen many looking at the supreme court ruling as the win of kenya. The chief justice in fact tweeted that the Supreme Court is not an enemy or friend of anybody and in my own words, holds the country in equal measure in its fair and just hearing.   

Fair and Just Hearing?
 It is undeniable that the court hearings were fair and equally just as both parties of the political divide were allowed to present their cases. The hearings were marked with intellectual maturity except some occasions where some lawyers broke out emotionally to cite out their political inclination.
The sobriety shown by Lawyers Fred Ngatia, George Oraro, and Kethi Kilonzo were of high moral standards. They show cased a talent and a mark of professionalism that made Kenyans believe in the judicial reforms. The played a perfect, The Firm and a characteristic Boston Legal. They were admired by many as they articulated their view to the Supreme Court.
One thing that stood out as intriguing as it is beguiling was the Supreme Court registrar’s peremptorial remarks. They were so dry that believing her was utter nonsense. Her body language was so distant from the assurances she gave to the media and you could see in her the true beauty of a reformed judiciary.
The verdict? The judges did not play Portia as was the case in the Merchant of Venice. Neither did they play Solomon in his Biblical landmark ruling. They played Independent Boundaries and Electoral Commission and the Electoral Commission of Kenya merged into one with their solemn faced delivery of the verdict which was not more than a sentence long.
The outcome
Anybody who was privy to the just concluded election petition would agree with me that, African Centre for Open Governance (AFRICOG) had the strongest case. The Coalition for Reform and Democracy had the weakest case as per se. Why then was AFRICOG’s case dropped? It is everyone‘s guess.
Did the judges scrutinize the case justifiably? I think that this was the poorest show in judicial ruling. Basically, the much hyped judicial reforms were the uniforms, call the name. In My opinion, the wolves in the judicial corridors had just earned a new sheep’s skin. The expediency that was emblazoned in the media as judges and magistrates were encouraged to work to cut down on the back log of cases were silent answered prayers. The vetting of judges’ remains a mirage all the same; unachieved end.

What Has Democracy Achieved So Far?
The outcome of the 2002 Election was as a result of what was famed as true democracy. Emilio Stanley Mwai kibaki won the elections fairly and squarely. The then Electoral commission of Kenya was lauded for a fair election done in Kenya’s History. The height of the election came during the swearing in ceremony where Kibaki promised to make good of his campaign goodies.
The world watched with untold envy as Kenyans ended the former president Daniel Toroitich arap Moi’s regime in style. That was the only achievement democracy in Kenya achieved in her fifty years after independence.
What Remains of Democracy in Kenya?
Skeptics have it that this elections which are the second in a row, where Raila Amollo Odinga has lost rather unfairly, could mark the end of his political life. In many circles, Raila has been regarded as the strongest fighter of democracy in Kenya. He can be compared to Morgan Tsvangirai of Zimbabwe. The two have been in and out of prison due to their activities which are riddled with vote rigging, voter manipulation, vote counting figure manipulation, the use of government machinery to silence them and the court humiliation.
The future looks uncertain given that many analysts see the lack of options on the side of Raila. Many have it that Raila could support Kalonzo Musyoka in the near future since it is apparent that he(Raila) has failed over and over again.
Others are that he might rise up again, pick up his tools and go for it. On phone interview with the BBC, Raila hinted at him continuing with the fight for democracy.
My question is, is it Raila Amollo’s fight for presidency here or the fight for democracy?  If I may add another question, Is Raila that hard and tight fisted to accept the decision of the people? Or is the system so biased that our democracy is in shambles?
Whatever remains of the right of the majority in this country is so little to talk about. The future is in limbo. The constitution acknowledges the sovereignty of the people where the courts are the custodian but if the events of the past two weeks are landmarks in history, then democracy in Kenya is on its death bed.  The IEBC’s ruling put a final blow to that only for the Supreme Court to cement it by a rather preposterous ruling.
The survival of democracy therefore remains in the fight for it within constitutional means for the court are inept in protecting this fragile element of this countries being as shown in the dismissal of AFRICOG’S case.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

HOW FEMINISM IS ADDRESSED IN THE RIVER AND THE SOURCE

The story revolves around Akoko. The buck stops with women in the fight against oppressive testosterone. It is upon women to tap into their innermost strength to transform the world it what they imagined. Akoko, being on the losing end in a male-dominated family fought her way to earn her father’s love. She had to put her feet on the ground to make the world recognize her. Aloo, the family spokesman said that Akoko’s hard work had been incorporated into a saying that women sending their children on errands would mention her. She did not show any female shyness when she was introduced to her husband to be. With her head held high, Akoko stirred into Owuor Kembo a feeling that had not earned vocabulary among the Luo - love. Akoko did not subject the chief to monogamy. She was okay with him marrying as many women as her wealth could manage. It was the chief’s decision, despite growing outcry, to remain faithful to his wife. We are not told of any arm-twisting but sure as the sun ris...

EXPLORING FEMINISM IN BLOSSOMS OF THE SAVANNAH AND A DOLL'S HOUSE

Feminism emerged as a movement to fight for the social, political and economic rights of the women. It is more of a political movement that recognises the individuality and sexuality of women and how historically and religion wise have been segregated. Before the advent of feminism, women lived under the tutelage of their male counterparts. For instance, a woman did not have any right to choose whom to marry, it was the prerogative of the male family member to choose. In the TV Serial, Rome, Julius 'Octavian' Caesar, who later became Augustus Caesar, makes a decision that affects both his mother and sister in a way unimaginable. The mother, Artia of the Julii is in love with Marcus Antonius (Mark Antony) and she plans to marry him. However, Caesar decides it will be impossible for the two lovebirds to make it official. For political reasons, he settles for his sister Octavia as a suitable wife for Mark Anthony! There are many examples of male subjugation in numerous cultu...

THEME OF MARRIAGE IN A DOLL'S HOUSE

Henrik Ibsen explores marriage as a tool for women subjugation and at the same time as a weapon of financial emancipation. He also looks at marriage as a level-headed arrangement between two like-minded individuals. Marriage is one of the most celebrated unions in the world. Similarly, it enjoys such high moral ground in religious and many cultural circles. In A Doll’s House, Henrik Ibsen explores this vital part of the society in the life and times of Nora, her husband Torvald Helmer and other characters. From the onset, marriage seems a happy association since Nora is jubilant and bubbly as a wife. Although money could be one of the factors that threaten this marriage, Nora is capable of handling it. Torvald is very particular about the family’s expenditure and warns Nora to be careful. Being naïve and playing innocence helps Norah to get away with her husband’s restraint. In their association, Helmer holds the high moral ground, chief financier and key decision-maker. He ...