Every other day I have been wondering about the concepts of ‘the sovereignty of a nation’ and ‘the sovereign will of a people’. I do not think the sovereign will of a people is ever actualized in the concept of the sovereignty of a nation in Kenya, except, may be, in 2002 general elections.
In my understanding of the concept sovereign, I lean towards the legal-online dictionary that has defined it as; “The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which an independent state is governed and from which all specific political powers are derived; the intentional independence of a state, combined with the right and power of regulating its internal affairs without foreign interference.”
Furthermore, I quote verbatim from the dictionary;
“When analyzed, sovereignty is naturally divided into three great powers; namely, the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary; the first is the power to make new laws, and to correct and repeal the old; the second is the power to execute the laws both at home and abroad; and the last is the power to apply the laws to particular facts; to judge the disputes which arise among the citizens, and to punish crimes.”
This brings to my layman’s understanding that as a Republic, the state has all the powers supreme and unlimited unto itself to determine how it will govern itself, its subjects and the way political powers are to be derived and applied, in the exercise of its own affairs internal or as may be. As a State, the Republic of Kenya, therefore has this sovereignty whose consequence is to use the Constitution to actualize her peoples’ own aspirations, in the derivation and exercise of political powers in self- governance of all matters Kenya or Kenyan. Not everybody can be an elected leader, universal suffrage helps us eliminate the ones we deem not appropriate our goals and aspirations.
It therefore follows that when one talks of the sovereign will of a people, it is about a social contract between how a people want to be governed by their elected representatives, for they constitute the elected leaders source of the political power, and the elected representatives, therefore, derive their authority to exercise political powers in governing of a country through the consent of the people, because the people have ‘willed that the elected officials’ act by the powers they confer unto them. However, this is sometimes a tragic fallacy that may fall short of political reality. To that end, I’m starting to see Kenya as an example.
What happens when an elected leader fools the election process, either on his own acts or not, or by the acts or not of the relevant Constitutionally mandated others, ascends to the throne of any leadership position, where by all facts and due observance of justice, does not deserve to have that mantle. Will his assumption of that political office, much as he may be correctly sworn in to that leadership position, be a true reflection of the will of the people?
There again lies my second dilemma, if it is not accordance with the simple rules of natural justice, will he be morally justified to seek redemption in the Sovereignty of a Nation when his leadership is not the Sovereign will of a people mandating him to rule?
So my questioning continues, will that leader be justified to tell the world, that in observance of Constitutional culture of adhering to it, that where the rules were flawed, and the Sovereign will of the people as enshrined in the Constitution is exercised by the Supreme Court and in its findings, based on its mandate as stipulated in the Supremeness of Katiba, annuls his election, is such a person justified to claim that “A bench of six judges, with only two dissenting elements, subverted the will of around 15 million Kenyans?” If you are of good moral fabric, and understand the law, the verdict is yours.
Each day, we believe that we are a sovereign nation, but the sovereignty of this nation is a piece of dogs smelly defecation in the true exercise of democratic rights, which are subverted by the very ungracious ways upon which we lack the power to enforce the true will of the majority. We have reached a point where executive power has entwined with Parliament’s buffoonery, rendering it an impotent source of election laws, that describe Jubilee’s open tendency to circumvent the judicial ruling, of why the presidential election was declared null and void due to the systemic errors in the transmission process.
One has to rule by the people through their consent. Jubilee is at pains to demonstrate this in a clear manner. Yet, they have an option even though improper. To demonstrate their political ‘acceptability’, the Jubilee Party has orchestrated a campaign in which doubts still exist as to the true expression of the will of the people.
Let us make reference to the mutilation of stringent election laws that were created to increase transparency. The checks and balances that were meant to safeguard electoral processes, so that the true will of the people is aptly documented and errors therein detected and interrogated, in the determination of the political will of the majority, has been tampered with by the new laws that are biased and create the impression that it favors Jubilee because of the time the Jubilee party has orchestrated for implementation. This is an unfortunate event in the country which may have disastrous long-term consequences.
Parliament has abated this ‘thugerism’ by rubber stamping the Executives will to normalize those anomalies through the due processes of Parliament, therefore abusing the Powers of Parliament checking the Executive excesses and overseeing its executive functions. Parliament has failed, because the Judiciary did its part, and pointed out the anomalies, but Parliament, through the tyranny of numbers of Jubilee, and the unfortunate toothless of NASA in its infamy of numbers, has executed Parliamentary coup to the Spirit and Letter of the 2010 Constitution, suppressing the voice of reason and auctioning transparency in our ever vile presidential elections
The ruling elite have constantly asserted that Kenya has a right to self –determination because she is a sovereign state. To that end I agree, but we must allow the correct process that leads to appointment of leaders, through the correct processes, be impartial and accountable with high sense of integrity. Through such a process, the outcome of the election process is likely to be deemed fair by a majority of Kenyans even if they are on the losing side of that election. In short the sovereign will of a people should not be subverted under the pretext of streamlining election laws.
I therefore caution the Kenya, not just in relation to Africa, but to the rest of the world, when people demonstrate and riot because of the political governance they are subjected to, it is because the will of the people more often than not has been trampled on. It is the reason why many Americans protested against Trump’s election. It is the very same reason that led us to the brink of rotting in 2007, and it is the same thing that can sow seeds of discord however successful the regime might be in suppressing the riots and dissenting voices, it reaches a point when trampling the sovereign will of a people, imposing leaders against that will even through domestic channels like Parliament, can lead to indeterminable depths of chaos in future.
Kenyans, open your minds, let us question ourselves. History will be a harsher judge to us in future than the Supreme Court. This court can never prevent us from the harsh judgments of our descendants, but the untold suffering we may potently brew for ourselves or them will never give a false ruling. The outcome of our silly adventurers of political mechanization will never stand the test of time when pursued to gratify the noisy few and disenfranchise the silent majority from enjoying the fruits of true democracy, either now or a century from tomorrow.
Remember Rwanda, the hunger for power and ethnic cleansing was ‘ethno-ego-centric’ in nature of unfair acquisition of power by tribes. That was, and is still is, a bitter lesson to the African continent and a harsh indictment of our fathers for their failure in preventing that genocide of 1994 from its root in the colonization policies of Africa in 1884. It’s signature copy is through the propagation of policies akin to Kenya’s infamous ‘uthamakism’
Take note, like in Rwanda, the explosion of 1994 was the consequence of two or three generation’s failure to act responsibly in handling socio-economic and political power struggles over a long period.