THE CLERGY HAVE SUCCUMBED TO THE INTRICATE TEMPTATIONS OF THE WORLD OF POLITICS.

The clergy have increasingly been made a butt of many cynical jokes. This is because the faithful have developed a cynical distrust of them. And it is quite easy to understand the anger and frustration from the faithful. Big money allegedly from the “clergy’ is threatening to corrode our democracy. But it is not only the money from the clergy (which is actually a lingering misnomer for the church). We also have undue influence from the filthy wealthy cabal who in communion with the clergy are pulling their massive resources together to debilitate the process for essential reforms in this country. Judging by their countrywide campaigns which are awash with all sorts of posters, leaflets and other political rally appurtenances, we have no doubt that colossal sums of money are involved. And, it cannot just be the contributions made by the Christian faithful. There must be undisclosed sources from which these colossal sums of money come from. And since the source(s) is a highly guarded secret, this can only be the kind of money whose aim is to pervert democracy. We all know that it can only be a perversion of democracy for a section of the clergy and politicians to rely on massive financial resources rather than prayer and ideology to influence the referendum outcome. This perversion has been made possible by the very fact that at the moment there is very weak legislation that prohibits political groupings and individuals from sourcing and spending unregulated funds in a political campaign. Is it not time that the conscientious public demanded full disclosures of all contributions and disbursements that have so far gone to the No camp? If indeed it is the money from the faithful, is its use not inconsistent with the purpose for which it was given? We need to know whether the faithful were consulted by the clergy before their tithes were injected into this muddy referendum campaign exercise. This is because no clergy on any pretext whatsoever can elect to use the church resources for purposes other than that which they are meant for. By using the faithful’s money in a political campaign, the clergy have succumbed to their appetites and lost their spirit among the singularly intricate temptations of the world of politics. By the end of the referendum campaign, the clergy will have to deal with the fact that they will increasingly be seen by the faithful as having become a misnomer and a cover for socio-political stagnation. As for the Yes Team, I wish to remind them that commitment and consensus in strategy are prerequisites for a successful campaign. They must try to counter the floodgate of lies perpetuated by the naysayers. They must also deal decisively with those in their midst who have concealed their inner self behind the glib mask of duplicity. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

By Benedict Wachira: Magoha must go…………….my experiences.

Today, Police are all over the University. The administration police have surrounded Kikuyu campus. The GSU are baying for innocent students’ blood, across the Kabetes. A combination of anti-riot, AP, and GSU police have cordoned off the statehouse road, and all they are waiting for is the whistle, the whistle to allow then to maim, maim male students. The whistle that allows them to rape, rape female students. And the whistle that will allow them to kill, kill anybody who runs away from them. The media, the Kenyan media, has decided to give the situation of national importance a total black out, or give a one sided story, on the turn of events. The media is trying to make this issue of national importance, to look like a simple politico-goonship story. The media wants to make the students look like barbarians, and that all they want is to stone cars and cause disruptions. The media is part of the problem. It all began in 2006. April, 2006. A group of former expelled students came to the University, they came as “revolutionaries” who had been kicked out because of fighting for students rights. They came and made promises, they came and excited students, they came and played with students’ emotions, but all they wanted to do was to fuck the students up. Unknown to the University Comrades, Magoha had made a deal with these returned expellees, a deal to help him steal money, a deal to help him stay on his seat for longer, and a deal, to feed them with the cramps that fell. In 2006, April, 2006, Magoha and his accomplices succeeded very well, and took almost all the executive posts. Come 2007, May, 4th, 2007, Magoha wanted more, he wanted a tribally balanced SONU. He wanted arse-lickers, who could do whatever he wanted. And he had prepared well for it. Very well indeed. In the course of 2006, he instigated for the changing of the SONU constitution, so that the outgoing office, would serve as the incoming electoral commission, this he did by: And I quote him “massaging the backs of the then student leaders.” Bribing through stealing from the students’ fund no longer had the common name of corruption, no, it now had been given a new name: Massage. Come May 4th, 2007 Susan Chege, won the chairperson’s seat with a landslide majority. But Magoha could not allow that. He wanted the chairperson’s seat to go to a person who understood how “The system works,” not a novice whom he could not trust. Furthermore, he wanted a tribally balanced SONU, and given that there was no Luo vying for the SecGen’s post, he had to get a Luo for the chairman’s post. This was against the wish of the majority of Luo students, who didn’t like Adinda, Magoha’s candidate, due to his poor performance as a sports secretary the previous year. Those who had tried to stop the rigging were instead beaten up by the riggers, and the University security. Not only was Adinda, a person who had been booed and dismissed all through his campaigns given the seat, but so was a whole lot of others students vying for other seats. We mobilized students to oppose those fake results and tension was all over the university. Even two former student leaders, the late Oulu GPO and Fwamba NC, could not just sit aside and watch, they came to our aid. The University students wanted to take to the streets, but we told them to wait. To wait until we tried out the other channels. We went to all the offices that one could think of, from the ministry of justice, to the ministry of education, from well known lawyers, to river road lawyers, we did letters to the University Council and we finally met the VC himself. All he did was plead with us, not to cause chaos in the University. He instead blamed the constitution. But what he seemingly could not remember was that HIS constitution (new) was never passed by an AGM, and it was thus ILLEGAL. All we wanted was a repeat election of the elections, with neutral electoral commissioners. The talks failed and we settled for our last option: Leading the students to the streets with two agenda only. 1. Magoha must go. 2. Yote yawezekana bila SONU. It was the only option that we had been left with, everybody else, the government, the Council, the Judiciary had given us a blind ear. Oblivious to some of us, Magoha had already begun clandestine talks with some of the people we were together with, and by the date of the demo, only three people had remained. Demoralized and disoriented. How did this happen? Was the only question in our minds. Magoha had proved that he was not only a master tribalist, but a master in the world of bribing. Some of the fellows had been given money, lots of money, others had been given imaginary posts, and others were merely threatened. (Here I can’t help but remember how I had a very progressive meeting with one Mr.Kibore, on how he would mobilize guys from Upper Kabete, drop with them in Chiromo, and head on to main campus. then 20minutes later, I meet Dann Mwangi, who shows me an sms from Kibore, who was already campaigning for the speaker’s post! A post that he had been assured of by Magoha himself!,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,of which needless to say, he never got. ) *Interestingly, the same rigging tactics that were used by Magoha’s men, were the same rigging tactics that Kibaki used in the presidential elections later that year (lack of ballot papers in some areas, changing of results at the summation halls, the use of security persons to protect the riggmasters etc etc) But this was just the beginning of of Magoha’s successes. That year, millions of shillings were stolen, by the SONU leaders in conjunction with Magoha’s administration. By the way, the SONU leaders had given the stealing a nicer name: Jackpotting. Adinda had no decency whatsoever. His lowest point being when he led his goons to beat and maim around 60 Biomedical students, who had sought the University’s intervention for the recognition of their degree, by the Kenya Biomedics registration Board. Instead of the goons, who had used metal pipes and whips to beat up the peaceful and innocent young women and men from Upper Kabete being suspended and facing disciplinary action, it was the victims who were suspended, and some even expelled from the university. It was hence quite clear, who was behind all this. After a year of stealing, stealing and more stealing the elections were here again. This time round, I decided that I was not going to vie for the Secretary General’s post, but not under the conditions that were there. Comrade Amuke and I (and later joined by Onchari) formed the reformist movement. And our call was >>no reforms no elections<>No reforms no elections/SONU must go campaign<>No reforms, no elections/SONU must go

HON. WILLIAM RUTO MUST ANCHOR CAMPAIGN ON DRAFT CONSTITUTION IN THE BREAST OF HONESTY.

If the words of Mario Vargas Llosa (1936- ) are anything to go by, then real politics has indeed very little to do with ideas, values, and imagination. It has everything to do with maneuvers, intrigues, plots, paranoia’s, betrayals and a great deal of calculation. It has no little cynicism. In sum it is a kind of con game. In Kenya, one only needs to confirm the truth of this assertion by just paying a little attention to the goings on in the current constitutional making exercise. The referendum campaign is so crowded with infamous falsehoods and distortions. In fact, it would be an understatement to say that there is a certain class of politicians whose mendacity is simply unparalleled. Take for instance Honorable William Ruto`s rhetoric that the electorate can reject the draft constitution in the 2010 August 4th plebiscite and enact another one in a span of three months. Ruto knows too well that he is perpetuating a blatant falsehood. Perhaps it would do Ruto a lot of good were he to stretch his memory a little bit further to 2002. The NARC government then promised the people of Kenya that it would promulgate a new constitution in 90 days. It took the NARC government three solid years to come up with a draft constitution and even then vested interests saw the draft rejected at the referendum. When the Wako draft was rejected at the plebiscite, the government did not invite people to gloss over the rejected draft constitution with a view to removing the clauses that they disagreed upon so that another referendum could be held immediately thereafter. The entire process had to begin afresh. It has taken another five solid years (two of which are under the grand coalition government) not forgetting that the process has consumed not less than 9 billion of the hard earned tax payers` money for the government to go through another constitutional making process. Like 2005, the country will have to wait for at least two years for political temperatures to subside before taking another stab at the process. And even after that we have to wait for a complete economic recovery before embarking on the process again. This obviously mean that the country will have to head into the 2012 general elections under the current flawed constitution that led to the 2007 post election violence. Honestly speaking, many Kenyans of goodwill shudder at the prospects of the country heading into another election without a constitution that has proper checks and balances. It is because of this that I beseech him for once to anchor his campaign in the breast of honesty. For the sake of the citizenry of this country, let him think for once that he could be wrong. Currently, we are at the brink of enacting a new constitution and it were better if those who feel that there certain clauses they disagree with were to wait for its promulgation then immediately after embark on amendments. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter/tomefrancis.com

DRAFT CONSTITUTION NOT FOR WHIMSICAL ANTICS AND FRANTIC SLAPSTICK COMEDY.

Even as the state intelligentsia (in a bid to avoid being seen as sharing in the guilt) fumbles with the investigations to unearth the bizarre faceless minions behind the inclusion of the two noxious words (national security) in the bill of rights, a number of persons—both public officials and private citizens have expressed fear of the existence of a very dangerous conspiracy aimed at cutting a swath through the efforts at enacting a new constitution. It is emerging that the motivation behind the naysayers campaign is not because the draft constitution is fundamentally flawed as they would want the unsuspecting public to believe. (For if it was then they would not need a conspiracy to make the electorate reject it.) Their rejection of the draft constitution is informed purely by their collective phobia for a possible Raila presidency. It is quite disheartening for politicians to let a very sensitive and costly constitution making exercise degenerate into an exercise for settling personal scores. Granted, Prime Minister (Raila Odinga) is one the most tumultuous and controversial figures in the political history of this nation. His fiery speeches have made him a well-known and popular figure throughout Kenya and the world. His single-minded pursuit of better governance has won him loyal admirers and implacable political enemies. It is precisely because of his growing political presence and his critical stance on governance that has made many political figures shudder at the prospects of his presidency. Today, many of the anti Raila crusaders are the former YK92 operatives. It is instructive to note that at the time when the KANU apologists were snoozing courtesy of KANU`s political furs, Raila was a “political criminal” who was incarcerated because of his political convictions. Despite the incarceration, his hopes for a better Kenya were never dashed. He always drew inspiration from the fact that the world over, the history of human progress is at the same time the history of every new idea heralding the approach of a brighter dawn, and in Kenya, the brighter dawn was always considered illegal, outside of the law by the inimical KANU apologists that presided over the withering away of our state. With the Kibaki succession politics gaining momentum, the move by the YK92 operatives alongside other KANU apologists to begin coalescing with a view to becoming power brokers is not unexpected. They willfully believe that the draft constitution, with its clear checks and balances, will make it virtually impossible for anyone to stand in the way of the democratic will of the people of Kenya. To them, a Raila presidency will mean that historical injustices will certainly be addressed. The panacea in containing a possible Raila presidency lies in their incessant opposition to institutional reforms as well as in becoming stumbling blocks in the country`s efforts to enact a new constitution. In so doing, they hope to have a carte blanche to rig the 2012 presidential elections and then invoke the national security clause (which is in the current constitution) to kill, beat up, and silence those who will be patriotic enough to stand up against this treachery. The question that is increasingly being asked by Kenyans of goodwill is whether whimsical antics and frantic slapstick comedy ought to be sufficient grounds for the rejection of long sought after draft constitution? The draft constitution cannot be and will never be the theatre of the absurd. I take it that you will be sincere enough and honest enough and brave enough to render a verdict according to your convictions, beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt. Suffice to say that each one of us is an atom in the incessant human struggle towards the light that shines in the darkness—the ideal of economic, political and spiritual liberation of mankind! TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

WE MUST ALL SAY NO TO SPIRITUAL MONSTROCITIES.

The three- hour “Uhuru Park Show” hosted by a section of the clergy and which boasted of a batch of like minded politicians attempted to create the impression that its audience is growing substantially. They may have nearly succeeded in doing so were it not for the fact that these men and women of the cloak forgot that such a function was likely to carry with it a pack of unintentional goals. One such unintentional goal (and which had far reaching ramifications) was in letting the all important prayer become a footnote in the whole exercise. This function, complete with all the paraphernalia of a political rally only helped portray the fact that the "maverickness” of a section of the clergy had definitely hit an all-time high. You see, they not only used the guise of prayer to unofficially launch the no campaign, but they also went ahead to choose their campaign symbol contrary to the rules and regulations of the IIEC. In choosing the symbol of a whistle and instructing the naysayers to blow themselves out of breath wherever they are, the clergy were indirectly telling all and sundry that they are not only defiant of the regulations as laid down by the National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) on noise pollution but that they were also telling the larger public that they are more than willing to be insensitive to the public`s desire for a noise free environment. Not even God likes noise. Definitely, the electorate is sure to refuse to be subjected to noise pollution by the whistle blowing naysayers and this may breed a fertile ground for unnecessary confrontation. Such antics signal the clergy`s intention to create not only a rapaciously chaotic but also inefficient and irrelevant protracted referendum campaign. Moreover, whistle blowing will only help portray the clergy`s stance as nothing more than a whimsical kaleidoscope of confused signals. It is such behavior that has made the electorate learn not to stop questioning the moral legitimacy of the clergy`s mawkishness on many other socially sensitive issues. Not even in the primordial society were people held captive in the miraculous whimsy of the supernatural. After all, God, in his own wisdom, deemed it absolutely necessary to abundantly bless man with scientific knowledge so that he (man) can put it to good use to save mankind. By insisting on subjecting mankind to oppressive weight of blind faith, the clergy are actively participating in their own relegation to the dusty cabinet of spiritual monstrosities. In the words of Thomas Browne (1605-1682) “If there be any among those common objects of hatred I do condemn and laugh at, it is that great enemy of reason, virtue, and religion, the multitude; that numerous piece of monstrosity, which, taken asunder, seem men, and the reasonable creatures of God, but, confused together, make but one great beast, and a monstrosity more prodigious than Hydra.” Indeed, the clergy must think it necessary to subject certain dogmas to a critique of reason if they are to command the respect of humanity. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

THE WHIMSICALITY OF WANTING TO INFUSE MORALITY IN THE DRAFT CONSTITUTION.

Any controversial national debate on the future of our country must always begin with the question of legality only then can we proceed to the question of morality.This two-step approach is what we mean when we say that our government operates under a rule of law. Some people seem to forget easily that the question of legality (which so often resolves itself into a question of constitutionality) is both fundamental and paramount on any given issue. It is perplexing as well as perturbing that they have failed to go back to the basics and remind themselves that all great political issues eventually resolve themselves into legal issues. And since the Constitution is the fundamental and paramount law of the land, all debates on great national policy issues must begin and end with the Kenyan Constitution. When some of them opine that the rejection of the draft constitution will mean going back to the current constitution which outlaws abortion I think they are obviously tethered on confusion's tail end. Suffice to say that what the current constitution has done is to leave the operationalization of the clause on abortion in the province of legislation. Indeed, the provisions in the penal code are no different from what is in the draft constitution. Are the naysayers saying that they are ready to live with the penal code that has the same provisions like the draft Constitution but reject the latter? On this alone, can they be honest enough to tell us the motivation behind them yielding to the temptation to oppose the draft constitution. In this regard, I am afraid that they are truly caught up in the whimsical to the extent that they have totally failed to focus on the constitutional issue. Or may be, as it has been said, they are salivating at the prospects of swimming in the American Dollars whose sole intention is to debilitate the constitution making process in the country. With regard to the Kadhis courts, I wish to remind the clergy (and those politicians hiding behind them) that they are no more catholic, pentecostal or believers in the African Traditional Religion than the rest of us. I have never, as a Christian, felt my rights infringed upon by the existence of the Kadhis courts in the constitution. If, however, at a latter date, they prove detrimental to my faith, then I will cross the bridge at that juncture. I am acutely aware that the draft constitution provides a window through which those aggrieved can amend it, so why all this fuss? Unless, of course, we do not subscribe to the biblical teaching that we are all equal in the eyes of God (with or without an earthly constitution). And while the clergy are at it, a section of the politicians in the “Yes camp” are busy instilling fear in the electorate that we need all the naysayers on our side lest they defeat the constitutional referendum. Others like Augustino Neto (Saturday Standard, 1st May 2010) are imputing that the referendum may meet its Water Loo when the minority abstain from voting hence denying the referendum the quorum necessary for it to be valid. Evidently, this witty piece of writing is aimed at inciting the naysayers into abstention. I wish to remind them that if we needed to have everybody on the yes side, then the import of a referendum will be lost. In any case, the referendum laws, in many countries do not provide for quorums. Save for those that put the threshold as low as 40%, the issue of threshold is deliberately left out in many countries. Still, many other people are of the opinion that just as it is unconstitutional to make voting compulsory so is the threshold requirement unconstitutional. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.comtter.com/tomefrancis

CAN THE MINORITY DEFEAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENDUM VIDE ABSTENTION?

It is important to note that the question of constitutionality of the promulgation of a new constitution consists of both the procedural and the substantive aspects. The procedural aspect consists of the minimum requirements laid down by the constitution for the promulgation of a new constitution. On the other hand the substantial aspect consists of the basic concerns of necessity, beneficialness, and practicability. In other words, when we put this debate into the ordinary man`s language, there are two issues that we must grapple with: the procedural issue of constitutionality; and the substantive issue of policy. Of much concern is the substantive issue and especially with regard to the necessary quorum in the national referendum. In view of the above Mr. Augustino Neto (Saturday Standard, 1st May 2010) touched on both the procedural and the substantial. On the substantive, he noted with a lot of concern the absence of the referendum law (which can only be introduced by ordinary legislation). The import of threshold is such that it gives the majority of eligible voters the impression that if that minimum requirement is not achieved, their opinion is not taken into account and therefore the referendum exercise is null and void. Individual countries are therefore expected to come up with clear, unequivocal, and straightforward legislation to guide their national referendums. It is also important to note that countries have to decide whether a referendum on a single issue has the same weight with that of the promulgation of a new constitution and therefore both have to be subjected to the same threshold or whether the latter should have a slightly lower threshold. It is worth noting that in many countries, the requirement for the latter is slightly lower. This is deliberately so because many people fear that a higher threshold can block the whole process. They opine that when a higher quorum is provided for, the result of the referendum can be predetermined vide deliberate abstentions. This is obviously a move which is against the constitutional purpose of the referendum. Indeed, it is very possible that the naysayers can call for a countrywide boycott in the hope of defeating a constitutional referendum by abstention despite being in a minority. Respective countries must therefore have the foresight to prevent such a scenario. I would for instance be frightened at the prospects of parliament passing a legislation that would require a 60% turnout of eligible voters and a 50% plus one as the minimum requirement for the promulgation of a constitution. But unlike Augustino Neto, I may be comfortable with a legislation that states that “a referendum’s decision “shall be considered effective and binding if at least 40% of the total number of eligible voters participate in the vote and if 50% plus one of them voted in favour of the decision. (It is instrumental to note that eligible voters herein refer only to registered voters and not anybody who has attained the age of 18 years.). This is because I do not anticipate voter turn-out to hit an all time low of 40% even with the ongoing debilitation by the naysayers kingpins. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

THE CLERGY`S WALKOUT AND SUBSEQUENT VOW ON OBSTRUCTIONISM IS UNCALLED FOR.

The government's willingness to seek consensus with the clergy on the draft constitution has finally been rewarded by the latter`s abandonment of the discussions. I say “rewarded” because the electorate now knows that the clergy was never in the first place interested in consensus talks. That is why from the very onset, the clergy ensured that the discussions were intermittently bogged down in procedural wrangling. And as largely anticipated, after pulling out of the talks, they have vowed not to relent in their obstructionism of the country`s efforts in the promulgation of a new constitution. Clearly, their actions are a testament to the fact that seeking consensus with a person so much consumed in conservatism and dogmatism can only be an exercise in futility. You see, since time immemorial the clergy has always been intolerant to emerging fountains of knowledge to the extent that many people fervently wished that the good Lord should deport the lock-step clergy to Hell for not listening and sometimes preaching and praying in “strange” tongues. As early as the seventeenth century, some liberated clergy got the drift. They too started questioning the place of dogmas in the Christian church. The conservatives viewed as dissenters. But to the so many people who understood and embraced their preaching and teaching on nature, morality and theology, they were latitudinarians (derived from the words attitude and latitude). This is because they saw the import of allowing some freedom in attitude, beliefs, behavior and interpretation in religious matters. They sought to reconcile fundamental Christian ethics with the new rationality of Renaissance philosophy, science, and humanism. Because of the extent of their liberalism they were often condemned as atheists. Many of us would have hoped that history would have provided the clergy with such important lessons. However, it looks like the vital historical lessons have never been learnt. It is painful today to see many of the clergy still clenched in the rigor mortis of dogmas. Their views on science are still antagonistic. They forget that in God`s own wisdom, human beings were abundantly blessed with knowledge with which to make human life more comfortable. Fortunately, such clergy are increasingly being isolated because no longer are the faithful a faith -fool lot. Unlike in the yonder days, where dogmas where formulated (especially during the time of doctrinal controversy) in order to clarify the orthodox teaching in the face of emerging challenges, today’s world is sufficiently informed as to decide what is best in the interest of humanity. Like Horace (65-8BC), we wish to remind the clergy that much as they wish to drive out nature with a pitchfork, nature will constantly be running back. The best we can do is to take advantage of our God given knowledge to be able to live harmoniously with nature. Even though I am extremely disappointed with a section of the clergy whose school of thought is far removed from the realities of today’s world, I am however cognizant of the fact that the law does not grant me the license with which to express my inner most feelings. In this regard, I have decided that I be sufficiently philanthropic as to reward them (clergy) with a pacifier. They could suck on it until the referendum exercise is dispensed with. In so doing, they will at least keep their mouths closed. In return they will immensely benefit from their silence. This is because they will have an ample time to re-work on their perception. I want to believe that they are not oblivious to the fact that the public has increasingly viewed them as purveyors of nothing more than crooked religious voodoo. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

Reflections: a letter to Kirimi who went missing and suddenly life is not the same again

Reflections: a letter to Kirimi who went missing and suddenly life is not the same again ''ITS INEVITABLE-THE CHICKEN WILL ALWAYS COME HOME TO ROOST''

THE YES TEAM MUST BE WARY OF THE JOHNNY-COME-LATELIES.

Despite the research findings by Synovate Research that seem to suggest that the No Team is currently drenched in torrential political rain accompanied with political crashing, the Yes Team cannot afford to sit on its laurels. If anything, this research finding should signal the beginning of a series of protracted campaigns to discount the heavy dose of misinformation purveyed by the No Team to ensure that draft constitution wins overwhelming support especially from the doubtful pockets of the expansive Rift Valley Province. With focus and clear strategy, it will be unsurprising for the draft constitution to receive unprecedented backing from the electorates in say Eldoret North constituency. The Yes Team must strive to bring everybody on board, but in so doing, the Yes Team must be wary of the Johnny-come-latelies and the active portfolio strategists who are forced by circumstances to invest where political conditions seem favorable to them. This is because such elements are more often than not to bring in to the Yes Team shades of opinion that are unhealthy. For starters, some have already began suggesting that in order to bring everybody on board, there is need for the Yes Team to purge the draft constitution of its contentious clauses to make it more suitable for a pluralistic democracy. They opine that an addendum is the only way out of the seeming intractable constitutional difficulty. Prima facie, an addendum appears like some god send opportunity to solve this intractable constitutional difficulty. However, a closer look at it reveals that engaging in such an exercise is akin to an additive inverse. This is because one man`s meat is another man`s poison. In other words, there are those of us with quite a number of contentious issues in the constitution. The fact that we have kept our cool should not be misconstrued to mean that we are completely satisfied with the provisions in the draft constitution. This then means that were we to isolate the contentious issues then almost every article and clause in the draft constitution will be forced to become an addendum. In my opinion, we have reached the ne plus ultra. From the foregoing, any move to re-open the draft will therefore serve the interest of those unwilling to promulgate a new constitution. Suffice to say that we must at this stage elect to deal with actualities. We must therefore not be willing victims to either those suffering from accelerated political depreciation or those suffering from political acceleration stress. Already, Moi; the self professed political professor (emeritus) opines that the country is better served with the current constitution and that we only need minimum constitutional amendments to make it even better. How on earth can one seek consensus with such a person? Like Moi, key political players from the expansive Rift Valley Province are cunningly hiding under the churches’ cloak to achieve their selfish political desires. They have elected to use freedom of speech not so much to express their wants but to conceal them. As for the grand coalition government, it must not shy away from saying that the draft constitution is a government project. It is. It became a project of the coalition government (read as the people of Kenya) the day it (the coalition Government) pledged to the citizenry that it will deliver a new constitution. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

THE ELECTORATE MUST NOT BE FED ON A PLETHORA OF INFAMOUS FALSEHOODS ON THE DRAFT CONSTITUTION.

Whereas we acknowledge the fact that the obstacles to consensus on the draft constitution are considerable, I wish to appeal to the political class and a section of the clergy to ensure that the campaigns for or against the draft constitution must be issue based. Of particular concern is the fact that they are saying things that are not only grossly misleading but utterly irresponsible as well. First, the draft opponents opine that in the absence of Majimbo, the draft constitution completely fails on the devolution front. What they however fail to tell the public is that the moment every legislator demanded to have a region in his backyard, the import of devolution as envisaged in article six of the draft constitution was lost. Aware that we could not sit down with a square rule and compass to re-design our ethnic boundaries, the regional architects engaged in shady alliances and disgraceful back-room deals in Naivasha with a view to blocking and thwarting the interests of politicians from smaller regions from ascending to the highest political office of this country. However, back in parliament it emerged that no conscientious legislator wanted to be part of a cabal that desired an amendment for the formation of permanent regional majoritarian. Secondly, the no campaign is saying that the president in the draft constitution is akin to a quasi king. This of course, is another white lie. It is important to note that unlike the current constitution that makes a mockery of the separation of powers with little if any checks and balances; the draft constitution has vested distinct power in the three arms of the government. It also has in built checks and balances effectively designed to limit on the president and by extension, the government`s abuses. The draft constitution empowers parliament to vet the president`s appointees. For instance in article 205, clause one, the state president on the recommendation of the Judicial Service Commission and with the approval of the National Assembly, shall appoint the Chief Justice, the Deputy Chief Justice and other Judges. In extreme circumstances, parliament can, with a two thirds majority, impeach a sitting president without shooting itself in the foot as is the case in the current constitution. We also have the senate which can check the excesses of not only the president but of parliament as well thereby further limiting on the abuses of the president. Thirdly, with regard to article thirty five, clauses one and two, abortion is only permitted to the extent that in the opinion of a health professional, the mother`s health is in grave danger. This views are also contained in sections 158, 159 and 160 of Kenya`s penal code. Like the draft constitution, section 240 of the penal code provides an exception. It states that a person will not be criminally responsible for performing in good faith and with reasonable care and skill a surgical operation upon an unborn child for the preservation of the mother`s life, if the performance of the operation is reasonable, having regard to the patient`s state at the time, and to all circumstances of the case. Interestingly, this section of the penal code has never caused uproar among the clergy. It must be said without any fear of contradiction that the flock is irked by the devout clergy that has deliberately or otherwise chosen to misunderstand the divine linkage between Christianity and science. On land, article fifty nine, clauses one and two spell out the right to an individual to own property and that the state shall not arbitrarily deprive a person of property of any description nor will the state through parliament’s legislation limit or in any way restrict the enjoyment of any right under this article as it will obviously be negating the article on freedom from discrimination as is contained in article thirty seven, clause one of the same draft constitution. However, in clause three, such an exceptional action is permissible in so far as it is strictly done in the interest of the public. It must be noted that it is the practice all over the world for the states to at times invoke the power of eminent domain to foster economic productivity. Based on our history of injustices, it must be made clear that the power of eminent domain can only be invoked on legally acquired property. This is where the National Land Commission (NLC) comes in. Before adequate compensation, NLC will look into whether the land in question was legally acquired or not and make appropriate recommendations to the Government. It is also quite in order for the government to introduce tax on unused but legally acquired lands with a view to encouraging production on such lands. Again, this is purely in the interest of the public. The argument by the “no” proponents that the government will arbitrarily deprive people of their land is therefore baseless. Finally, Kadhi courts are not in anyway contentious since they do not infringe upon the constitutional rights of the Christians. In any case, true Christians know that equality is in the eyes of God, not the earthly constitution. Clearly, the challenge seems to be how the “yes” proponents can carry out effective civic education given the propensity for the electorate to swallow with ease plethora of infamous falsehoods and distortions. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

E-LEARNING IS THE WAY TO GO FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION IN KENYA.

Quite significant during President Kibaki`s launch of e-learning in schools on 29th of march 2010, at the Kenya Institute of Education (KIE) was his bold message that traditional schools are not working as effectively as we would have wanted. With population explosion, live classroom-based teaching is becoming too costly and cumbersome. Every year there is an astronomical increase in the budgetary allocation to the Ministry of education. For instance investments to the education sector, through the two sister ministries within the 2009-2010 budget made up 18.6% of Kenya`s total budget. It is worth noting that the larger majority of this budget was under recurrent expenditures. This included things such as paying of personnel salaries and purchase of expendables. The Ministry of Basic Education’s budget went up by 16.2% while that of the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology rose by 12.9 percent. Not withstanding the enormous strain that such an allocation has on the government`s annual budget, the two sister ministries are still unable to meet their rising recurrent expenditure, thus the need to come up with a more effective, cost cutting education mechanism that can achieve education objectives without the unnecessary attendant costs. This is where e learning comes in. To begin with, e-learning will definitely, reduce the government`s wage burden by significantly eliminating costs associated with instructors` salaries bearing in mind that fewer and fewer teachers and lecturers will be required because the Internet will be overflowing with accessible, multimedia presentations from experts in different disciplines. Secondly, and perhaps of more significance is the fact that the Kenya National examination Council (KNEC) will administer examinations on-line thus significantly reducing, if not totally eradicating instances of cheating in national exams. Thirdly, on-line education will provide a challenge for bright students, extra help for lagging students and alternatives for those who don’t function well in a classroom. This is because synchronous e-learning is self-paced. Fast learners are allowed to speed through instruction that is relatively easy while slow learners slow their own progress through content thus eliminating frustration with themselves, their fellow learners, the course and the teacher. In these ways, e-learning is inclusive of a maximum number of participants with a maximum range of learning styles. Even though there are those debilitators of e-learning who have said that e-learning will mean handing your kids over to a Robot teacher, the truth is that the magical bond between teachers and students will remain intact and it will perhaps be enhanced further. This is because, since lesson planning and delivery will move on-line, the few available teachers and lecturers will have more time to provide personalized support and mentoring to students. From the foregoing, since the advantages of e-learning far out weigh the traditional mode of education, the government must not fear venturing into this path. Whether we like it or not, e-learning is rapidly growing. Its clear benefits guarantee it a leading role in the teaching and learning strategy. The only drawback as for now is that the existing technology infrastructure in our country is inadequate to accomplish this very important goal. It is hoped that with more investment in technology, e-learning may just be the panacea to the problems bedecking the education sector in Kenya. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

POLITICAL ELITES MUST NOT BUTTRESS BOVINE OBEDIENCE IN THEIR ETHNIC BASES.

Hobbes in the Leviathan argues that because people are motivated primarily by selfish reasons, the society must come up with a political order that can curb such selfish desires and guarantee all the citizenry equal rights. Such a political order is referred to as the constitution. However, it must be understood that there will always be an aristocratic minority who will fear that a fair constitution will curtail their insatiable desires. This explains why today, few political elites are trying to buttress bovine obedience in their ethnic bases by spewing empty rhetoric. Take for instance the allegation that the president in the proposed constitutional arrangement will wield extensive powers beyond the reach of the people. This argument is untrue. First and foremost, parliament will vet all presidential appointees. Moreover, with a two thirds majority, parliament can impeach an inept president without shooting itself in the foot as is the case in the current constitution. The senate is also empowered to check presidential excesses. From the foregoing, it is very clear that the president will not have a carte Blanche to act as he or she pleases. The fear that the president will be a quasi king is therefore unfounded. As for the inclusion of the clause on abortion; I think that a section of the clergy have deliberately chosen to misinterpret it. If, indeed, they have fears that abortion proponents are likely to exploit the ambiguity in this clause, then parliament through legislation can define the term professional. Besides, Christians have God's ten commandments in place. I do not therefore think that it is in the province of the Government to legislate for people's morals. And as for the inclusion of the Kadhi courts in the constitution. Let it be said loud and clear that the clergy are insincere on this issue given the fact that the Kadhi courts do not in any way infringe upon the rights of the Christians. It is worth noting that the church was adequately represented in the Bomas conference that came up with the then Bomas draft which has been one of the many references in the making of the current draft constitution. The Kadhi courts were not a contentious issue then. I do not understand why they have suddenly become contentious. In any case, true Christians know that equality is in the eyes of God, not the earthly constitution. On land, it is instrumental to note that last year; the cabinet and parliament passed a comprehensive legislative National Land Policy. The draft constitution borrowed a lot of from this policy. The National Land Commission will among other things, initiate investigations, on its own or on a complaint, into present or historical land injustices and recommend appropriate redress. Closely related to this is the clause that empowers parliament to legislate on the minimum and maximum acreage that one is supposed to own. Implicitly, the government is targeting huge tracks of idle land. It is only proper that idle land is taxed to generate income for the country. One wonders why this issue has become so emotive. It must be made abundantly clear that the clause has nothing to do with the compulsory acquisition of land by the government. Lastly, I do not agree with those suggesting that we postpone the referendum in order build consensus necessary for the amendment of certain clauses. I know for sure that if we had more time for the discussion of the draft constitution, we would probably make a great many more mistakes and make this exercise even more emotive than it currently is. It is incumbent upon us to note that there is still a window of opportunity available to those dissatisfied. This is because, after the draft constitution has been passed at the referendum, any proposed law can be put to a popular vote before it can go into effect. Indeed, the practice worldwide is that signatures of about 5 to 10 percent of the registered voters are required to validate such a petition. In Kenya, only a million signatures are required. Faced with these facts, I urge the “no” crusaders to kindly modify their stance, changing it so slightly so that "dissatisfied" becomes "satisfied," which is just a difference of three letters. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

RUTO`S TREE PLANTING EDICT SIGNALS HIS CLIMB-DOWN IN THE FACE OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.

Going by the highly unexpected good tidings that emanated from none other than Hon. on the verge of a complete political metamorphosis. You see, this increasingly belligerent legislator has over time demonstrated that he has no ready-made solutions to offer despite his harsh criticisms of the various cabinet policies that he himself participates in crafting only to disown them even before the ink in which they were written dries up. That he has finally completely reversed himself on the issue of environmental conservation and even gone ahead to issue an edict to the effect that all land owners in Kenya must have at least ten percent of their land planted with trees for purposes of conserving the environment is no doubt a climb-down in the face of political correctness. Even though Ruto`s edict is logically inconsistent with his usual proclamations, I have no doubt in my mind that it has nonetheless left many conscientious Kenyans with a deep sigh of relief. I dare say that it is only a matter of time before he also sees through the same lenses, the wisdom in not attempting to engender yet another constitutional gridlock in this country. It is surely comforting to know that even though we haggle and sometimes even quarrel over certain political issues but at least we can pride ourselves of being able to rise to the occasion and think (however long it takes) on the same wavelength when it comes to issues that gel us as a nation. It is against this backdrop that Kenyans from all walks of life fervently hope to see a similar change of heart in William Ruto`s stance regarding the constitutional making process. We hope that William Ruto will sooner than later realize that parliament has had its say on the draft constitution and that it is only good manners that he, without further ado, lets Kenyans have the final say vide the prospective referendum. Neither should he make the costly mistake of allowing those hypocritical legislators surrounding him to cloud his political sense. I say so because I have a feeling that Hon. William Ruto knows too well that there is no symbiotic relationship between him and each of those legislators attempting to debilitate the constitution making process. Many of them are politically inept and are thus desperately jostling to burry themselves deep in his political fur as a means of avoiding the wrath of their constituents come 2012. Still, more others are conjoining themselves with him for the sole reason that they are deeply disappointed with the fact that the draft constitution has barred them from touting their presidential ambitions as a conduit pipe to retaining their parliamentary seats. They imagine that Ruto has enough political clout to kowtow parliament to amend the noxious clauses failure to which he will rally the public to reject the draft constitution at the referendum stage. The more crafty ones think that Ruto`s political epitaph has already been written and that all they need to do to win the massive support from his political turf is to be seen publicly with him and to permanently adorn foolish grins on their faces and to vigorously nod their heads in agreement with anything he says. Such conniving legislators must be told in no uncertain terms to hold their horses or risk their political careers festering faster than they can imagine. It is fallacious for them to imagine that Kenyans will allow them the opportunity to fire up their ethnic bases to vote “no” against a draft constitution that we have painstakingly sought for years without end. In so doing they will only prove to all and sundry that they are not progressive firebrands as they have all along wanted us to believe. Quite frankly, it bothers many Kenyans that what is happening now is just an excuse on the part of a section of the legislators to advance arguments that totally ignore the constitution making process and that they are also hell bent on interpreting things in a rather parochial way in the hope that they will succeed in sowing the seeds of confusion among Kenyans. Take for instance the land issue that has allegedly become contentious; how come that last year parliament adopted the land policy as it appears in the current draft constitution without the flaring of emotions? It is therefore purely hypocritical for a section of these legislators to belatedly backpedal on the same issue. Kenyans are not a benighted lot and they will therefore not be confounded by such unintelligible doubletalk. Neither should such legislators attempt to adorn the church’s cloak or peddle ethnic sludge in the hope that such antics will provide them with the political discourse aimed at denying Kenyans a new constitution. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

PRELATES STANCE ON DRAFT CONSTITUTION IS ALOT MORE DISINGENUOUS.

Three quiescent years after the botched up 2007 Presidential elections, it seems as if the leadership of the mainstream Christian Churches has rediscovered its voice again in the political arena. But unfortunately, once more its position, as represented by among others; cardinal John Njue of the catholic church and Reverend Peter Karanja; Provost of All Saints' Cathedral Nairobi, is yet again, on the wrong side of history. This is because their remarks to the effect that they will rally “their flock” to vote against the draft constitution are a lot more disingenuous. Far be it for me to suggest that the prelates have no right as citizens of this country to comment on this country’s constitutional issues. The problem is that usually, whenever they comment on any constitutional issue, it is presumed that theirs is a reflection of the common position adopted by the church faithful. It is for this reason that I beseech them to be more guarded with their speech lest they want to goof time and again and in so doing, keep on confirming their astounding ignorance on constitutional matters with relative ease. Remember the 2005 draft constitution referendum vote? The leadership of the mainstream Churches tried to force down the throats of the faithful the direction to take. So many Christians I know voted en-masse against the respective positions taken by the church leadership. This bits and pieces of increased and unrestrained sentiments by the top church leadership is not only a manifestation of their dictatorial tendencies but is also a clear pointer to the disrespect with which they hold “their flock.” Clearly, they have no respect for individual conscience and liberties on matters constitutional. I wish to remind them that the flock shall once more rightfully give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s. It behooves the faithful to see the clergy behave as if matters constitutional are solely in the confines of faith more than reason. Take for instance, the right to life; it appalls the faithful that the church leadership is even oblivious of the obvious relationship between religion and science. Is not crystal clear to the church leadership that God intended science and religion to compliment each other? The church leadership must begin to seriously examine itself and stop these antics. Theirs is not only a disgusting trend but also a dangerous one for that matter and which will not be tolerated by the faithful. I must not hesitate to state that I am a Christian faithful but not a Christian faith fool. I therefore have no patience with subjective and partisan prelates. The stance by the church leadership will undoubtedly see sentiments simmer at dangerously high temperatures in the mainstream churches. Managing this disappointment will require deft hands. It will perhaps take a lot more reassurance in the weeks and months ahead to calm the deep seated simmering anxiety among the faithful of the mainstream Churches. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

WHEN WILL THE GOVERNMENT REPOSSES THE ILLEGALLY PRIVATISED KENYA SEED COMPANY?

Lest we forget, a forensic report released by PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC) indicated that there were glaring breaches and irregularities characterizing the privatization of Kenya Seed Company (KSC). Moreover, the Kenya High Court ruled on 12th April 2005 that KSC had changed hands illegally. Why, then, is the repossession of KSC still shrouded in mystery? Little if anything is being done by the government and especially by the Ministry of Agriculture under whose docket this public facility lay to ensure that this extremely important asset reverts back to public ownership. It is unbelievable that the government can still drag its feet when credible information points to the fact that conniving individuals covertly diluted the government’s shareholding (run indirectly by Agricultural Development Corporation) from 53 percent to 40 percent. Worse still is the fact that the KSC board and management never consulted ADC in the privatization process. Legally, this means that the privatization was null and void. One should have expected the Kenya Government to be stirred into action once it got credible information. But contrary to our expectations, the government seems pretty relaxed on its laurels. To begin with, the share issue raised only a paltry Sh144.7 million rather than the Sh160 million as a result of an under subscription. This under subscription was occasioned by a deliberate lack of disclosure to both the government and the general public of the worth of the company at the time of its disposal, consequently, the then directors and politically well-connected individuals had a carte blanche to increase their shareholding and therefore acquire KSC at a throw away price given the fact that the share price valuation was seriously under valued. Speaking on the strength of the court ruling and the PwC report, the Agriculture minister William Ruto vowed late last year that this asset will be repossessed the soonest. However, there are no indications to date, that the much hyped repossession is about to take place. Nothing seems to be forthcoming and the “avuncular” Agriculture Minister has maintained a dead silence on the issue. I wish to remind the Minister that it is imperative that he, under whose docket this thieving took place, constantly informs the public of the progress that is so far being made in this front. It is instrumental to note that some of the key players behind this privatization are serving in the current government as legislators. Some of them were lawyers of the architects of this scam. Still, some of them later own served as members or directors of KSC. In fact one of these “smart” lawyers is not only holding huge shares in this facility through proxy but has also his eyes firmly fixed on the country’s presidency come 2012, under the banner of youthful and transformative leadership. It is also worth noting that the bellicose allies of the Agriculture Minister are alluding to a political alliance ahead of 2012 between the Agriculture Minister and one of these “smart lawyers.” Could the political alliance in the offing be the reason why there is a go slow in the repossession of this vital public asset? In whose interest is the Agriculture Minister and by extension, the Kenya Government dragging its feet on this matter? TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

ARE THESE POLITICIANS VICTIMS OF RABID GRANDIOSE DELUSIONS?

“When the law is on your side, pound the law. When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. And when neither is on your side, pound the table” so goes a dictum. It is this dictum that made me recall an incident in parliament last week when one legislator chided another legislator for banging the table when demanding for the creation of additional regions and counties. Such was the acrimony that characterized parliament’s sessions last week. This acrimony is natural given the fact that the quest for fair political representation has been with us for quite some time. With rapid population growth and with no clear criteria for the creation of legislative boundaries; rabid grandiose delusions are likely to manifest in some ambitious politicians as we approach 2012. Parliaments acrimony aside, we must as a nation be cognizant of the fact that fair representation demands for a formula that best serves the country’s national democratic aspirations while balancing the peculiarities of the country. The peculiarities to be considered include ethnic diversity, geographical size, level of economic development and civic awareness. Ignoring these peculiarities is a sure recipe for protracted conflicting ideologies that could easily engender secessionist sentiments. I am convinced that with sobriety we can agree on a formula that will best address fair representation without appearing to trample upon the rights of other ethnic groups. We have enough academic gurus who can get us out of this impasse. (Unless of course, to paraphrase Plato’s words, these academic gurus are too smart to engage in politics and do not therefore care whether they are punished by being governed by those who are dumber). We must begin to appreciate the fact that Kenya is not a blanket woven from one thread, one color, and one cloth. It is only in the conscious harnessing of unity in diversity that we can all be proud of our nationhood. In this regard, we must not allow regional king pins from pursuing their delusions at the expense of our nationhood. In the public limelight such politicians will pass for our average nationalists but in the comforts of their ethnic enclaves they are shockingly different. They have shown that they are more than willing to resort to ethnic driven merry- go- rounds with a view to mutilating the draft constitution to self perpetuate their selfish political interests by riding high on our ignorance. They will therefore do anything at their disposal to ensure that we are far removed from the reality by insisting that we continue putting on our ethnic blinkers. In so doing, we will have helped them to realize their own selfish interests. Lest we forget, in the words of Paul Valery, “Politics is the art of preventing people from taking part in affairs which properly concern them.” We the people must wipe off from our faces, those foolish ethnic grins. We must not dance ourselves lame when these leaders invoke the hydra of negative ethnicity only for us to cry later. In any case, it is doubtable that such leaders want to use this ethnic platform to advance the interest of “their people”. It can only be that they want to ride on the back of negative ethnicity to access raw power so that they can advance their own selfish interests. TOME FRANCIS. BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

MORE REGIONS? POLITICIANS MUST STOP THE DISSEMINATION OF ERROR AND MENDACITY ABOUT OUR NATIONHOOD.

For the past few weeks, the public has increasingly been treated to a circus by flamboyant politicians who have tried moving clauses in the CoE draft hither and thither (and dither) and threatening that failure to meet their demands would see them rally “their people” to reject the draft constitution at the referendum stage. One such issue is the clamor for additional ethnic conclaves (which are mistakenly being referred to us regions) and counties. In their political gimmick they want to make the unsuspecting public to believe that theirs is a quest for devolution of resources. As it stands now, I am hesitant to accept that the clamor for fair representation (whether viewed through the lenses of geographical size or population) is informed by the politics of the devolution of resources per se. I tend to think that the real argument behind this latest move has more to do with how votes cast in these ethnic conclaves in the prospective general elections will translate into seats won by political parties and by extension how the same seats shall determine who becomes the country’s Chief Executive. Strictly speaking, this is an act of gerrymandering. It behooves the intelligence of the larger populace that there are still politicians out there who are hell bent on steadily building their political careers out of such chicanery. Contrary to their beliefs, their bid to become the regional king makers is steadily faltering; and their perceived balloons of success will soon be seriously deflated. Perhaps, it is only a matter of time before their political balloons burst. The truth is that our nation is not ready at all to be divided into ethnic fiefdoms. It must be crystal clear to all and sundry that to look at issues from the lenses of these self serving politicians is a sure way to reserve for our nation a place in the dust-bin of history. One does not have to look far a field to discern countries who, for like-reason, have suffered that fate. In rebuking their selfishness I draw inspiration from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer that states that “Constantly speak the truth, boldly rebuke the vice, and patiently suffer for the truth’s sake.” It is in this light that I dare say that every Kenyan must exercise his or her responsibility and vigilance and to speak truthfully about the constitution making process. In this regard I urge Kenyans from all walks of life to remain faithful and vigilant to the process as it approaches the final stage. In the words of John P Curran, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” To shy away from this enormous and God given responsibility because a temerarious, obdurate and desultory cabal is telling us that ethnic conclaves are good for us will be suicidal. Such persons are hell bent in making us to exchange that vigilance and responsibility for complacency, to idle in the shadow of false images, thoughtlessness, ignorance, and disinformation and to blindly swallow sugar coated lies that they are desperately trying to implant in our minds. They without prospicience want the largely impuissant (intellectually) public to permit without as much protest the dissemination of error and mendacity about the state of our nation. It is upon the patriotic academic gurus to make the public to begin appreciating the fact that when yesterday’s liberation fighters turn into today’s political henchmen who want to employ chicanery as a means to turning the country into ethnic conclaves; they (the public) must be ready to vigorously shake them back to reality. This is the price we have to pay to regain the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great nation was founded. We must unreservedly say time and again that “never shall we allow Kenya to become a hotbed of political insanity. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

TSC MUST STOP BOGs FROM TAMPERING WITH THE TEACHERS RECRUITMENT PROCESS.

In just about a fortnight, the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) is going to embark on the recruitment of teachers in both primary and post primary institutions in an attempt at addressing the huge shortfall in its workforce. As opposed to primary schools where the process is done centrally at the respective district education offices, such interviews are conducted in the respective institutions when it comes to post primary institutions. Here, the respective boards of governors (BOG`s) are tasked with the responsibility of interviewing interested applicants and recommending the most successful ones to be employed by TSC. And as is often the case, this exercise will be followed by much gnashing of teeth as a result of skewed recruitment procedures. Although many BOG`s will show that the decision to settle on a given candidate was legitimate, the reality is that this exercise is always clenched in the rigor mortis of gender, nepotism, ethnicity and religiosity. Even though TSC has time and again allayed fears that the process is insulated from any tampering; in reality, if an institution’s governing body decides to rate gender, nepotism, ethnicity or religious devotion higher than pure professionalism when recommending a teacher to TSC for employment, then nothing in the current TSC interview guidelines can stop them. To begin with, “unwanted” candidates will not be privy to the date scheduled for the interview despite having traveled hundreds of kilometers to submit the applications. And if they are lucky enough to attend such interviews they will normally be locked out on technicalities other than those stipulated by TSC. For instance, a board may deliberately tamper with the subject combinations or add something else that is totally strange to professionalism in order to favor their preferred candidate. Since unsuccessful applicants are unlikely to want to publicize the fact that they were discriminated against or launch a case in a court of law, this means that many applicants will have been discriminated against and will continue to be discriminated against with no legal protections. Even if a teacher manages to get a job in such a school despite his or her gender, ethnicity or faith, their problems may not be over. School boards can, inter alia, decide to recommend to TSC on levels promotion on the basis of the ethnicity or faiths of teachers, meaning that there can be a de facto ban on senior posts for those from the wrong gender, ethnic or religious backgrounds. In such instances, rarely is performance considered as a factor in promotion. Despite being aware of this anomaly, TSC has made no coherent or principled defense of this situation and it is therefore unsurprising that in most cases it endorses the decisions of the boards without as much as a query thus justifying the extent of discrimination allowed against teachers. Eliminating malpractices in the teacher recruitment process is a simple solution that does not need high priced consultants or endless reinventions of the wheel. We already have in place the Ethnic Relations Act, therefore what remains is its enforcement that will put a stop to semi autonomous government agencies (SAGAs) such as TSC from continuing to operate in stark contrast with the expectations of the larger Kenyan populace. The least we expect from the Government is for it to force TSC to ensure that school boards do not discriminate applicants based on gender, nepotism, ethnicity or religion in employment. In so doing, it will perhaps make teaching a profession that can draw enough qualified and competent applicants. After all, hiring the best teacher is the single most important school ingredient to a child's learning success. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

YET ANOTHER IMPLICIT ATTEMPT AT MORALISING HORRENDOUS POLICE DEEDS.

We are all too familiar with the conventional wisdom that effective police officers are the key to a secure nation. Indeed over the past several decades, we have discovered much about effective policing practices and what a difference they can make when security officers employ them in ensuring the safety of the citizenry. With this discovery, we fervently hoped that police reforms will engender the effectiveness we all desire. Unfortunately, almost two years down the line, the reality is still shocking. Impunity is still one of the gravest problems affecting the police force, and one that needs to be urgently addressed. Tragically, police officers are increasingly committing crimes (from cold murders, to common robberies, rape and torture) without having to face, much less suffer, any punishment. It would seem that the implicit approval of the morality of these crimes by the powers that be has made police officers to repeat ad nauseum these horrendous acts without fear. It appears as though to many police officers, an effective officer is synonymous to a tough, mean, no nonsense man or woman, with more brawn than brain who has to murder many (albeit; innocent and defenseless) citizens and then hope to be feted for their valor. Adherence to the existing Professional Code of Conduct and Ethics for the police force as well as the Public Officer Ethics Act (2003) is immaterial given that they enjoy immunity from the powers that be. It therefore does not come as a surprise to the public for the Minister for internal security and provincial administration alongside the police spokesman to spew cheap lies ad nauseum, to the public regarding the conduct of some criminal elements in the police force even when there is glaring evidence to suggest that they brazenly engage in extra judicial killings among many other forms of crime. Not once has the minister for internal security and the top police brass not hastened to dismiss as baseless lingering questions impinging negatively on the police force. They will do anything within their means including alluding to phantom Mungiki as a justification for their horrendous deeds. Sadly, that is exactly the stance adopted by the Minister for Internal Security and the police spokes person, Erick Kiraithe, over last week’s shocking murder of the seven taxi operators in Kawangware. In their deliberate but satirical attempt at swaying public opinion from this substantive issue, they have for the umpteenth alleged that the murdered taxi drivers were suspected mungiki adherents armed with all sorts of weaponry (I guess what was missing from the scene of crime was the usual mungiki paraphernalia to tie the loose ends) thereby justifying the fact that the Administration police killed them in self defense. On realizing that this line of thinking had become stale, they quickly switched to yet another familiar lie; that the officers suspected to have committed this heinous act had been interdicted pending investigations. Belatedly, they thought it prudent to add that the said officers had been arrested. These are tale tell signs of these cops being discreetly transferred to remote parts of this country to wait for the public acrimony to fizzle out before being promoted for a job well done! If such unfortunate incidences go unpunished, then the public trust in the police force is likely to remain at an all time low. Currently, in the estimation of the public, many of the police officers are no different from a monkey with a loaded gun. This is one reason why the much touted community policing program became a cropper. It is also the reason why the public still has serious doubts as to whether the Government is fully committed in implementing to the letter the much touted police reforms. TOME FRANCIS, BUMULA. http://twitter.com/tomefrancis