First Multiparty Elections in Kenya - Case Study Example

Table of contents 1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………… 3 2. Kenya under one party rule …………………………………………………………… 3 3. Significance of the first multiparty elections in Kenya ………………………………. 5 4. The Most Important Causes ………………………………………………………….. 8 5. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………...... 9 Introduction Kenya is one of the 53 independent countries in Africa. It gained its independence from Britain in 1963. It is situated in East Africa and borders countries like Uganda, Tanzania, Somalia, Ethiopia, and Southern Sudan (Throup and Hornsby 16). The country is relatively populous with a population of about 40 million people according to the latest census conducted in the year 2009. Kenya has forty-two tribes making it one of the most diverse countries in Africa. The country has had a long history of peace since its first multiparty elections conducted in 1992, which made it be considered one of the most peaceful countries in Africa until 2007. In 2007 the country was rocked with post election violence that saw ethnic violence occasioned by disputed election results. The violence left more than 1,300 killed with scores others displaced, especially in the expansive rift valley. Kenya under One Party Rule The country has made remarkable effort in restoring calm in the through reconciliatory efforts from the citizens themselves, the government, and lobby groups. The purpose of this paper is to explore the significance of the first multiparty elections in Kenya to the country and to the citizens. It will also describe the most important causes of multiparty elections in Kenya, and the extent to which the first multiparty elections in Kenya has been a representation of the general trend in Africa at the time. Kenya, like many other African countries, began its self-rule under one party system, as a way of containing political activists. Kenya, for example, introduced the one party system in 1960 by imposing a ban on other political parties other than the Kenya African National Union (KANU), led by the then former president Jomo Kenyatta. In fact, nobody was allowed to disobey what the government in power had instituted by law. This implied that anyone who attempted to disobey the presidents’ directive had to face the wrath of the powers that be through detention without trial (Oyugi, Wanyande and Odhiambo-Mbai 221). This gave the government in power the opportunity to do whatever it wanted leading to many forms of social injustices such as corruption, land grabbing, and torture. The situation, however, became worse after President Moi succeeded Jomo Kenyatta following his (Jomo’s) sudden death at state house in Mombasa. During his reign, President Moi made KANU party very powerful and expected everyone to worship it. However, his leadership style failed to please many people. At one time, air force military personnel led by Hezekiah Ochuka made a coup de tat attempt to over throw Moi’s government. However, the attempt failed to bear after the army intervened. In fact, the botched coup led to the execution of the Ezekiel Ochuka and detention of his alleged accomplices such as the current Prime Minister Raila Odinga (Ogot and Ochieng’ 234). Pressure, however, continued to mount on Moi to create a multiparty system where everyone would have the freedom to express themselves and participate in the national politics of the country. Nevertheless, since President Moi was scared of pluralism, he decided to detain without trial the leaders of multiparty lobbyists among them being Charles Rubia and Kenneth Matiba. Nevertheless, despite their thwarted efforts, the formation of Forum for the Restoration of Democracy (FORD) took place, just a year after their detention. The new party was a more formidable force to reckon with. Nevertheless, FORD did not last long due to competing interests disintegrating into FORD-Asili under the leadership of Kenneth Martiba and FORD-Kenya headed by Jaramogi Oginga Odinga (Throup and Hornsby 16). Due to mounting pressure accompanied by political demonstrations, President Moi was left no choice but to heed to the quest of the citizens and politicians. He also had to start reviewing the systems of electoral processes. This continued and in 1992 a bill was presented to parliament that revoked the long-standing single party system, which brought Kenya to a multiparty system. This ultimately marked the beginning of a new Kenya, as it marked the genesis of democracy and peaceful coexistence in Kenya (Oyugi, Wanyande and Odhiambo-Mbai 122). Significance of the First Multiparty Elections in Kenya The first multiparty election has been very significant in Kenya’s history since it marked the beginning of democracy, where people could freely express their opinions regarding how they wanted the country to be governed, something, which was not possible during the single party system. In fact, the thirty years after independence is considered a big disappointment to many people since by the time the country was gaining independence from Britain in 1963, everyone thought that it was time for the Kenyans to liberate themselves from both political and economic oppression from their colonizers. However, this was not to be as the subsequent two regimes only made things worse than the British rule. This is because both Kenyatta and Moi failed to meet the citizens’ expectations. Oloo and Oyugi note that the key ingredients of democracy in a country are the popular agreement concerning the way that the country ought to be governed (par. 2). In addition, the government must be accountable to everyone it governs in accordance with the law. Despite this being the case, the Kenyatta regime failed to adhere to this principle, instead concentrating on establishing a single party state to suit his political agenda and those of his supporters for six good years. As a result, he managed to build a very powerful unitary state with a centralized system of government, with more powers being vested on the executive arm of the government, instead of a more inclusive system of government such as the Majimbo (federal government) which majority of Kenyans favored at the time. This system was again inherited by his successor who even made things worse by establishing a system which almost legitimized impunity. However, after the introduction of the multiparty system in 1992, Kenyans had a voice to express how they want themselves governed due to the fact they could elect a president of their choice and an area member of parliament and councilors at the grassroots level (Ogot and Ochieng’ 243). In fact, since the introduction of the multiparty system, Kenya has been having several political parties. At one time, at the eve of 2007 elections, the country is reported to have had more than 150 political parties. Very few nations in the globe have ever registered such a huge number of political parties on the verge of an election. This proves the degree to which the multiparty system brought about democracy in the country. All these parties campaign on their set manifestos and Kenyans are free to choose whichever party and politicians whom they feel can meet their needs, as situation unheard of during the single party days. The fact that the many political parties know that there is competition makes them accountable to the citizens, failure to which they do not enjoy representation in parliament, something done in a span of five years in accordance with the Kenyan Constitution (Oyugi, Wanyande and Odhiambo-Mbai 312). The other major significance of the first multiparty elections in Kenya is that it has brought more development to people on the ground. This is because the members of parliament who are being elected understand the situation at the grass roots, as opposed to what used to be during the unitary system of government. One cannot deny that Kenya could not have been where it is economically were it that it could still be under the unitary system. This is because all members are made to become more accountable on how the resources and money spend on development projects have been utilized. Furthermore, the more the parties are the more bills likely to be introduced in parliament that are related to developmental issues affecting people on the ground. This has seen many bills brought to parliament, whose enactments have been of immense benefit to nationals and the country as a whole (Throup and Hornsby 16). The other significant moment is that the first multiparty elections in Kenya have helped reduce incidences of corruption and land grabbing, which used to be commonplace before the multiparty system was introduced in the country. This is because during the single party state, no one could have the courage to question the ill deed of the government officials as questioning could lead to execution of incarceration without trial. Today, despite corruption levels still being too high, at least the government of the day is being put forced by politicians drawn from different political countries to account for their spending and distribution of national wealth, something, which has been of great benefit to Kenyans at large (Oyugi, Wanyande and Odhiambo-Mbai 314). It is noted that the first multiparty election in Kenya gave room for the enactment of laws, which can bar a sitting president from continuing to contest a presidential seat for more than two terms, just like it is with the American system. This was evident when the constitutional amendment passed after the multiparty system in Kenya barred former president Daniel arap Moi from standing in 2002 despite his desire to stand. This forced him to anoint Uhuru Kenyatta, his predecessor’s son as his preferred choice for the presidency. However, his plot failed as his longtime friend turn foe, Mwai Kibaki won the presidency with Raila Odinga being the king maker. The victory of President Kibaki over Moi’s regime is significant to the history of Kenya and Africa at large since it marked a change of regime by defeating a candidate being supported by a sitting president, something that has not been easy in Africa as a continent. This is because many African leaders like clinging onto power irrespective of their age. However, in case they have to leave, they mostly tend to do all it takes to transfer power to their close allies even if it means rigging the election. A case in point is Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe who has clung onto power since independence and is still not yet ready to leave. This regime change indeed brought many benefits to Kenya with regard to development and freedom of expression, something that Moi’s regime denied Kenyans despite the institution of multiparty-ism in the country. In fact, since the enactment of the new Constitution, people can question the president’s actions openly as opposed to during the passed regime. This is truly a remarkable democratic move in Kenya (Throup and Hornsby 16). The Most Important Causes of the Event and the Extent the Event Is Representative within a General Trend in African Politics at this Time As earlier stated, the quest for multiparty-ism in Kenya was brought about by several factors. The first and main factor that necessitated multi-party politics was oppression and lack of democracy. This was because the government was not willing to allow people to associate freely or engage in government affairs, thereby resulting in uprisings and political protests. This was also the trend in other African countries at the time. For instance, Kenya’s neighboring country Tanzania also faced a similar challenge. Tanzanians felt that they needed more political freedom, free from government interference and oppression. Like ex-president Daniel Arap Moi, his Tanzanian counterpart former president Julius Nyerere was not read to allow for pluralism, as this would deny him some control on political affairs. However, as pressure continued to mount on Nyerere, his ruling party Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) lost the faith of most citizens forcing Nyerere to reluctantly, guide the then African unitary state into a purely multi-party state in 1995. The scenario is the same in other countries like Egypt, Nigeria, Namibia, Algeria, Uganda, and South Africa just to name a few (Cowen and Laakso 211). The other factors leading to the quest for multiparty elections were that Kenyans wanted the reliable and responsible government, which is representative of the people’s wishes. It is reported that the government of the day then was only meant to benefit specific regions and communities as national wealth was only distributed to the ethnic groups and regions that supported the president most. This implies that the Kalenjins and Kikuyus, the former president’s main supporters benefitted at the expense of other regions. Kenyans felt that it was only through political representation that inequality could be done away with. The scenario was the same in Tanzania and other African countries where people felt that the sitting president and elected members were only favoring their regions in distributing national wealth, leading to uprisings in favor of multiparty democracy (Oyugi, Wanyande and Odhiambo-Mbai 314). Conclusion It is evident that multiparty-ism in African countries never came easy as was Kenya’a case. Multiparty-ism has had a lot of significance to Kenya as far as democracy, equal representation, and distribution of national resources are concerned. This is because it has helped open up democratic space where people can freely express themselves and hold the government accountable, something that has been of huge benefit to Kenyans and other countries that underwent this transitional stage. Works Cited Cowen, Michael, and Liisa Laakso. Multi-Party Elections in Africa. New York: NY: Palgrave Macmillan. 2003. Print. Ogot, Bethwell, A., and William R. Ochieng’. Decolonization and Independence in Kenya: 1940-88. Athens: Ohio State University Press. 1995. Print. Oloo, Adams and Walter O. Oyugi. Democracy, and Good governance in Kenya: Prospects and Obstacles: DPMF Workshop and Conference Proceedings. University of Nairobi. N.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2012: http://www.dpmf.org/images/democracy-adams.htm. Oyugi, Walter O., Peter Wanyande, and C. Odhiambo-Mbai. The Politics of Transition in Kenya from KANU to NARC. 26 August, 2003. Print. Throup, David and Charles Hornsby. Multi-party Politics in Kenya: The Kenyatta & Moi States & the Triumph of the System in the 1992 Election. Oxford: James Currey Publishers. 1998. Print. Read More