The Star carried a frightening headline this week, indicating that the National Cohesion and Integration Commission had designated 19 counties as potential violence ‘hotspots’ ahead of the 2017 elections.
In addition to regular flashpoints like Nakuru which has seen election-related violence in almost every election cycle since the advent of multiparty politics in 1992, the new NCIC list includes such pacified counties as Kiambu, Kakamega, Baringo, Homa Bay, Bungoma and Kisii. The geographical and demographic breadth of the hotspots undermine any notion that Kenya is a stable country.
If the NCIC synopsis is credible, Kenya as a whole might just burn in 2017. Identified contributory factors of the violence range from border skirmishes between antagonistic pastoral tribes to political incitement.
Government Spokesman Eric Kiraithe was quoted saying, “The government will have an inter-agency approach in managing chaos during the election.” Not equivocation about chaos happening. Kiraithe also said, “We know there are those who want to cause chaos but we will dialogue with them because all Kenyans must enjoy equal rights and freedoms under the Constitution.”
Notwithstanding the rhetoric, the government’s reluctance to address potential violence is clear in its relegation to the periphery of the single most latent trigger of widespread election violence: a flawed election. The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) was thus omitted from the roll of agencies being primed to manage the chaos, which include the Directorate of Public Prosecutions, the Anti-Corruption Commission and of course the police.
As electoral rigging now ranks high in the agenda for not only the opposition but non-governmental and the religious sectors as well, any prognosis of violence in 2017 that excludes it is totally dense. In the same week NCIC released its report, the national umbrella group of Christian religion, the National Council of Churches of Kenya, warned that flaws around presidential and gubernatorial elections could precipitate bloodshed.
“A close analysis of the possible scenarios particularly around presidential and gubernatorial contests paints a picture of a country that is characterised by desperation and militancy which can tear the country and communities apart, leaving in their wake deeper wounds than we have experienced before,” NCCK said.
The opposition, which has repeatedly vowed not to accept the result of another flawed election, has just launched a campaign to reform the IEBC, whose top leaders have been implicated in top-level corruption. The officials were laid bare in a high-profile anti-bribery case in the United Kingdom, which has jailed businessmen who passed huge kickbacks to the IEBC officials in exchange of multimillion dollar contracts.
The trial of the British businessmen generated a trove of evidence including emails between them and IEBC electoral officials who even initiated the upward variation of product costs in order to line their own pockets. Local investigation into the scandal has been marked by sloth, indifference and interference from the government, which has tended to shield the officials against all accusations.
It is reflective of our low standards as a nation that we have fights over whether corrupt electoral officials should remain in office. But even if there was no whiff of corruption, the commissioners who as arbiters should enjoy high public confidence, have one half of the country opposed to them.
It is indeed astonishing how many in the establishment, blinded by power, downplay the full impact of a corrupt IEBC on national stability while ruminating over the most bizarre triggers of violence in some of the most stable communities.
The aversion to address IEBC’s partisanship as a grave violence 'hotspot' compares only to the manner in which land issues were buried beneath the political surface until post-election violence happened.