One of the treasured gems hidden in the Commission of Inquiry into Post-Election Violence report was a 20-word exhortation on Kenyans to make a choice.
The commission, popularly known as Waki Commission, had been formed in the wake of the unprecedented bout of post-election violence that afflicted Kenya following the announcement of the 2007 presidential election results.
“Kenya needs to decide if it wishes to let violence, corruption, and powerless institutions prevail or to introduce fundamental change,” appealed the commission chaired by retired judge of the Court of Appeal Justice Philip Waki.
The appeal was not without context. From the commission’s own finding, impunity had become the order of the day in Kenya, violence was the method of choice to resolve political differences and distrust among different groups had eroded the sense of national identity.
“Ethnic fears and hatred have been elevated in importance and could turn violent again even more easily than has happened in the past,”warned the commission, which I had the honour of covering for the Star.
The government had not been serious about addressing generic issues or underlying causes of violence. Piecemeal and apathetic responses characterised every attempt to promote accountability as a value.
Almost 17 years later, we are back to where Justice Waki left us with his inimitable call of the times. By all indications, Kenya is hurtling fast towards another cycle of deadly political clash in 2027. The writing is on the wall.
Just like 2007, we have a deeply fractured political system pitting two strong sides against each other. Each of the two are making strong impressions on their respective sides as to their claim for power.
The “one term” brigade of former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua is flashing the “betrayal” card just like Raila Odinga did in 2007. The former DP is bitter, determined to revenge and has even gone to de-campaign Kenya in foreign lands.
On the other side, the “two term” brigade of President William Ruto has been lured into early “empowerment” campaigns, almost mirroring “kazi iendelee” campaigns of President Mwai Kibaki in 2007.
If the carnage we witnessed this year and last year in respect to the Gen Z protests is anything to go by, one would not be far off concluding that the country has elected to embrace violence as a way of solving its issues.
The outlook of our National Police Service remains as was during the colonial period, when the overarching goal was regime survival. Despite the many reform drives executed, including change of uniform, our police remain dyed-in-the-wool reactionary edifice.
To complement the imperviousness of change in the police, other key institutions, parliament included, are at their lowest in terms of independence, public trust, quality of leadership and dedication to Article 10 on national values and principles of governance.
Corruption is now, unarguably, our way of life. The latest Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission “share of national bribe” indicated that the cost of buying a job in the public service had soared eightfold in just four years.
In short, the majority of the triggers of 2007 post-election violence are still holding out. Add the restless Gen Z factor to their cocktail and you have a volatile situation building. When Gen Z issued us with a notice last year, all we ever did was to begrudge them.
Luckily for us, we have two years to forestall this eventuality. In his report, Justice Waki posited that all that was required to tame the ghosts of violent elections was political will and “some basic decisions to change the way politics is conducted”.
He added another solution; addressing the conduct of politics and its intersection with other issues related to land, marginalisation and inequality, and youth. Short of that, he predicted, violence, including that related to elections, will continue to appear and will be ignited ever more readily.
Senior Project Manager, Friedrich Naumann Foundation, member, Media Complaints Commission, and Advocate of the High Court of Kenya
