There are two parallel debates on matters constitutional going on currently. One is the debate on whether it is necessary to make any adjustments to the 2010 constitution at all.
And the other is focused on what we should ideally end up with in terms of the modified structure of the executive and the legislature, following an adjustment of these structures which some of us consider to be inevitable.
On this second issue, I hold the view that we need more elected representatives, not fewer as some have argued.
I base this view on the need to distinguish between the abstractions of constitutional theory and the realities of what we may define as “the lived experience of ordinary Kenyans.”
The key to understanding those lived realities lies in an appreciation of what has been referred to as “the safety valve theory of politics” which applies far more to developing nations than to those which are industrialised and rich.
I have outlined this frame of reference for our local politics many times but let me do so once again for the benefit of those who are not regular readers.
The basic idea here is that what we may call “nation building” takes a really long time. For what were distinct and often rival communities in pre-colonial times, joined together by lines drawn haphazardly on maps – for such communities to form a single nation, takes a really long time. And in the interim, all kinds of things can go wrong.
So, whereas our government, like any other, will as a generalisation promise us peace and prosperity, their top priority should actually be peace.
What do I mean by peace?
Simply that we should all be able to wake up in the morning in any part of the country and go about our daily business without fearing that we will be caught up in an inter-communal outburst of violence, such as we saw recently in Sondu, or as is more common in Turkana. And, worst of all, as happens after controversial presidential elections.
And there is statistical evidence that supports this safety valve theory of African politics.
Consider these neighbouring countries, in terms of their populations and the size of their legislatures:
Uganda has a population of 48 million and has 557 MPs.
Rwanda has 14 million people, and a parliament with 106 MPs.
South Sudan has a population of 11 million, and a parliament of (unbelievably) 550 MPs in their current Transitional National Legislative Assembly.
Tanzania has a population of 63 million and a parliament with 393 MPs.
And Kenya, has a population of 53 million and a parliament with 349 MPs.
The clear pattern here is that Kenya and Tanzania – the two Eastern Africa nations with a reputation for political stability – have the lowest ratio of elected representatives to the general population.
If we had the same ratios as Uganda, we would have 616 MPs.
If we had the same ratio as Rwanda, we would have 401 MPs.
And if we had the same ratio as South Sudan, we would have a staggering 2,650 MPs.
Now these very many MPs do not really constitute a huge systemic blunder as might superficially appear to be the case. Rwanda, Uganda, and South Sudan are all countries that experienced, at some point in their history, years of genocidal conflict and prolonged political dysfunction and chaos.
And out of this came a conviction, at least in the early years after the violence had ended, that political stability and peace must be the top priority for the country – and that everything else would have to be subordinated to seeking lasting peace and stability.
And that if there is to be peace, each corner of the country must feel that they belong to a political system in which their pleas can be heard, and their grievances addressed.
Hence all these many elected representatives of the people.
They are the emblems of inclusivity. And the cost of having such a bloated legislature is a small price to pay, if the end result is to make ordinary people have faith in the political process.
They constitute a necessary safety valve for those nations.
And I think Kenya needs something of that kind too.
