Will the August 2022 Kenyan election be once again mired in judicial intervention?
By Dr Munyonzwe Hamalengwa
All eyes are turning once again to the upcoming heavily contested Kenyan elections in August 2022 whereby a perennial presidential contender in the name of Raila Odinga, this time supported by his perennial presidential rival and outgoing President, Uhuru Kenyatta, ironically is going against the current Vice-President William Ruto.
It is not usual that the current President opts to support an opposition candidate against his own Vice-President. This makes interesting political drama and it is being lived up to its billing in Kenya. This set of political matrix is interesting in itself in the Kenyan context, in that the Vice-President since the death of Jomo Kenyatta in 1978, has always assumed the presidency. But this time President Kenyatta and his deputy Ruto fell apart. The Vice-President has injected the drama by pledging to probe corruption of the outgoing President, Uhuru Kenyatta. This articulation in normal times could secure the presidency to the current Vice-President. This is like self-suicide; it would involve elements of self-probing as he was part of the regime he would be probing. But these are not normal times in Kenya. The colloquial “Deep State” is alleged to support Odinga because this time he is being backed by his historical nemesis, Uhuru Kenyatta, the son of the first President, Jomo Kenyatta under whom the first vice-president Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, Raila’s father served before the two fell out, leaving a trail of bitterness of decades between these two families who were once very close and this rivalry continued between the two respective sons. The conclusion of the historical political family hatred between the Kenyattas and Odingas is wrapped in this election and the spin-off is the now infamous Kenyatta-Rutto grindstone.
This August election is also dynamically interesting as it is backgrounded by the massive election violence of 2007/2008 which resulted in the current President Kenyatta and his current Vice-President and presidential contender Rutto being dragged before the International Criminal Court to answer to the charges of committing international crimes. The charges were dropped allegedly because the two tampered with witnesses, weakening the case. These two despite this gluing bond and experience, are now on opposite camps. The presidential candidate Ruto campaigning on the platform promising to expose the corruption practices of his outgoing President.
The 2013 election which Kenyatta won and appointed Ruto to be Vice-President, was mired in a tumultuous presidential election petition in which the court backed off from declaring the election of Uhuru Kenyatta as null and void for election irregularities. It appeared that contested globally televised judicial process, was a trial run to the 2017 presidential election at which the Supreme Court of Kenya became the first court in Africa to declare a presidential election outcome null and void. The two contestants in that election petition were the now current allies, Kenyatta and Odinga. But when Kenyatta lost the petition, he was livid and threatened to do political damage to the judiciary, a judiciary that had gained credibility because of the judicial reforms that came out of the ashes of the 2007/8 near civil war in Kenya which had led Kenyatta and Ruto to be dragged before the International Criminal Court. This judiciary had further enhanced its credibility and global good reputation by being the first judiciary in Africa to declare null and void a declared presidential victory.
The judiciary whether of international or local jurisdiction has been involved in Kenyan election outcomes from 2007/8 through 2013 to 2017 and involving Kenyatta and Ruto.
Will the Kenyan judiciary be involved again in resolving any election disputes that may arise in this so far dead even political war? This time the protagonists would be Odinga/Kenyatta on one side and Ruto with his presidential running mate on the other hand. The Kenyan judiciary that Kenyatta had vowed to destroy has already secured its credibility in the eyes of the court of public opinion in Kenya and the world. And if it gets involved again in resolving the Kenyan electoral outcome, it’s pronouncement will be judged credible. The possible involvement of the Kenyan judiciary in any election disputes after the fact, bodes well for Kenyan democracy as the credibility of the Kenyan judiciary acts as a deterrent to any possible engagement by particularly presidential contenders in any electoral malpractices. They know that there is a credible Kenyan judiciary watching over them and that there is a particularly articulate Kenyan legal profession that is horned and battle tested in judicial elections warfare. The International Criminal Court, already involved in an election dispute in Kenya, will be in the wings waiting for action.
Send comment to: forthedefence@yahoo.ca.