by Compiled by ANB-BIA, Brussels, August 1997
THEME = CHURCHES
Thus KANU (Kenya African National Union), was declared the only permitted party in June 1982, in spite of widespread protests. Individual liberty was gradually eroded and the number of political prisoners increased. In 1986, the party introduced a system of "queue voting", by which the voters formed a queue behind the candidate of their choice.
The power of the President over institutions of state was also strengthened. In 1986, a law was passed giving him the power to dismiss the Attorney General and the Auditor General, without prior consultation of a special tribunal which had previously given them some security of tenure. In July 1988, the National Assembly increased his powers over the judiciary, giving him power to dismiss judges at will and to detain people without trial for two weeks.
It was only in April 1990, that the Western Powers began to react. They were exasperated by human rights violations and the continual financial scandals in which much of foreign aid was swallowed up. The American ambassador to Kenya was the first to make it known that his country would henceforth concentrate its aid on countries which encouraged democratic institutions, defended human rights and used a multi-party system. The United Kingdom followed suit. Pressures of this kind finally forced the President to announce in December 1991 that Kenya was ready for multi-party politics. The opposition parties united in a Forum for the Restoration of Democracy (FORD), under the presidency of a former vice-president, Odinga Odinga. Another former vice president, Mwai Kibaki, founded the Democratic Party of Kenya (DPK).
The first multi party elections were held in 1992. But President Moi used very clever tactics. He could rely on the support of the Masai and Kalenjins (he himself is a Kalenjin) who, though a minority, were very united. To weaken his enemies, largely based on the Kikuyu and Luo, he discretely encouraged the rival ambitions of opposition leaders. FORD split up into two factions, FORD-ASILI (the "original" FORD), and FORD-KENYA. Taking into account the DKP, the Opposition was now divided into three, nearly equal groups. The result was that, while the three opposition candidates got 3.4 million votes between them, Moi, clearly in the minority, with 1.8 million votes, won the elections. With a similar distribution of votes, KANU got a comfortable majority in Parliament. The Vice-President of FORD-KENYA remarked sadly: "KANU did not win the election, the Opposition lost it".
The Western Powers declared angrily that there would be no restoration of aid until a certain number of conditions were fulfilled. However, in the years that followed, President Moi cleverly negotiated, giving in, item by item on economic measures, so as to be in a better position to resist political conditions. Meanwhile, the harassment of the Opposition continued relentlessly. Today, Kenya's opposition parties offer no hope of change. They seems to have learned nothing. After the death of its president, Odinga Odinga, FORD-KENYA split into rival factions. The Democratic Party is undermined by desertions to the government side or by internal quarrels. FORD-ASILI was discredited when its president announced that all Indians should be expelled from Kenya, a move reminiscent of Idi Amin in Uganda.
President Moi now aspires to a new five-year mandate even though he is already 73 years old and has no "understudy" for the office of President.
In 1986, when the "queue voting" system was introduced, the National Christian Council of Kenya, representing 35 Protestant Churches and about six million faithful, opposed this system, saying that it would intimidate people, and exercise undue pressure on voters. President Moi responded, by attacking the attitudes of church leaders.
This first skirmish was followed by a series of clashes between the Churches and the State. The Churches were concerned that the government was attempting to extend its powers and to limit individual rights. The President continually accused Christian and Muslim leaders of plotting his downfall. In 1989, Rev. Lawford Ndege Imande, leader of the Presbyterian Church, wrote a book in defence of Church leaders' right to take a stand on social and political matters. He was arrested and sentenced to six years in prison.
During the tribal clashes which escalated in 1993, especially in the Rift Valley province, twelve Catholic Bishops (all Kenyans, the five foreign bishops did not sign for fear of reprisals), publicly accused the government of being chiefly responsible. On 30 October, they sent an open letter to President Moi, in which they denounced the injustices, illegality, tribal tensions, and the lack of political will to face up to this situation which could lead to civil war. The following year, when violence erupted again between the Kalenjins and the Kikuyu, the Catholic Bishops published a statement placing complete responsibility on the shoulders of the government.
In January 1994, the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace, as a preparation for its Lenten action, invited the faithful to reflect and to act in political matters. It deplored the "derailment of the democratisation process", the acts of violence, the unheard of acts of banditry which Kenyans have to suffer, and it expressed its distress at the fact that "the declarations of the Head of State dealing with good government, justice and peace, are contradicted by utterances and actions of the members of his own Cabinet, the Provincial Administration, Police and indeed, every arm of the Government...Our Bishops have said enough. It is now time for the Justice and Peace Commission, which is created by the Kenya Episcopal Conference, to concretely pursue isues and plan adequate actions".
On 12 March 1994, the Catholic Bishops issued a Pastoral Letter entitled: "On The Road to Democracy". Summing up the situation in Kenya, they observed that there is no noticeable change as far as the one-party system is concerned. The party in power ignored the other parties, and the bishops raised the question of a revision of the Constitution, which has been in force all the time during a de facto one-party rule. They concluded by saying: "Democracy is much more than a multi- party system. It demands respect and protection for the rights of each individual and all groups, especially minorities". On 7 April 1994, the Daily Nation published a declaration of the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) following an outbreak of clashes in the Uasin Gishu district. The Council stressed the need for a new Constitution and a new morality. At the end of their plenary meeting, held in November 1994, the Catholic Bishops published a Declaration in which they once again stressed the insecurity in the country, the lowering of morality, increasing unemployment, and the lack of integrity in matters of justice. They observed that "the party in power has all the rights" and declared their support for a wide ranging discussion to prepare a new Constitution.
There was criticism also from the Muslim community. One hundred Imams meeting in Mombasa, decided to join with the Christians and present an united front against the KANU government at the elections due in 1997. The Muslims claimed they had been discriminated against in employment and education.
On 2 April 1995, the Catholic Bishops wrote another Pastoral Letter entitled: "A Call to A Change of Heart". They issued a call to conversion and to build the nation together. "We must have the independence and courage to tell our politicians: "Enough; enough of your divisions, your squabbles, your lies, your self-seeking, your jockeying for power and riches"". They called for a separation of powers, especially for the independence of the judiciary. They concluded by demanding that the government in preparing a new Constitution, should listen to the people by engaging competent citizens from every walk of life in a common dialogue. The government answered by accusing the Catholic Church of collaborating with the Opposition, in an attempt to overthrow President Moi's government by violent means.
In the beginning of May 1995, the NCCK, published a Declaration in which they recommended constitutional reform with the help of all citizens. Among other things, they demanded a revision of the electoral law, the establishment of a national independent commission and proportional representation. They also insisted on civic education.
In July-August 1996, the Churches repeated their stance. In separate but convergent declarations, the Catholic Bishops and the NCCK called for an immediate revision of the Constitution and a dialogue among all parties on forming an electoral commission. In a Pastoral Letter entitled "Our Social Responsibility", read from the pulpits of all churches, the Catholic Bishops declared that the time for a revision of the constitution had come, and they asked Christian communities to campaign "for peaceful change and to reject trafficking in votes and cheating in elections".
The NCCK also called for constitutional reform and a suspension of the existing electoral commission. They also called for Press freedom and that the elections should be supervised by all parties. President Moi's KANU rejected the Churches' demands. He called them: "new revolutionary attempts, aimed at destroying the Constitution which has served us so well since independence".
What had happened? After two unfruitful meetings with the Head of State, at the beginning of April and on 5 May, the Churches decided on the unprecedented step of publishing a "Common Document", signed jointly by the NCCK and the Kenya Catholic Episcopal Conference, entitled: "Minimum Constitutional, Statutory and Administrative Reforms: Prerequisites to Free and Fair and Informed General Elections".
In the introduction, the signatories stressed that for more than ten years, they had been calling for reforms, but in spite of promises made by the President, nothing had been done. "The problem", they declared, "is not the lack of time, but the lack of minimum good will". The church leaders said that as leaders and as people of good will, they will continue to offer proposals based on the universally accepted principles of fair play, the separation of powers, the sovereignty of the electorate, electoral freedom, freedom of association and freedom to hold meetings.
In the chapter on the separation of powers, they insisted on the necessity of an independent electoral commission, and they opposed the President's and the government's power to put people in prison without trial, and to restrict such freedoms as appointing or dismissing people in official positions.
On the question of the sovereignty of the electorate, the church leaders pleaded for a just distribution of parliamentary seats over the whole country, and the possibility of independent candidates to present themselves for election. They asked that the President's power to appoint twelve Members of Parliament, should be abolished.
They went on to enumerate other points guaranteeing freedom of meeting and association, and free access to voting, which must be open and fair. They concluded with a solemn call to the government to put these reforms into effect before the elections.
This declaration was published in two Nairobi newspapers. The President reacted by accusing the Churchmen of dictatorial attitudes. "I am surprised", he said, "that the clergy should take up a partisan position on matters which concern the nation. To give an ultimatum and to give orders is not the characteristic of democracy. It is dictatorship".
END