Audacious naming of IEBC boss won’t bury ghost of last polls

The appointment of Ezra Chiloba as the new Chief Executive Officer for the IEBC and the rejection of the latest opposition call for dialogue sets the stage for a replication of the country’s politics in the aftermath of the resumption of multi-party politics, in 1992, and which culminated in the 1997 Inter-Parties Parliamentary Group (IPPG) deal.

Having made a major concession by allowing the resumption of multi-party politics, the ruling party Kanu rejected further reforms, erecting roadblocks in the way of the new opposition.

There ensued a period of rancorous politics, much like what has gone on since Jubilee came to power. Fearing that it would be cornered into conceding further ground, Kanu resisted the very idea of dialogue and ruled the country on the basis of unilateralism.

With the 1997 elections approaching, the opposition threatened a boycott of the elections unless its longstanding demands on reforms were met. Having spent the better part of five years resisting demands for dialogue, Kanu suddenly changed its mind, with only a few weeks to the elections.

ELECTION BOYCOTT

An opposition election boycott would have further eroded the little legitimacy that Kanu possessed, at the time. Kanu cobbled together the IPPG deal through which it assimilated a number of the opposition reform proposals, a fact that encouraged the opposition to participate in the 1997 elections, which, of course, they lost.

The IPPG reforms did not help the country or the opposition. The reforms came so late that they could not be assimilated into governance practice before the 1997 polls. Also, the reforms came too late to provide any real constraint on Kanu’s misrule ahead of the elections. That history is currently playing out.

Having momentarily consented to the latest opposition’s call for national dialogue, the Jubilee Government quickly vacated the consent, and now characterises opposition demands for dialogue as a clamour for inclusion in a coalition government.

The appointment of Chiloba as the next CEO of the IEBC is a continuation of the unilateral approach that the Jubilee Government has deployed in dealing with issues of national concern, particularly those arising from the last elections.

BUSINESS AS USUAL

Through this appointment, Jubilee is projecting the position that it is business as usual and that lingering questions as to the legitimacy of the IEBC are unfounded.

To be sure, Chiloba is a highly qualified professional who, under the right circumstances, is capable of discharging his responsibilities at the IEBC admirably. However, he joins a much discredited commission, one whose continued stay in office divides the country’s opinion.

Up to now, there has been no meaningful opportunity to review the 2013 elections. There is, therefore, no shared position on what went well and what could have been done better. Leaving aside the more controversial questions, such as whether the IEBC declared the correct presidential results, one question about which there should be universal agreement is that the IEBC badly mismanaged the procurement side of the $200 million elections, as a result of which no value for money could have been derived for the Kenyan taxpayer or the foreign donors that funded the elections.

Remarkably, however, there has been reluctance at every level to bring accountability against the IEBC.

The first sign of this reluctance occurred during the Supreme Court hearing of the presidential election petitions. Although there was much scope for the court to pass value judgment on the performance of the IEBC, its judgment steered clear of questions as to the competence with which the IEBC had run the elections.

Thereafter, there should have been independent efforts to address the financial failures that characterised the elections. However, all the blame was heaped on former CEO, James Oswago, and people below him, while shielding the commissioners from responsibility.

OSWAGO'S FAILURE

As a result, the problems of the IEBC have been represented as a failure of the former CEO and, therefore, an internal matter for the commissioners to address on their own. This selectivity necessarily requires the commissioners to control internal information. Not surprisingly, there has ensued a fear of scrutiny and a culture of secrecy at the IEBC since the last elections. Nothing demonstrates this better than the secrecy with which the IEBC’s so-called internal review of the elections has been managed.

The appointment of a new CEO is an audacious act on the part of the commissioners. They have now buried the ghost of the last elections entirely on their own terms, and have established a basis for building on a future that does not have to connect with a past that remains largely unexplained. The commissioners are now aware that there is no force strong enough to stop them from running the next elections entirely on their own terms. This is something they will try to do.

Deep within Jubilee, there must be a quiet recognition that some kind of dialogue may become inevitable before the elections in 2017, as would provide political leadership on the management of those elections.

However, like the IPPG deal which came too late to threaten Kanu or to be useful for the country, Jubilee will keep a tight control on time, ensuring that any concessions made come as late as possible, at a time when these will carry little threat against Jubilee and when there will be little leverage left for the opposition.

For the opposition, accepting the appointment of a new CEO at the IEBC, while so many mysteries surround the last elections, is a major concession to Jubilee, one that will frame the next elections. Also, it is clear now that whatever demands for reforms the opposition may have, time is of the essence.

[email protected]