Friday, July 31, 2009
TJRC, tribunal, special court oooh hooo!
Sometimes i think it would have been a better country if there was a way of having the citizenship of kibaki and raila (complete with their hangers on and their mis-advisors and collaborators and all) to Kenya recanted.
Committed to the preservation of any positive gains of the human race especially those that relate to the socio-political arena and those that people have fought for.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Limousines
the rejection by kibaki of the limousines is a good development, albeit too little too late.
lets not dampen the gesture, lets encourage it, and as we do, we remind bwana kibaki that his fleet as is is still too huge, and the cost for maintenance is prohibitive. he can do more, he can sell some of them for public good
the waste of national resources on running the affairs of individuals and offices that could use lesser strenuous resources is endemic in this country
consider a situation where in some countries ministers have no elaborate security detail because since they are public servants, they are under no threat from anybody.
those kenyan ministers who are resisting the move are petty and wasteful. kibaki and raila, in restructuring the cabinet to fit the 24 number proposed by the ag (i hope it is not a "reformist" prank), can consider removing them from office.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
come to think of it, i took my 1290cc limousine out this last week end, 170 kms out of nairobi and back, and spend about shs 1,500 on fuel! this means that i spend slightly below kshs 5 on fuel per kilometer! ... i deliberately will not say anything about tear and wear or the body work... but...does the government want to borrow it for official functions?
lets not dampen the gesture, lets encourage it, and as we do, we remind bwana kibaki that his fleet as is is still too huge, and the cost for maintenance is prohibitive. he can do more, he can sell some of them for public good
the waste of national resources on running the affairs of individuals and offices that could use lesser strenuous resources is endemic in this country
consider a situation where in some countries ministers have no elaborate security detail because since they are public servants, they are under no threat from anybody.
those kenyan ministers who are resisting the move are petty and wasteful. kibaki and raila, in restructuring the cabinet to fit the 24 number proposed by the ag (i hope it is not a "reformist" prank), can consider removing them from office.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
come to think of it, i took my 1290cc limousine out this last week end, 170 kms out of nairobi and back, and spend about shs 1,500 on fuel! this means that i spend slightly below kshs 5 on fuel per kilometer! ... i deliberately will not say anything about tear and wear or the body work... but...does the government want to borrow it for official functions?
Committed to the preservation of any positive gains of the human race especially those that relate to the socio-political arena and those that people have fought for.
Monday, July 6, 2009
The civil society today
Until 2002, everybody was all praises for the civil society and its work...of course even the people who fought it, knew that they had no point, because the movement towards democratisation of kenya was on top gear.
After that, and until today, we as a society are stuck with the 2002 image and euphoria.
For starters, the failure of the kibaki first administration, the bedevilled MOU, the fruit wars of 2005 and the polarisation of the country were made even more poignant by the fact that it was seen that civil society had been divided along ethnic and other lines and inevitably had taken partisan positions.
the pre-2002 civil society leaders were protangonists in public and therefore the line between reformist and non-reformist was obliterated, and since these people had been perceived as the leaders of the civil society, the leaders of the reform agenda, a harsh judgement was passed on civil society: that it comprises of, at the best, self seekers
the most tragic thing about this has been that there are two views that have never left the table: that the civil society post-2002 was weakened, and that the civil society is not providing leadership on national discourse. this view has constantly been propangated by the media, the political leadership and some elements in the general populace.
the fact that the civil society today faces a country which no longer has faith in any institution is not contested, neither is the fact that some soul searching is necessary for all of us, the civil society included.
the civil society, its methodology in advocacy, its engagement with the larger society and its engagement with the political leadership and the media has changed, greately so.
I think therefore that this is the genesis of the problem ... that people do not understand the "new" civil society and its ethos, that the leaders of the "new" civil society are not those of yesterday, and therefore that you can not use the yardsticks of yesterday to measure today.
face it: people, viewpoints, institutions and processes change. one must appreciate change before proceeding to make highfalutin pronouncements.
today for instance, we face the fastest clawing back of democratic gains made so far...some say it is a conspiracy of the ruling elite, others say it is a failure by the middle class... i think it is neither; it indeed is fermenting of dissent that is being catalysed
may we avoid stasis as this is an incurable a malady as there can be.
After that, and until today, we as a society are stuck with the 2002 image and euphoria.
For starters, the failure of the kibaki first administration, the bedevilled MOU, the fruit wars of 2005 and the polarisation of the country were made even more poignant by the fact that it was seen that civil society had been divided along ethnic and other lines and inevitably had taken partisan positions.
the pre-2002 civil society leaders were protangonists in public and therefore the line between reformist and non-reformist was obliterated, and since these people had been perceived as the leaders of the civil society, the leaders of the reform agenda, a harsh judgement was passed on civil society: that it comprises of, at the best, self seekers
the most tragic thing about this has been that there are two views that have never left the table: that the civil society post-2002 was weakened, and that the civil society is not providing leadership on national discourse. this view has constantly been propangated by the media, the political leadership and some elements in the general populace.
the fact that the civil society today faces a country which no longer has faith in any institution is not contested, neither is the fact that some soul searching is necessary for all of us, the civil society included.
the civil society, its methodology in advocacy, its engagement with the larger society and its engagement with the political leadership and the media has changed, greately so.
I think therefore that this is the genesis of the problem ... that people do not understand the "new" civil society and its ethos, that the leaders of the "new" civil society are not those of yesterday, and therefore that you can not use the yardsticks of yesterday to measure today.
face it: people, viewpoints, institutions and processes change. one must appreciate change before proceeding to make highfalutin pronouncements.
today for instance, we face the fastest clawing back of democratic gains made so far...some say it is a conspiracy of the ruling elite, others say it is a failure by the middle class... i think it is neither; it indeed is fermenting of dissent that is being catalysed
may we avoid stasis as this is an incurable a malady as there can be.
Committed to the preservation of any positive gains of the human race especially those that relate to the socio-political arena and those that people have fought for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)