Mutahi Ngunyi
6 July 2008
opinion
Nairobi — Regarding Mr Amos Kimunya, I submit that the country is behaving badly. Our aggression on the man is displaced, cowardly and excessive.
What is worse: we have not examined the evidence, and we are not even interested. That is why when we discuss the matter, all we can do is exchange ignorance.
This is particularly true of our MPs who are known to think with their mouths open. No reflection, no facts, just talk! But the evidence aside, our actions are cowardly because the problem is not Mr Kimunya - he is just a broker.
The problem is his two bosses: President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga in that order. Mr Kimunya could not have sold the hotel without the knowledge of both.
In fact, I want to hypothesise that the President was fully involved in this matter. And, as for Mr Odinga, he is just playing politics.
The man was fully briefed, and chose to do nothing. That is why his reaction on the saga is sub-optimal, shifty and sheepish.
But am I suggesting that Mr Kimunya be let off the hook? Absolutely not! In dealing with Mr Kimunya, the President should borrow from a King known as Zeleusus.
In one of his decrees, this King forbade the use of wine, unless it was subscribed as medicine. In another, he ordered that all adulterers be punished by the removal of both eyes.
Unfortunately, one of his sons became subject to this penalty. He had committed adultery and both his eyes were to be removed.
The King was in a dilemma. On the one hand, he had to uphold the law he made to be taken seriously. On the other, he had to protect his son.
He thought deeply about the matter and decided to share the punishment with his son. He ordered the removal of one of his eyes, and one of his son's.
In this way, the majesty of his government was maintained and, in the eyes of his subject, he was seen to be fair!
For the country to take President Kibaki seriously, he has to punish his favourites. In this case, he has to remove one of Mr Kimunya's "eyes." And, like King Zeleusus, this act will imply removing one of his "eyes" as well - a form of personal sacrifice. On his part, Mr Odinga should also part with some flesh, may be a finger.
My point? The three should share in the punishment and pain of the Kimunya fiasco. More so because they were either informed or were actively involved in the deal.
But is this realistic? Can Mr Odinga sacrifice a "finger" for the love of Mr Kimunya? Zero. This Kimunya man is on his own.
He is like a sacrificial lamb that has been fattened at the Treasury awaiting the big roasting. And it is this thirst for blood that worries me!
When this saga began, I was with the crowds baying for Mr Kimunya's blood. For a moment I was proud of our two "governments".
But, as the drama unfolded, I realised that this was not about the saga. It was high politics. For starters, the claim that the hotel was undervalued is not true.
Evidence made available to the Wako Committee reveals that between February 25 and March 14, independent valuations of the hotel were made by three competent firms.
The open market value from these reports ranged from Sh 1.6 billion Sh1.7 billion. This is not far from the price fetched by Mr Kimunya.
Second, the claim that Mr Kimunya did not consult on the matter is untrue. PM Raila Odinga admits being consulted. But he dismisses these consultations.
For instance, he says that no one wrote him a letter regarding the matter. The only consultations he had were in the form of a meeting. This kind of reasoning is interesting!
Post-election anger
But it is not the misrepresentation of facts that is alarming. It is the skilful execution of this anti-Kimunya ploy. It was done with urgency, vice and anger.
And what is more: it shows that the post-election anger is still raw. That in forming the grand coalition, we buried the emotive issues alive.
These issues are now knocking from underneath the coalition, wanting to be released. Mr Kimunya is the first casualty of the monster.
Similarly, and fundamentally, what happened should serve as an indicator of how ODM will play its part of the coalition politics. They will play by the rules, aggressively and viciously.
In the meantime, PNU is likely to play with its tail between the legs. And as we have seen with the Kimunya saga, ODM will make minced meat out of them. But there is one exception, a blind spot for ODM.
When they were writing the National Accord and Reconciliation Act and the constitutional amendments in March, ODM was asleep. And that is why they continue to delude themselves that Mr Odinga can only be removed from office by Parliament.
If PNU is pushed to a corner by an aggressive ODM, they can send Mr Odinga and his ODM brigade packing. And they can do this by pulling out of the coalition.
Should this happen, section 6(c) of the accord states that the coalition would stand dissolved. Similarly, section 8 states that if the coalition is dissolved, the accord would be annulled.
In other words, the coalition PM as created by this Act would cease to exist. In fact, all ODM ministers, plus the PM would stand fired. And contrary to our thinking, the clause requiring us to go into an election should the coalition collapse was removed.
What is more: should PNU pull out of the coalition, the President can use Section 15(A) i and ii of the amended constitution to appoint a PNU Prime Minister, deputies and 40 ministers.
But is all this possible? Can we degenerate to this? Given the sneak preview from ODM in this Kimunya saga, this scenario is possible.
More so because PNU, unlike ODM, does not enjoy a good fight. They are likely to go for the extreme measure.
But there is an alternative. These fellows might just act like bananas and stick together in a crooked brotherhood! In the interest of peace, I would not mind that.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 The Nation. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
