All high and mighty should be subjected to public interviews

Wanyonyi Wambilyanga

The ongoing interviews for possible candidates to the office of Chief Justice are intriguing.

The interviews are subjecting men and women to processes they never thought they would go through.

Bedroom secrets were not left out, academic qualifications were put to the fore, tempers flared at some point; and all these were in front of cameras. Incredible.

No one thought this could happen anytime soon, but it is happening. I am glad the learned men and women were put to task to explain this or that.

They all did fairly well in my assessment, and it could be because they have been in the system and know what works and what does not. The small hiccups could be as a result of some of them being in an interview room for the first time.

As all this was playing out, something captured my interest. Why can’t the President and Prime Minister, as they think of a reshuffle, subject candidates for the posts of ministers and assistants to such an exercise where all and sundry can see the process?

Simplistic thinkers have always assumed the post of minister is the preserve of cronies and henchmen and women.

For this reason, Permanent Secretaries and other officials have been crucified for sins of the minister. I shudder whenever Special Programmes Minister Esther Murugi appears on TV.

She has always learnt to shoot from the hip even when a second or two to think of what she wants to say would be beneficial.

She wanted to shed her clothes for the Ocampo Six, she rubbed people infected and affected with the HIV and Aids scourge the wrong way, now she crazily suggests anyone standing in the way of Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta’s journey to the house on the hill should be locked up and released only after election.

For the lack of a better word, this is ludicrous. Court jesters thrived in Kanu days because of the rule and their intent.

Today, we are being entertained to shenanigans that ideally would be comical in the heydays. The minister has lowered the leadership bar to a ridiculous level.

She does not speak as a leader, let alone a senior minister. The other day, she did not see sense in consulting local leaders when she was resettling displaced families in their areas. Is this naivety or just plain ignorance?

If we subject her and many other leaders to public interviews, maybe the populace would understand where they come from and their capacity to lead. We have had leaders who do not meet any standard of leadership.

Maybe it is not their fault they have been given a load their shoulders cannot cope with or they simply bite more than they can chew.

As we implement the Constitution, let us subject those charged with leading institutions and processes to public interviews.

It would be good to subject county leaders to such a rigorous exercise, too, before they go for the vote.

Since many who failed in national politics think they can hack it in the counties, let them answer to the people in such a forum.

The judges have been put to task to explain cases they ruled 20 years ago. We should also ask leaders to explain why things went the way they did when they were at the helm.