Opposition leaders’ boycott of Parliament smacks of hypocrisy

The ruling of by the Supreme Court overturning the declaration of President Kenyatta as winner of the August 8 election has opened a can of worms. One of the interesting developments, set to unfold in the court, is the petition by former Mombasa Senator Hassan Omar against Ali Joho’s gubernatorial win.

Hassan has castigated NASA for their selective condemnation of irregularities in the election which, he says, NASA knew of. As if following from where Omar left off, Martha Karua has filed a case seeking the nullification of the entire election.

Her argument is that the illegalities and irregularities that led to the nullification of the presidential election should be adequate to cause the cancellation of the entire election. Ngunjiri Wambugu has decided not to pursue his ill-advised pursuit of the Chief Justice, David Maraga. These, indeed, are interesting times.

Nonetheless, the most important act in the unfolding drama for me, and which therefore forms the subject of this column, is the decision by NASA affiliated legislators to boycott the official opening of Parliament by the President. It has also failed to contribute membership to the House Business Committee and refused to join deliberations in the chambers of Parliament.

In my view, this course of actions represents a misguided extension of a political logic that just refuses to travel. Earlier, they had threatened not to participate in the election of speakers of the two chambers. This was a political gimmick, playing to the gallery. With their limited numbers in both Houses, they knew that they could not influence the choice of Speakers.

Though we can forgive them for such gimmicks, the tragedy is when they try to push this logic too far. Their decision to stay away from the official business of the two Houses, in an attempt to communicate a withdrawal of the legitimacy of the Executive and the Legislature is founded on a gross misunderstanding of the Kenya we are living in.

First, their argument that their decision to boycott the official opening of Parliament is because of questions to President Kenyatta’s legitimacy after the Supreme Court ruling, indicates a selective application of, and disrespect for, the Constitution.

As anyone would know, our 2010 Constitution, which these legislators have recently sworn to defend, forestalls the possibility of a power vacuum in any key role in the state. As such we know that the term of a sitting president runs until the next one is sworn in. For now, Uhuru Kenyatta is he.

Secondly, this decision is disrespectful to their voters. While it is conceivable that some people vote for their legislators because of their preferred presidential candidate, we know that citizens vote for representatives so that they can promote their interests. Their first responsibility is to their electors, rather than pursuing the interests of the so-called principals.

But their approach to this boycott is utterly disingenuous and dishonest. Showing up to Parliament to sign the attendance sheet in order to keep the privileges without doing the work they are expected to do is something Kenyans must not accept.

This is daylight robbery. We should be ruthless with them in the same way we respond to those whose first order of business is to seek a salary increment. If one must take a position to support the position of their party at the expense of their constitutional responsibilities, they ought to go the whole nine-yards. Resign and go back to the ballot.

But we all know too well, that politicians don’t like the idea of going back to the ballot. Elections bring too much uncertainty and also cost too much money. As such, we can expect that NASA parliamentarians will keep trying to play hide-and-seek: continuing to please their masters. Hopefully, they don’t continue this way even after the October 17th election but this is something we must contend with.

- The writer is a researcher and analyst in Nairobi. kamau.wairuri@outlook.com