Magic wand? No, BBI is but a poisoned chalice

In yet another episode of political theatre, the handshake has delivered the BBI report to purportedly heal ethnic divisions wrought by the 2017 elections. The report relies on anecdotal and emotive partial narratives to make its arguments and is, in fact, a political statement of the world as the political principals see it.

There is no political responsibility for the alleged 2017 electoral fraud and ensuing violence, ethic political mobilisation, violation of election laws by political parties, interference with electoral processes, the murder of Chris Msando and the political aftermath – the attacks on the Supreme Court and undermining of judicial independence as a whole. Peace comes at the price of truth.

The implicit understanding around the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) is that citizens need to appease the political leadership to forestall the further use of state terror against critical voice. Whereas BBI says several good things, it lacks the necessary truth and accountability to help the country heal the cleavages that fuel violent ethnic conflict. BBI is first an appeasement strategy.

The report ignores the role state capture plays in driving economic and political exclusion, and ensuing conflict. Linked to this, it ignores the failure to implement the Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission and Ndung'u Commission reports and instead adopts the trajectory of righteous indignation directed into additional policy reform. It is a whitewash that seeks to enlist key constituencies by throwing in sweeteners for women, youth, doctors - join the conspiracy if you will.

It is a subtly crafted gaslighting exercise designed to enlist Kenyans into an alternative reality where those in power are insulated from accountability.

The BBI is a kiss and makeup a strategy that ignores the systematic weakening of state institutions by the Jubilee administration, for example, the vicious onslaught against the previous Auditor General and the authorities' delay in appointing an able successor - all while underlining the need for stronger oversight institutions.

On devolution, the report proposes more money for counties - at least 35 per cent, but in the same stroke proposes to recentralise the health administrative function and Nairobi County. The proposal for national public participation rapporteur while attractive on the face of it, displays an ideological disconnect with Article 174 that enshrines self-governance by the people - not directed engagement of the people by the government.

It also ignores that the government has failed to finance function 14 of the constitution to ensure that counties build their village and ward governance structures to deepen public participation and democracy.

Despite the proposal for more funds to counties, the report is blind to devolution. It is largely centrist and fails to mainstream devolution into the discussions on shared prosperity and growing the national cake.

It also ignores the Jubilee administration's securitisation of the state and failure to operationalise intergovernmental security structures such as the county policing authorities and community policing.

BBI fails to make meaningful recommendations to check the powers of the rogue National Assembly, which has been in overdrive trying to recentralise devolution at every opportunity. This can be done by strengthening the Senate, for instance. BBI also fails to provide measures to address the debt crisis, fails to address the impact of national debt on the financing of county service delivery and the imperative for an intergovernmental fiscal framework in debt management.

Is the 'national ethos' a proxy to socially re-engineer the civic space? The proposals on the national ethos are particularly insidious.

A keen reading into the language used points toward an attempt to depart from the human rights-based approach taken by the constitution, towards an approach that will socially re-engineer Kenyans into placid, pliable and patriotic citizens who unquestioningly pay taxes and more importantly do not demand the truth about the 2017 elections. BBI is a subjugation of the sovereignty as expressed in our constitution – an attempt by the state to enclose civic space.

It is populist, rooted in part narratives and incomplete diagnoses. It is foremost a political settlement designed to exonerate those who have thus far frustrated Kenya’s democratisation process for their selfish gain. It is a poisoned chalice, full of sweet wine to lure battle-weary citizens into a hasty settlement at the expense of economic liberation.

Ms Gikonyo is local governance advocate and national coordinator, The Institute for Social Accountability. wanjiru.gikonyo@tisa.or.ke