Why is President William Ruto still wrong about attacking the judges? After the meeting with the Chief Justice, he repeated his attack on the judges; then upcountry the next day, he repeated the attack. And then his deputy repeated the attack.
The reason he keeps repeating these errors, why he keeps expressing anger at the Judiciary and others, is this: Mr Ruto takes his concept of being the President from his pupil-master, former President Daniel arap Moi.
In addition to earning his university degree, Mr Ruto studied Kenyan power and politics under President Moi for 10 years from 1992 in Kanu Youth Wing (YK'92) to 2002, when Moi left power. In time, Ruto was appointed a Cabinet Minister.
Moi did not train Ruto in the Rule of Law. Nor in human rights nor in constitutionalism. Moi's concept of the presidency was that of an absolute monarch. The President was to be obeyed. The President was not to be disobeyed.
The Judiciary was subordinate to the President. The Public Service was subordinate to the President.
The President appointed and dismissed persons in the whole of the civil service.
The President directed what the Treasury should pay and what not, in disregard of financial regulations, statutes, or other safeguards.
He 'appointed' Members of Parliament and sacked them if they did not stay compliant. Sycophants were the appropriate pool for appointments.
The Police Force was subordinate to the President. They arrested or released those arrested as ordered by the President. This was the Kenya of the Kanu regime.
The President trained his loyalist cadres well in these arts. They were not appointed his ministers without that training. The President only appointed ministers and others to the office after testing them and confirming that they agreed by their deeds to implement these practices and his form of government.
It took 20 years and the courage and determination of Kenya, at the cost, sadly, of many Kenyans dead, tortured, detained, injured, imprisoned, impoverished, robbed of education, exiled, and families destroyed to correct these perverted politics, while foreign governments looked on.
And so too, did Mr Ruto - only look on. Kenyans can see the repetition of some of these approaches in the events of the past week, and past eighteen months.
And Kenyans are right to be apprehensive that more of that past might be added to Mr Ruto's current repertoire.
Mr Ruto has no track record in constitutionalism, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental protections, separation of powers, collective responsibility, independent commissions and 'independent offices' - all the safeguards in the present 2010 Constitution.
When, therefore, on an official occasion Mr Ruto spoke at length against the sugar millers, the Rais, and threatened them with three options of leaving Kenya, we were reminded of Kanu's ways.
When Mr Ruto did not halt the police from attacking peaceful and unarmed persons in a constitutional protest, we were reminded of Kanu's ways.
When Mr Ruto did not speak out at the police breaking into houses and pulling out and beating up the inhabitants who had nothing to do with the protests, we were reminded of Kanu's ways.
When Kenyans died as a result and Mr Ruto kept silent, we were reminded of Kanu's ways. When the Finance Bill was not being met with unquestioning acquiescence, and Mr Ruto was voicing his displeasure in public against selected groups, we were reminded of Kanu's ways.
When Mr Ruto made public attacks on the Judiciary, we were reminded of Kanu ways.
But when Mr Ruto stated explicitly that he would not obey the orders of Judges, we are not only reminded of Kanu, but we see something even more ominous.
We see that Mr Ruto is ready to impose obedience on all Kenyans. Mr Ruto was openly making an unfavourable statement of his intent.
Kenyans agree that Mr Ruto should not continue taking us back to the dark old days. The Constitutional Presidency that Kenya is, is the way to succeed.
-The writer is senior counsel
