AFRICA POLITICAL OPPOSITION GROUPS IN LIMBO

The role of the opposition in democracies all over the world is to question the government of the day and to hold it accountable. Thus, opposition parties require space, freedoms, and opportunities to allow them time to prepare alternative programmes in readiness for the day they would take over.

Unfortunately in Africa, those in power are tenacious when it comes to dealing with opposition parties. They are unwilling to accommodate genuine demands, are averse to criticism, refuse to be advised, and look at alternative programmes as an aberration meant to conceal devious plans to dislodge them.

In an environment of inflexibility and suspicion such as this, opposition leaders find themselves languishing on the sidelines, many of them eventually dying without graduating to the executive office.

The first thing most African leaders do after assuming office is to find out what loopholes they can use to stay in power for as long as possible. They use all tricks in the "deceit manual." They steal votes, jail opponents on tramped-up charges; eliminate those who disagree with them, and spend sleepless nights figuring out how to disorganize and/or dismantle opposition groups.

Examples of such mischiefs are everywhere in the continent.

In Uganda, Warren Kizza Besigye of the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) has "lost" five consecutive elections to the cunning Yoweri Museveni since 2001. The former army officer and once Museveni's personal doctor is one politician who has spent more nights in police cells than any other in East Africa.

In Zimbabwe, Morgan Tsvangirai ran in two elections in 2002 and 2008 and "lost" both to Robert Mugabe. He too is a jail-bird having been arrested and beaten innumerable times. His many attempts to coax the 92-year old Uncle Bob to reliquish power have failed. Mugabe says anyone who wants his job must earn it through constitutional means.

In Togo, Jean-Pierre Fabre of the National Alliance for Change (ANC) "lost" to Faure Gnassingbe in 2010 and again in 2015. He has to wait another five years to try again.

In Kenya, Raila Amolo Odinga, one of most respected democracy champions in Africa will be making his fourth attempt at the presidency next year. A dynamic oppositionist like his late father, Oginga Odinga, Raila "lost" three elections in 1997, 2007, and 2013. Given his advanced age, 2017 will most likely be his last presidential contest. His chances this time around also appear rather cloudy.

Similar stories of opposition "losses" are told in many other African countries. In Ghana, Akuffo Addo of the New Patriotic Party (NPP)is struggling to unseat the incumbent John Mahama in the coming November elections. He "lost" in 2008 to John Atta Mills and in 2012 to Mahama. Addo is considered one of the most combative opposition leaders in Africa but even with his aggressiveness his chances of winning remain at best zero.

In the Democratic Republic of Congo - Moise Katumbi, currently on the run in South Africa after being convicted of "illegaly selling property," is another very frustrated opposition leader given that Joseph Kabila appears anxious to cling to power beyond his two constitutional terms.

Similar scenarios of opposition suppression exist in Sudan, Central African Republic, Comoros, Egypt, and so on. In Burundi opposition leaders have either been killed or fled after Pierre Nkurunzinza refused to step down when his mandatory two term limit ended last year. He called elections last July and "won"

Is there any hope for opposition parties in Africa, you may ask? My answer is: nop.

Oppositionists will continue to "lose" elections as long as incumbents refuse to relinquish power and use state resources to manipulate elections. They will lose because African presidents want to remain in office to continue looting public resources and appointing their wives and children to key positions as we are seeing in Uganda, Angola, Equatorial Guinea and other places.

Unless a level playing ground is thus created to enable them engage freely in politics, opposition groups in Africa face extinction. The only thing they can do is to wait and wait, and pray and pray.

And that is my say.

IS POMBE MAGUFULI OF TANZANIA A THREAT TO KENYA?

When I worked in Dar-es-Salaam as chief editor of the Express and then the Business Times in the late 1990s, John Pombe Magufuli, now the President of Tanzania, was just a junior minister in Benjamin Mkapa's government. And while he had been a member of the powerful Chama Cha Mapinduzi party since 1977, he was not well known beyond his Chato constituency on the shores of Lake Victoria, having been overshadowed by older and more dogmatic members of CCM, many of whom had worked with the founding president Mwalimu Julius Nyerere before Magufuli became a member of Parliament in 1995. However, it didn't take long before he was appointed to a full Cabinet position; moving from the Ministry of Works to Lands and Settlement, to Livestock and Fisheries, then to Works again, before his party became sufficiently convinced he was ready for higher office. In the meantime, he waited patiently - without openly showing ardent ambition - as Jakaya Kikwete - his political senior - made his way to State House ahead of him. So when his name was pulled out of the magic hat during the CCM's selection process, Magufuli was ready for the big challenge more perhaps than anyone else in the country's history. And on the election day in October 2015, he easily beat his opposition rival, CCM defector Edward Lowassa. While his predecessor Kikwete brought military finesse and diplomatic charm to the presidency, Magufuli came with a demeanour of a school teacher and an intellectual composure of a chemist, which he is. His facial personality exudes the characteristics of a no-nonsense man who looks at the cane as an instrument of necessity. And he has had no problem applying that instrument - indiscriminately and fastidiously - as he strives to rid his government of corrupt and lazy elements. Even those who worked with him closely in previous years now shiver in their pants whenever he opens his mouth or shows up unannounced at their places of work. He has sacked more civil servants than any of his predecessors, saved millions of public shillings through sweeping austerity measures than any leader in the region, and is vigorously fighting corruption, improving the country's fiscal health, attracting investments and providing better living standards for the citizens more than any of his predecessors. But even more significantly the man who earned the nickname " bulldozer" because of his track record of supervising mega road projects free of corruption has shamed previous administrations and exposed them as weak and inefficient. Had they done what Magufuli is doing today, Tanzania would probably have overtaken Kenyan long time ago to become the region's economic giant. That the other members of the East African Community now appear nervous about Tanzania's sudden reawakening and renewed assertiveness is not in doubt. Recent allegations by elements in Kenya that Tanzania is among neighbouring countries plotting to overthrow Uhuru Kenyatta's government attest to that. The allegations are most likely based on the fact that Magufuli and Raila are close friends and that Raila has in recent weeks been politically restive and even belligerent against the Jubilee government. But that is not a valid reason to implicate a neighbor in a coup plot. For the record, Raila was the Works Minister in Kenya when Magufuli was holding a similar portfolio in Tanzania. They became friends and have maintained that friendship up to now. The two have visited each other in their rural homes and always treat each other with profound respect. Also, both Magufuli and Raila come from the shores of Lake Victoria and speak Dholuo, a common language there. That's why such inimical allegations should be dismissed with contempt. My only fear is that what was said in Nairobi may have put a blob on bilateral relations between the two countries and raised suspicions in the region.

What is required now is for leaders in Kenya and Tanzania to avoid utterances or actions that could worsen the situation. In a nutshell, a mechanism must be put in place to level-up the situation. But more importantly, Dar-es-Salaam must accept that Uhuru Kenyatta - not Raila Odinga - is the President of the Republic of Kenya. Magufuli must not send signals suggesting he prefers to work with Raila than with Uhuru. And that is my say.

WHAT DOES KENYA'S OPPOSITIONIST RAILA ODINGA REALLY WANT?

This week I took the trouble to obtain and read the report of the subcommittee on African Affairs of the US Senate on what transpired in Kenya in 2007/2008. Titled "The immediate and underlying causes and consequences of Kenya's flawed election," the report is based on the hearings that took place on 7 February 2008 before the subcommittee which is a branch of the powerful Committee on Foreign Relations. I had two reasons why I wanted to revisit that horrible experience that took place nine years ago following the disputed 2007 general elections. One was to reacquaint myself with the feelings of the American leadership during that tragic period in our country's history. And two was to see whether Kenyans have heeded any of the advices given by our friends. The 115-page report contains written presentations from American political experts, academia and, more importantly Raila Odinga and, Kalonzo Musyoka who at that time was the vice president under Mwai Kibaki. The common threads running through the report are things we already know: flawed elections; delayed results; and the hastily-conducted Kibaki swearing-in ceremony. American legislators also talk of the loss of gains in the democratic progression; damage to Kenya's economy; the fragile nature of the country's ethnic composition; and what the US could do to stop future election violence. America is one of Kenya's oldest and most strategic allies and a strong investment, financial and defence partner. What it says Kenya must listen. In the subcommittee report, the Americans proposed several things Kenya needed to do to correct past mistakes including the development of effective governance institutions, creation of fair and equitable rules to govern political processes, respect for the rule of law; guarantees of adequate freedoms to civic organisations and the media; and freedom to allow citizens to organize themselves peacefully. Other than the successful adoption and implementation of the new constitution, the rest of the issues appear not to have been adequately addressed, hence the present volatile political atmosphere. Failure to substantially fill the office of the Registrar of Political Parties has left political organisations free to do as they like further muddying an already unstable political climate. The rule of law is under threat, with extra-judicial assaults on innocent people becoming an almost daily occurrence. Peaceful protests are turning chaotic. People are dying and property is being damaged. Hate speech has become the new lingua franca of the political class with insinuations that point to extreme violence. Freedom of the press has been eroded and self-censorship - rather than objectivity - has become the norm in newsrooms. The personal security of journalists and bloggers can no longer be guaranteed, and reports have emerged suggesting that some of them are opting to carry arms for self-defence. So, I find the advices given by the Americans to be as valid today as they were in 2008. They are no different from those made by the South African Judge, Johann Kriegler, who in 2008 called for "deep running electoral reforms." The problem is that Kenyan leaders do not listen and do not want to learn from the past. They keep on repeating the same mistakes over and over again. What is happening in Kenya worries everyone. With the time running fast, people should not expect any more significant reforms to take place before the next elections. My prediction therefore is that the political landscape will deteriorate to dangerous levels as we get closer to the polls, and the consequences this time around will be more devastating that they were nine years ago. That brings me to my question: What does Raila really want? Does he want the presidency to fulfil the dreams of his father; or, is he seeking the position for self-aggrandizement? Raila has been on the Kenya political scene since the 1970s. He has led many parties and held several cabinet positions. He contested the presidency three times and "failed." As Prime Minister for five years he had an opportunity to implement his agenda of reforms. He didn't and he couldn't because the power-sharing arrangement with Kibaki was shaky and unworkable. Like Bernie Sanders, 74, the Democratic Party candidate in the US whose hopes of becoming the presidential candidate have faded but refuses to quit, Raila 71, too wants to hang on until I don't know when. As someone said, there is time for everything. For the leader of the Orange Democratic Party, 2017 is crucial. If he loses he should leave active politics gracefully so as to preserve his legacy as a fierce and principled defender of democracy and human rights. If he wins he will have an opportunity of showing off his skills and Kenyans will get a chance to sample his presidency which has eluded him for so many years. However, the ruling elite must provide a level playing ground by ensuring the 2017 elections are conducted freely and fairly. Injecting barbarous

tricks into the electoral system would hurt the country and damage Uhuru Kenyatta's reputation. And that is my say.

RIGGING CLAIMS (AND VIOLENCE) IN US PRIMARIES MUSIC TO AFRICANS

Anyone who lives in this free-flowing information planet knows American presidential polls will be held this year, Tuesday, 8 November. They also know that primaries have been going on for the whole of this year with the two main political parties, the Republican and Democratic parties, battling to attract the attention of voters. As the primaries come to an end in Washington DC next week, two individuals have emerged as the presumptive nominees: billionaire Donald Trump of the Republican Party; and career politician Hillary Clinton, who this week ended a long nomination process by trouncing the tough-talking socialist revolutionary, Bernie Sanders. As a foreigner watching the campaign from inside the country, I have seen some aspects in the American primaries that are similar to what I have experienced in African countries. It is quite rare in American election campaigns to hear words such as "rigging" and "violence." Yet these are references I heard over and over again from both sides of the political divide this year. In Africa, theft of votes is a common hallmark of polls. Electoral officials casually and routinely connive with elements in the ruling class among them crooked police and judiciary officials to rig elections; numbers are cooked at tallying centers; and votes are openly stolen from winners and stuffed in ballot boxes of potential losers. But to hear candidates in America - the most democratic country in the world - complaining of primary elections being rigged; of some aspects of party rules being flawed in a way that gives some a competitive edge over others; and of votes being tampered with - is rather ticklish. And to see people pushing and shoving each other, fists landing with a thud, in the name of one's favorite candidate, is hilarious. Not used to such ignoble behavior, the Americans gaze at their television monitors in shock. What these primaries have done is to expose the underbelly of a country that prides itself of a flawless electoral system; one that sends observers to supervise elections across the globe; and one that is quick to criticize polls in other countries. For those who know, this comes as a comic relief to African politicians; knowing that things do go wrong in developed democracies. Of course, one cannot compare electoral practices in the US to those in Africa. The electoral systems in the US are still the best and most democratic in the world, and always produce results that meet the wishes of the American people. But this has not always been the case. In 1876 - one hundred years after the American independence - elections were stolen in broad daylight. In the presidential elections that year, a Democratic party candidate, Samuel J. Tilden, won the presidential elections by a large margin. Yet it was his opponent, Republican governor Rutherford B. Hayes, who was declared the winner. For five months the Americans did not know who their next president would be, a situation that almost triggered a civil war. There were also accusations of election fixing and vote stealing. At the end, Hayes was confirmed president and Americans happily went about their daily activities. No demonstrations, no burning of churches and no killings of innocent people. This is one lesson we in Africa must learn to avoid violence, something that has happened in many countries including my own: Kenya. And talking about Kenya, there is hope this week that the two political protagonists, the ruling Jubilee and the opposition, CORD, will finally meet to discuss the contentious issues surrounding the Independent Electoral and Boundary Commission (IEBC). Already the dispute has claimed a number of lives. No more should be lost. My hope now is that all parties will approach the talks with an open mind.

And that is my say.

KENYA: WE TALK OR WE PERISH

One does not need a crystal ball to see how fast Kenya is spiraling downwards into self-annihilation. Only nine years ago thousands of Kenyans lost their lives, and many have remained displaced even today, as a result of malignant greed for power that appears to be the hallmark of politicians.
The violence that took place after the 2007 elections was the closest the country came to a complete disorder since the 1982 coup attempt. Those who witnessed one or both of the two bloody events would want to be spared of another.
With the general elections now barely sixteen months away, Kenyans must decide whether they want to go the 2007/2008 fractious way - lose lives and ruin their economy, again - or proceed cautiously, dialogue, and engage in peaceful elections so as to come out unscathed on the other side.
What we are seeing currently in Kenya - the brazen street protests and indiscriminate destruction of property; the plenitude of hate speeches and absence of meaningful rapprochement; the erosion of press freedoms; the diminishing personal safety; and the insane cupidity which is continuously widening the economic gap between the rich and the poor - is a harbinger of what lies ahead.
While the last violence was spontaneous and unrehearsed, there are indications this time round that some are getting ready for an explosive eventuality: the security apparatus is being beefed up exponentially with new, heavy-duty, anti-riot equipment; more police are being recruited; and intelligence is being re-booted and refined. The language spoken by the Cabinet Secretary for Internal Security is uncompromising and acrid.
The opposition, on the other hand, is digging in for a confrontation as its leaders openly declare that they would accept nothing less than victory in the coming elections. Their supporters have become emboldened and relentlessly daring consuming gushes of tear gas at will Monday after Monday as the opposition tries to make its point of having the electoral body ejected. I was surprised recently to hear from close friends, who had previously opposed to any forms violence, coming out now to openly support use of force if CORD loses.
This is a scary situation for Kenyans whose only option is to pray and hope for the best.
My view is that politicians must move fast to diffuse the fast brewing levels of anxiety that are so feverishly occupying the minds of peace-loving Kenyans.
The unexpected "talks" this week between the two protagonists Uhuru and Raila at State House, and the pictures that circulated widely showing Raila laughing and joking with his nemesis over glasses of fine wine and a sumptuous lunch, maybe a positive sign of maturity and mutual respect, but they were followed almost immediately by separate rallies, thus underscoring the lingering bitter divisions on a day that was supposed to underscore our national unity and pride.
It is looking unlikely that the agreement reached at the "talks" - of appointing teams to discuss the IEBC issue - will materialize given the statements that came from both sides on Tuesday.
My view is that the two sides need to do more than just "laugh and joke." Why? because the well-being and future of Kenyans is not a joke, and in any case, the era of hoodwinking citizens with small talk is over.
Politics is about competition - intelligent competition. When the boundaries are violated and the players move further to the left in a display of chest-thumping, dogmatic showmanship and pedantic intolerance, then Kenyans have a lot to worry about.
I therefore propose the following:-
1. That the opposition CORD should unconditionally call off all demonstrations and public meetings to allow a cooling-off period.
2. Members of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) including the chief executive and all county representatives must vacate office immediately and the government must declare a commitment to pay them their contractual dues.
3. The Jubilee government and CORD must sit around a table without pre-conditions to work out details of how a fresh, independent body is to be chosen. This task should be left to the leadership of the two parties and not to Parliament.
4. The international community, which is already showing interest in the forthcoming elections, must appoint an independent panel to help chart the way forward including the studying of the current electoral practices and recommending changes where necessary to avoid stealing of votes next year.
5. The government must engage the civil society on how best changes can be made to some draconian media laws passed by Parliament and assented to by the President in recent years.
6. And finally, a process of taming the police force must begin without delay; to include re-training of all officers on everything, from human relations to laws relating to the use of force and constitutional responsibilities.
All this must be done in a spirit of give and take from all sides and with one thing in mind: that Kenya is bigger than any individual political leader.

And that is my say.