The Paradox of Political Handshakes in Kenya’s Democracy

Kenya’s recent political reconciliation between President William Ruto and opposition leader Raila Odinga raises concerns about the true meaning of elections. Historical patterns of political handshakes undermine democratic principles and accountability, while intertwining governance with power-sharing agreements leads to systemic issues such as corruption and policy instability. Strengthening institutional opposition and electoral reforms is crucial for revitalizing Kenya’s democratic framework.

Kenya has recently observed another political truce between President William Ruto and opposition leader Raila Odinga, a recurring theme in the nation’s history. While this handshake may be seen by some as a step towards national unity, it raises critical concerns regarding democracy, governance, and the opposition’s essential role in holding the government accountable. There is a looming query: are elections merely a façade for deciding who will share power?

Political handshakes in Kenya date back to the post-election crisis in 2008, when President Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga forged a power-sharing deal post the controversial 2007 elections, which was facilitated by Kofi Annan. This arrangement formed the Grand Coalition Government, appointing Raila as Prime Minister. While initially seen as a remedy for political strife, it introduced the troubling pattern of contentious elections followed by negotiations that integrate the opposition into government roles.

In 2018, Raila’s alliance with the then-President Uhuru Kenyatta, represented another shift as he moved from a critic to an ally of the administration he once opposed. This pattern prompts skepticism about the genuine significance of elections, as voters grapple with the transitioning nature of political allegiances in Kenya.

This trend undermines the democratic principles outlined in Article 38 of the Constitution, which ensures citizens’ rights to fair elections and political representation. Frequent merging of opposition leaders with the ruling party diminishes the electoral choices available for voters, effectively reducing democracy to a staged performance where leaders feign opposition before convening for power-sharing.

Moreover, the transitions contradict Article 10 of the Constitution, which emphasizes national governance principles such as integrity and accountability. The erosion of these values manifests in a political landscape in which opposition becomes merely an avenue for negotiated power-sharing.

The political environment suggests a continuous cycle where established leaders resurface in new roles without addressing systemic issues such as pervasive corruption. Reports from the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission reveal ongoing corruption scandals, yet the absence of political will to confront these issues remains alarming.

Policy stability further suffers from these political shifts, as each handshake alters policy direction, adversely impacting businesses and economic development. Public trust declines as citizens witness their votes failing to yield substantive change, reflected in decreasing voter turnout.

The repeated occurrence of political agreements undermines the tenets of the Constitution, which prescribes a functioning presidential system. The emergence of handshake deals leads to unclarity in governance structures, creating dual authority scenarios that hinder effective governance.

The implications of political handshakes extend to human rights violations, where the plight of victims of electoral violence and police brutality is often sidelined. Kenya’s commitment to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights is compromised as political leaders focus on power consolidation over accountability and justice.

The weakening of parliamentary oversight results from opposition leaders joining the government through handshakes, blurring the line between legislative and executive functions. This erosion of accountability risks fostering a culture of impunity, deviating from Article 94’s mandate for parliamentary independence.

To foster a more resilient democracy in Kenya, it is vital to sever the cycle of political compromises. Institutionalization of the opposition should be prioritized, including amendments to the Political Parties Act that restrict any merger of opposition parties with the ruling party during an electoral cycle.

Additionally, electoral reforms are necessary, particularly regarding the restructuring of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission to restore faith in the electoral process. Strengthening civil society and media’s roles in ensuring governmental transparency and accountability would further enhance these efforts.

The recent Ruto-Odinga handshake is yet another chapter in Kenya’s legacy of political compromises that has turned actual democracy into a charade. If elections only facilitate political bargainings, one must question their purpose. A government void of a legitimate opposition equates to a dictatorship in disguise; hence, a collective cry for reform is paramount for Kenyans to escape this cycle of superficial elections and handshakes favoring only the political elite.

In conclusion, the ongoing political agreements in Kenya challenge the integrity of its democratic processes. The essence of free and fair elections is compromised when opposition leaders align with the ruling party, resulting in a diminished voice for voters. To revitalize democracy, systematic reforms must be implemented to reinforce the role of the opposition and prioritize transparency and accountability within governance. Until these issues are addressed, the perception of democracy in Kenya remains at risk.

Original Source: icj-kenya.org