the orange newsletter volume 2 number 4. 24 january 2013

7/29/2019 The Orange Newsletter Volume 2 Number 4. 24 January 2013

1/4

Page 1 of4

NEWSLETTER OF THE ORANGE DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT

Volume 2 Number 4 Thursday 24 January 2013

Voters Queue to Cast Ballots during ODM Primaries at Kojuok Primary School Polling Station in Gem, Siaya County

Conducting Effective NominationsLarry Gumbe

The just concluded 2013 ODM primaryelection process has left a bitter taste in themouths of many party members. Why wasthe process so shambolic? Could we have

done better? Fundamentally, what is the

purpose of primary elections fornominations?

Nominations are held within politicalparties in multiparty democracy systems

that the political parties may get the bestcandidates from its membership for each

electoral seat. The candidates must beselected on the basis of criteria set by theparties. This criterion includes capacity torepresent the party effectively, education,knowledge of party manifesto and

programmes, loyalty to the party, highethical and moral integrity.

Democracy requires the highest level of

participation of citizens in the political

process. The most ideal way for citizens totake part in decision-making is throughdirect democracy (also referred to as

participatory democracy). Indeed, the term

democracy is taken from the Greek worddemo kratia. This word means rule by thepeople.

In the old Greek city states, democracy waspracticed through citizens assembling in asquare and debating and making decisionson a particular issue. But these states were

small and the citizens few. Todays states

are very large and their citizens very many.Therefore, direct democracy is verydifficult to practice in decision-making on aday-to-day basis. Indeed, in modern states,

direct democracy is usually only practiced

by way of a referendum, a Yes or Novote on an important issue. Examples ofsuch issues include: political independence

from a colonising state; adoption of a newconstitution; joining of a federation of

states and election of a single presidentialcandidate.

Because the modern states cannot practicedirect democracy the way the small Greekcity states used to, the most common formof democracy today is indirect democracy,

which is also referred to as representative


2/4

Page 2 of4

democracy. This is the kind of democracy

where citizens choose a small group offellow citizens to make decisions on theirbehalf. This process of choosingrepresentatives is referred to as election.

The importance of elections in Kenya aselsewhere can be seen in the number of

institutions we use it to choose our leaders:

in welfare, cultural and economicassociations, in political parties and in the

state. Thus free, fair and transparentelections are essential for our political life.They provide us with the best opportunity

to identify and choose the most committedand effective representatives.

Since the debacle of the ODM nominationsin 2007, there have been intensediscussions on how to remedy the same.For nominations to be free, fair and

transparent there must be a set of rules thatcontrols the process, creates an evenplaying field for both electors andcandidates, and minimizes any negative

practices. The rules must also ensure thatthe nominations are conducted in ademocratic, effective and efficient mannertaking into account the human and financial

resources available to the party.

The Kenyan Context

Nominations in Kenya have beenconducted as follows:

1963- 1966: The major political parties inthis period were KANU and KADU.

Independent candidates were also permitteduntil 1965. The parties conductednominations through electoral colleges ofparty delegates. Candidates had to be

vetted and cleared by the political partiesbefore they could participate in thenomination processes.

Karachuonyo Constituency produced thefirst independent candidate, Elijah OmoloAgar, to get elected to the NationalAssembly. Agar ran as an independent

candidate after claiming that he was riggedout of the KANU nominations. Agarbelonged to the KANU A wing alongside

powerful Justice and Constitutional Affairsminister, Tom Mboya. This was apparentlythe genesis of his political troubles withVice-President Jaramogi Oginga Odinga ofKANU B. In a hotly contested race, Agar

beat KANU and the VPs preferredcandidate, Gogo Ochok, to clinch the seat.

1969- 1988: KPU was banned by Kenyatta

in 1969. Kenya was a de facto one partystate until 1982 when the Moi regime madeit a de jure one party state. During thisperiod KANU was the only legal political

party. KANU would vet and clear

candidates to run for various seats. Wheremultiple candidates were cleared for asingle seat, they would proceed to theballoting process, running against each

other.

In 1986, KANU changed its rules to effect

primary elections for nominations by queue

voting, the mlolongo, system. If onegarnered more than 70% of the vote, then

they would be declared elected. Thissystem was carried out to its farcicalconclusion. Very often shorter queues were

declared as winners!

1992- 2007: Multiparty politics returned to

Kenya in 1992. The major political partieswere KANU, FORD- Kenya, FORD- Asiliand Democratic Party. Ford split into Ford-Kenya and Ford- Asili for reasons which

included the method of nominating partycandidates. Whilst Matiba and followerswanted universal suffrage of partymembers, Odinga and followers preferred

the delegate electoral college system.

In 1992, all major political parties used thedelegate system apart from FORD- Asili

which had limited success with theuniversal suffrage system.

In 1997, all major political parties used the

delegate system.

In 2002, the KANU presidential candidatewas anointed at a delegates meeting at agymnasium in Kasarani, Nairobi. The

National Rainbow Coalition, NARC,arrived at its presidential candidate throughboardroom negotiations. NARC theneffected extremely chaotic and farcical

nominations for parliamentary and civicseats through the universal suffrageprocess. In the end, party leaders largelyselected candidates in boardrooms.

In 2007, the ODM help primary electionsfor the nomination of its presidentialcandidate. Raila Odinga was so nominated.

A short while later, the ODM effected andextremely shambolic primary elections forthe purposes of nomination of its

parliamentary and civic candidates. In theend, party leaders largely selectedcandidates in boardrooms. Others partieswho tried the universal suffrage system hadsimilar results.

ODM Nominations

Nominations for elections in political

parties must be effected transparently,efficiently and effectively. In 2007, theODM help primary elections for thenomination of its presidential candidate at

the Moi Sports Centre in Kasarani

Constituency, Nairobi. About 4,000 partydelegates from all branches in Kenyaparticipated. The polling and vote countingexercise was finalized in about 3 hours. The

candidates and the delegates left the venuefairly well satisfied with the standards ofthe exercise.

A short while later, the ODM effected andextremely shambolic primary elections for

the purposes of nomination of itsparliamentary candidate in KasaraniConstituency. Over 100,000 persons in

over 100 polling stations were eligible tovote in the exercise.

The National Elections Board, Chaired byJustice Richard Kwach, was widelycondemned in the party for conducted asham, shambolic and chaotic process. In

Karachuonyo, one day, Dr Orinda had theparty nomination certificate, the next day itwas Eng. Rege, then Orinda, then Rege, adnauseum!

The party, with very limited human andfinancial resources, was trying to mirror theparliamentary elections exercise which was

to be conducted by the ElectoralCommission of Kenya using financialresources hundreds of times greater thanthat of the party.

Lessons Learnt

The important lessons learnt from the 2007ODM nominations are:

1. There must be clear thinking andaction on nominations. The party mustnot embark on the process without

requisite resources and preparation

2. There must be clear, logical andenforceable rules governing party

nominations

3. A clear membership list must be inplace so that none members may notparticipate in pertinent party activities

4. Members of the party elections boardmust be of the requisite intellectuallevel. They must be able to maintainthe highest moral and ethical standardsin their work. They must be

committed party members

Two systems

The nominations should be effected indemocratic, efficient, effective transparentand fair processes which should give the


3/4

Page 3 of4

party the best candidates. The two main

nominations processes are:

Electoral College Universal suffrage of membersAspirants are required to apply for therespective seats declared as vacant fornominations. The aspirants are the vettedfor qualifications and disqualifications

before they are cleared to go to the ballotuse one of the above methods.

Political parties may opt to identify some

candidates through boardroomnegotiations.

In the Electoral College system, approveddelegates vote for cleared aspirants for the

various vacant nomination seats. Usuallythe delegates congregate at certain points toeffect the same.

In the universal suffrage system allapproved party members are eligible tovote for approved nomination candidates at

designated polling stations.

Cost Implications

The cost estimates for conducting aneffective national universal suffrageprocess at all IEBC polling centres is KSh.4 Billion. The Electoral College system

conducted at all sub- locations would costabout KSh. 492 million.

Analysis and Conclusions

In 1992, all major political parties used thedelegate system apart from Ford- Asili

which had limited success with the

universal suffrage system.

In 1997, all major political parties used thedelegate system.

In 2002, the KANU presidential candidatewas anointed at a delegates meeting at a

gymnasium in Kasarani, Nairobi. The

National Rainbow Coalition, NARC,arrived at its presidential candidate through

boardroom negotiations. NARC theneffected extremely chaotic and farcicalnominations for parliamentary and civic

seats through the universal suffrageprocess. In the end, party leaders largelyselected candidates in boardrooms.

In 2007, the ODM help primary electionsfor the nomination of its presidentialcandidate. Raila Odinga was so nominated.

A short while later, the ODM effected andextremely shambolic primary elections forthe purposes of nomination of its

parliamentary and civic candidates. In theend, party leaders largely selectedcandidates in boardrooms. Others partieswho tried the universal suffrage system had

similar results. This has been repeated in2013.

The party, with very limited human and

financial resources, was trying mirror theparliamentary elections exercise which wasto be conducted by the ElectoralCommission of Kenya using financialresources hundreds of times greater that

that of the party.

The important conclusions ODM

nominations are:

1. There must be clear thinking andaction on nominations. The party mustnot embark on the process without

requisite resources and preparation

2. There must be clear, logical andenforceable rules governing party

nominations

3. A clear membership list must be inplace so that none members may notparticipate in pertinent party activities

4. Members of the party elections boardmust be of the requisite intellectuallevel. They must be able to maintainthe highest moral and ethical standardsin their work. They must becommitted party members

Recommendations

Candidate Eligibility

ODM must in the future ensure that itnominates strong candidates who meet allthe minimum legal requirements. The

candidates should, ideally, exceed the legalrequirements so that ODM may win manyseats and form a formidable governmentthereafter.

Nomination System

ODM should consider using the Electoral

College nominations system as it is more

cost effective and in less amenable toinfiltration by its opponents.

The CORD Presidential Candidate Rt. Hon. Raila Odinga address supporters durind a CORD Rally at Tala in Machakos
http://elections.nation.co.ke/Photos/-/1631952/1670594/-/c8x5l7z/-/index.html


4/4

Page 4 of4

Electrifying Kenya: Lessons from EthiopiaLarry Gumbe

Decent housing, with electricity andrunning water, is largely considered to be abasic requirement to all in the 21st century.

Indeed, the Constitution of Kenya, Article43(1) (b) recognizes the right to,Accessible and adequate housing, and toreasonable standards of sanitation. Thecountry must, therefore, plan to generate

enough electricity to meet domestic,industrial, transport and agricultural needsof the population.

Kenya Vision 2030 is the countrysdevelopment blueprint covering the period2008 to 2030. It aims to transform Kenya

into a newly industrializing, middle-

income country providing a high quality lift

to all its citizens by the year 2030. Thecountry must have access to adequate andreliable supply of electric energy to achievethis vision. The country currently has

installed capacity to generate 1,400 MW ofelectricity from hydroelectric, geothermaland thermal sources. Kenya currentlyconsumes about 145 kWh/capita of

electricity. For Vision 2030 to be achieved,this figure needs to rise to about 5,000 to7,000 kWh/capita which would translate apeak installed capacity of 45,000 MW.

The potential to economically generateadditional electricity from environmentally

friendly sources such as hydroelectric,geothermal and other renewable energy isestimated as 20,000 MW. It is therefore

necessary to generate more electricity tocover the 25,000 MW shortfalls.Our neighbour, Ethiopia, has shown us that

it is quite possible to develop this capacityin a short time. Just ten years ago, Ethiopiawas generating less than 400 MW, sincethen, it has added 10,000 MW in thefollowing projects:

Tis Abay II, 2001, 75 MW Gilgel Gibe I Omo River, 2004, 184

MW

Tekeze High Dam Tekeze River,2009, 310 MW

Gilgel Gibe II Omo River, 2009, 420MW

Tana Beles Belesa River, 2010, 435MW

Gilgel Gibe III Omo River, 2013,1870 MW

Great Millennium Dam Nile River,2013, 6,000 MW

Ashegoda Wind Farm Project(Enderta), 2011, 120 MW

There are three more huge hydroelectricdams on the pipe line; Tekeze II GilgelGibe IV and Gilgel Gibe V. The Ethiopiangovernment has a plan to produce 10,000

megawatts of electric power in the next fiveyears. Ethiopia has the potential to producemore than 45,000 megawatts of electricity

from hydropower. Ethiopia is alsoresearching other sources of energy likewind and geothermal.

The Lesson from Ethiopia is that it is quitepossible to generate enough electricity inKenya to power Vision 2030. We need to

generate the same from a mix ofhydroelectricity, coal, geothermal nuclearand other green energy sources. Ourgeothermal potential is 7,000MW. TheGeothermal Development Corporation has

plans to exploit this. KenGen has beennegotiating with the South Korean firm,Daewoo, to produce 300 MW from coal inMombasa. It is quite possible for us to

construct a 5,000 MW coal plant in 36months. This has been done in India. Wecan construct two such plantssimultaneously

Generating additional electricity fromnuclear power is also a promising option inachieving Vision 2030 in Kenya. Nuclearpower has great advantages:

Nuclear plants do not require a lot ofspace

They do not emit greenhouse gasesand hence do not contribute to global

warming

Nuclear energy is by far the mostconcentrated form of energy

The development of power plants canbe effected rapidly

We can produce enough electricity topower Vision 2030 and beyond. All weneed is to stop thinking small. We need to

think at the levels of Meles Zenawi!!.

The Orange is a Newsletter of the Orange Democratic Movement

Readers are invited to submit their articles for publication at the address given below:

Prof. Larry Gumbe

Email:[email protected] SMS: 0713 764809

-

The Orange Democratic MovementOrange House

Menelik Road, Kilimani AreaP.O. Box 2478, 00202

Nairobi.Email:[email protected]

Check out our website atwww.odm.co.ke

Opinions of contributors are not necessarily those of the ODM.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.odm.co.ke/http://www.odm.co.ke/http://www.odm.co.ke/http://www.odm.co.ke/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

the orange newsletter volume 2 number 4. 24 january 2013

Documents