The Constitution proclaims that “The Republic of Kenya shall be a multiparty democratic State founded on the national values and principles of governance referred to in Article 10.” Those values and principles include patriotism, national unity, sharing, devolution of power, rule of law, democracy and participation of the people as well as good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability.
Multiparty democracy is at the core of our system of government. For democracy to thrive, the parties must be viable, distinct and vibrant. They must be capable of differentiation on the basis of ideology, platform and programs, in addition to their leadership and membership. It means that anybody attempting to undermine the multiparty characteristic of our republic is violating the Constitution. And such violations have consequences.
The Constitution requires that any collaboration between political parties must be structured and sanctioned through the respective party organs. They must also be processed transparently and accountably. In other words, political leaders cannot act against their parties’ interests; nor can they purport to do anything without the express approval of the party members. Anything done by a party leader or member against the interests of his or her party is therefore deemed to be unconstitutional.
Democracy is about rights and freedoms. The owners of political parties in a democratic state are individual members. Membership isn’t based on social, economic or political status; it’s free choice anchored on the individual members’ beliefs and commitments. However, should a member change his beliefs, join another party or engage in acts incompatible with his party’s policies, article 103(1)(e) of the Constitution stipulates that the member shall be deemed to have resigned from his party. He can then opt to remain party-less or as an independent. A person who no longer supports or prescribes to his party’s policies cannot continue to represent his party in parliament, senate or council. When an independent candidate joins a political party, article 103(e)(ii) of the Constitution states that he, too, would automatically lose his seat.
If anyone loses his or her seat due to 'changed' party allegiance, s/he would have to forfeit running in a subsequent by-election because the law prescribes that one has to be a legitimate member of a party at least three months prior to any election. Even better, article 104 empowers citizens to recall their representatives for various infractions. And since integrity, the rule of law, good governance and accountability principles are embedded in chapter six of the Constitution, those violating the Constitution and the Political Parties Act by disrespecting the multiparty nature of our democracy are still in the grind.
Arguably, the Constitution empowers citizens to remove political leaders undermining their opponents’ parties as well as those undermining their own parties. Such people are subverting the foundation of multi-party democracy. That’s why whips are considered essential to the Westminster system of government.
In a parliamentary democracy, whips are party 'enforcers.' They cajole, induce, threaten and 'remind' party members to vote according to the official party policy. Whipping ensures discipline in party management. In multi-party democracy, everyone has the right to belong, or not belong, to a political party of their choice. Before the reintroduction of multi-party democracy in Kenya, that choice wasn’t there. It often meant choosing between life, death, jail, detention without trial, torture, starvation or exile. A 'dissident' couldn’t form his or her own party. One couldn’t participate in politics as an independent either. The Big Man chose who stood for what and when.
But that was then. Multiparty is now flourishing, except that the current Constitution bars anarchy. Party discipline is the cornerstone of modern democratic practice.
In the UK, for instance, the Chief Whip of the governing party in the House of Commons is appointed as a Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury. He sits in the Cabinet. In Canada, the Party Whip is responsible for assigning offices and scheduling speakers from the party for various bills, motions and other proceedings of the House. A party whip ensures that the number of MPs in the House or committees is adequate to win a vote if one is called. In fact, when a vote is called, division bells ring until the whips for each party are satisfied that there are sufficient numbers.
Under the Westminster model, three types of whip are issued depending on the bills in the House. A single-line whip is non-binding and is only for attendance or voting, but with a clear indication on the party policy on the issue. A double-line whip is an instruction to attend and vote in a particular way but without sanction. A three-line whip is a strict instruction to attend and vote in a particular way, breach of which would have serious consequences. Members who breach a three-line whip can be expelled from the party. Nobody dares vote against his party.
Therefore, there is nothing novel, innovative or dictatorial if a political party whips its members for any number of reasons. Indisciplined brats don’t deserve to be in Parliament.
Miguna Miguna is the Prime Minister's advisor on coalition affairs.The views expressed here are his own
Multiparty democracy is at the core of our system of government. For democracy to thrive, the parties must be viable, distinct and vibrant. They must be capable of differentiation on the basis of ideology, platform and programs, in addition to their leadership and membership. It means that anybody attempting to undermine the multiparty characteristic of our republic is violating the Constitution. And such violations have consequences.
The Constitution requires that any collaboration between political parties must be structured and sanctioned through the respective party organs. They must also be processed transparently and accountably. In other words, political leaders cannot act against their parties’ interests; nor can they purport to do anything without the express approval of the party members. Anything done by a party leader or member against the interests of his or her party is therefore deemed to be unconstitutional.
Democracy is about rights and freedoms. The owners of political parties in a democratic state are individual members. Membership isn’t based on social, economic or political status; it’s free choice anchored on the individual members’ beliefs and commitments. However, should a member change his beliefs, join another party or engage in acts incompatible with his party’s policies, article 103(1)(e) of the Constitution stipulates that the member shall be deemed to have resigned from his party. He can then opt to remain party-less or as an independent. A person who no longer supports or prescribes to his party’s policies cannot continue to represent his party in parliament, senate or council. When an independent candidate joins a political party, article 103(e)(ii) of the Constitution states that he, too, would automatically lose his seat.
If anyone loses his or her seat due to 'changed' party allegiance, s/he would have to forfeit running in a subsequent by-election because the law prescribes that one has to be a legitimate member of a party at least three months prior to any election. Even better, article 104 empowers citizens to recall their representatives for various infractions. And since integrity, the rule of law, good governance and accountability principles are embedded in chapter six of the Constitution, those violating the Constitution and the Political Parties Act by disrespecting the multiparty nature of our democracy are still in the grind.
Arguably, the Constitution empowers citizens to remove political leaders undermining their opponents’ parties as well as those undermining their own parties. Such people are subverting the foundation of multi-party democracy. That’s why whips are considered essential to the Westminster system of government.
In a parliamentary democracy, whips are party 'enforcers.' They cajole, induce, threaten and 'remind' party members to vote according to the official party policy. Whipping ensures discipline in party management. In multi-party democracy, everyone has the right to belong, or not belong, to a political party of their choice. Before the reintroduction of multi-party democracy in Kenya, that choice wasn’t there. It often meant choosing between life, death, jail, detention without trial, torture, starvation or exile. A 'dissident' couldn’t form his or her own party. One couldn’t participate in politics as an independent either. The Big Man chose who stood for what and when.
But that was then. Multiparty is now flourishing, except that the current Constitution bars anarchy. Party discipline is the cornerstone of modern democratic practice.
In the UK, for instance, the Chief Whip of the governing party in the House of Commons is appointed as a Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury. He sits in the Cabinet. In Canada, the Party Whip is responsible for assigning offices and scheduling speakers from the party for various bills, motions and other proceedings of the House. A party whip ensures that the number of MPs in the House or committees is adequate to win a vote if one is called. In fact, when a vote is called, division bells ring until the whips for each party are satisfied that there are sufficient numbers.
Under the Westminster model, three types of whip are issued depending on the bills in the House. A single-line whip is non-binding and is only for attendance or voting, but with a clear indication on the party policy on the issue. A double-line whip is an instruction to attend and vote in a particular way but without sanction. A three-line whip is a strict instruction to attend and vote in a particular way, breach of which would have serious consequences. Members who breach a three-line whip can be expelled from the party. Nobody dares vote against his party.
Therefore, there is nothing novel, innovative or dictatorial if a political party whips its members for any number of reasons. Indisciplined brats don’t deserve to be in Parliament.
Miguna Miguna
Miguna Miguna is the Prime Minister's advisor on coalition affairs.The views expressed here are his own
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment