Hell broke loose the moment Wanjiku began to ‘bell the cat’

By Ng’ang’a Gicumbi

It’s amazing how issues can be complex in life. And Aesop’s fable of the wise mouse is one such story. Unable to withstand further killings from the bully tomcat, the mice held a general council to consider what measures to take to outwit him.

There was heated debate until a mouse in his teens came with what every mice present agreed was a brilliant idea. "You will all agree," he said, "that our chief danger consists the sly and treacherous manner in which the enemy approaches us. Now, if we could receive some signal of his approach, we could easily escape from him.

I therefore propose that a small bell be procured and attached by a ribbon round his neck. By this means, we should always know when he is approaching." Every mouse was content of the proposal until an old mouse got up and asked: "but who will bell the cat?" The mice looked at each other in silence.

There is no doubt that in spite of its inherent promises of change, the new Constitution is creating confusion at every turn. Wanjiku, it seems, has become bold enough to bell the deadly tomcat of yesteryears, which has now become a toy, her plaything. It is amazing how everybody appears not to be in control of things. The President, Prime Minister, ministers, church, civil society, all seem to be groping in the dark clinging to almost anything. The media, which appears to have some dictatorial tendencies, is on closer inspection, diffident like the rest.

Only Wanjiku seems confident in her confusion. After all, has she not suffered bouts of confusion for as long as she can remember? Over time she has come to trust in her confusion. At least it has often saved her face by making her look circumspect. Or has it? The new Constitution has just emboldened her trust in this bewilderment further by anointing her its principal interpreter.

The once-upon-a-time shy mice are not only belling the tomcat, but chasing it around as well. I have just finished reading an excellent chapter by James Maloney and Kathleen Thelem titled A gradual theory of institutional change in a book they edited in 2010. According to the authors, institutions, once created, tend to change "in subtle and gradual ways over time" because institutions "contain within them possibilities for change."

What animates change is "the power-distributional implications of institutions." The writers place paramount importance on the role of compliance amongst actors within an institutional context. This power-distributional approach is buttressed by an emphasis on compliance because "institutional ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ have different interests on interpreting rules or dedicating resources to their enforcement."

Mahoney and Thelen posit four types of change that are all initiated by efforts of different actors through their degree of compliance. The first is displacement – when existing rules are replaced by new ones. Two is layering where new rules are attached to existing ones. The third is drift rules remain formally the same but their impact changes; and four: Conversion – rules remain the same but are interpreted and enacted differently.

These different types of institutional change are affected by "differences in veto possibilities and the extent of discretion in institutional enforcement and interpretation." In other words, veto players or veto points affect which type of institutional change may occur. For example, the relationship between Kibaki and Raila is one regulated by veto principle.

Or even better, the constitution has empowered Wanjiku to veto Government decisions. And it seems her veto power is getting bigger and stronger and her veto points more numerous and better articulated every day. This means that, as we approach the elections, the Executive will find it extremely tricky to effect displacement change.

It’s like Wanjiku has become a legislator, constitutional lawyer and commentator, all wrapped in one a real political tomcat. Who then will bell the mice?

The writer is a behaviour scientist