Posted Monday, April 25, 2011 | By MACHARIA GAITHO
If President Kibaki allows Mr William Ruto to resume his job as minister for Education without securing the say-so of Prime Minister Raila Odinga, that should be the signal for the latter to re-evaluate his continued stay in a government that treats him with increasing contempt.
PNU hardliners pushing for the unilateral reinstatement of Mr Ruto are not so much in love with the suspended minister as they are in love with the opportunity to humiliate Mr Odinga.
They salivate at the chance to demonstrate that despite the National Accord and Reconciliation Act as enshrined in the law and the Constitution, the power-sharing agreement is dead and it is them calling the shots.
Therefore they will not even want to have the president consult the prime minister on Mr Ruto’s reinstatement now that he has been acquitted of criminal charges; they might prefer that Mr Odinga be not given the chance to say yes or no.
But it seems they have not quite sold the president on their strategy, hence the strange explanation by Government Spokesman Alfred Mutua that Mr Ruto’s resumption of duties is ‘‘automatic’’, hence there is no need for a formal reinstatement.
This ingenious argument ignores an inconvenient fact: Mr Ruto did not voluntarily step aside once corruption charges against him were confirmed.
If anything, it appeared that he wanted to hang tough until President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga got together and announced a joint decision to ‘‘step him aside’’.
It, therefore, follows that in accordance with the national accord and the law, the President and the Prime Minister must concur on the reinstatement, or otherwise, of Mr Ruto.
That has to be joint decision of the coalition principals, and not one that can be hijacked by an insular clique more intent in succession politics and in settling scores.
However, it must be pointed out that if Mr Ruto has been cleared of all pending criminal cases and there is no legal bar to his return to the Cabinet, it would be churlish for Mr Odinga to try and block him.
Leadership calls for grace and magnanimity, and it would serve Mr Odinga little other than temporary satisfaction to keep Mr Ruto out in the cold.
If anything, he needs to do everything he can not to further alienate an important constituency loyal to Mr Ruto that has deserted him in droves.
Of course he can also decide to go the whole hog. If Mr Odinga feels that his relationship with Mr Ruto is damaged beyond salvage, there is then no need to remain locked in a loveless and fake embrace.
In that situation, the best course of action would be to complete the divorce. Instead of the present state of limbo, Mr Odinga can move to eject Mr Ruto altogether, exercising the right to hire and fire within his half of the Cabinet.
This would present an interesting scenario if President Kibaki were to decide that he, too, must be consulted.
Even more interesting would be if the President rejected such a proposal, which leave the Prime Minister helpless and wringing his hands in frustration.
The clique consumed with keeping Mr Odinga in his place would just love such an opportunity.
Something like that happening should also force Mr Odinga to take a cold hard look at his role within the coalition.
If he decides to jump out, that would be a major victory for the forces that want to frustrate him into leaving anyway. Yet there might be little other choice unless he is content to cool his heels and endure sustained humiliation in a government where he is reduced to a mere passenger.
It is generally accepted that this coalition must last the course if the new Constitution and the rest of the reform programme towards a new dispensation is to be realised before the next elections.
If, however, President Kibaki and his succession planners prefer the risk of dismantling the present structure in order to keep power within “The House” then there might be no alternative but a parting of ways.
mgaitho@ke.nationmedia.com
PNU hardliners pushing for the unilateral reinstatement of Mr Ruto are not so much in love with the suspended minister as they are in love with the opportunity to humiliate Mr Odinga.
They salivate at the chance to demonstrate that despite the National Accord and Reconciliation Act as enshrined in the law and the Constitution, the power-sharing agreement is dead and it is them calling the shots.
Therefore they will not even want to have the president consult the prime minister on Mr Ruto’s reinstatement now that he has been acquitted of criminal charges; they might prefer that Mr Odinga be not given the chance to say yes or no.
But it seems they have not quite sold the president on their strategy, hence the strange explanation by Government Spokesman Alfred Mutua that Mr Ruto’s resumption of duties is ‘‘automatic’’, hence there is no need for a formal reinstatement.
This ingenious argument ignores an inconvenient fact: Mr Ruto did not voluntarily step aside once corruption charges against him were confirmed.
If anything, it appeared that he wanted to hang tough until President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga got together and announced a joint decision to ‘‘step him aside’’.
It, therefore, follows that in accordance with the national accord and the law, the President and the Prime Minister must concur on the reinstatement, or otherwise, of Mr Ruto.
That has to be joint decision of the coalition principals, and not one that can be hijacked by an insular clique more intent in succession politics and in settling scores.
However, it must be pointed out that if Mr Ruto has been cleared of all pending criminal cases and there is no legal bar to his return to the Cabinet, it would be churlish for Mr Odinga to try and block him.
Leadership calls for grace and magnanimity, and it would serve Mr Odinga little other than temporary satisfaction to keep Mr Ruto out in the cold.
If anything, he needs to do everything he can not to further alienate an important constituency loyal to Mr Ruto that has deserted him in droves.
Of course he can also decide to go the whole hog. If Mr Odinga feels that his relationship with Mr Ruto is damaged beyond salvage, there is then no need to remain locked in a loveless and fake embrace.
In that situation, the best course of action would be to complete the divorce. Instead of the present state of limbo, Mr Odinga can move to eject Mr Ruto altogether, exercising the right to hire and fire within his half of the Cabinet.
This would present an interesting scenario if President Kibaki were to decide that he, too, must be consulted.
Even more interesting would be if the President rejected such a proposal, which leave the Prime Minister helpless and wringing his hands in frustration.
The clique consumed with keeping Mr Odinga in his place would just love such an opportunity.
Something like that happening should also force Mr Odinga to take a cold hard look at his role within the coalition.
If he decides to jump out, that would be a major victory for the forces that want to frustrate him into leaving anyway. Yet there might be little other choice unless he is content to cool his heels and endure sustained humiliation in a government where he is reduced to a mere passenger.
It is generally accepted that this coalition must last the course if the new Constitution and the rest of the reform programme towards a new dispensation is to be realised before the next elections.
If, however, President Kibaki and his succession planners prefer the risk of dismantling the present structure in order to keep power within “The House” then there might be no alternative but a parting of ways.
mgaitho@ke.nationmedia.com
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment