By Chris Maina
Does President Uhuru already have a legacy?
This question was answered in the affirmative this week in an opinion piece by Prof. Peter Kagwanja (whose wife, Monica Juma, is the Principal Secretary in the ministry of Interior where Ole Lenku is the cabinet secretary). Though Kagwanja, from the foregoing, ‘fucks’ the regime, being a scholar, it is only fair to heed him.
The other stuff you need to knowÂ about Kagwanja is that he is believed to be the Nairobi host of Ugandan vagrant, David Matsanga, at their apartment in Ngara/Parklands estate, Nairobi. In Matsanga you see the lowest Â of Prof. Kagwanja’s knowledge.
What Kagwanja, who has peers, can only mentally construct without uttering, is packaged to Matsanga, who is peerless, to propagate!
Kagwanja sums up Uhuru’s 48 ‘finest hours’ of ‘power and legacy’, which is nothing but two days of keeping the country on the precipice of lunacy and ethno-political jamboree, thus:
“Certainly, the judicious decision to sign away his presidential powers for 48 hours to his Deputy, William Ruto, in a tactical move to allow him to attend the court and safeguardâ€™s Kenyaâ€™s sovereignty, has fortified his tenure and legacy, revitalised his coalition and weakened the opposition”.
“The future of Jubilee power looks certain”.
“But the future of the international court is not as certain”.
“The court is doomed if the judges gamble on an alternative pathway!”
“The Kenyatta case is the most politically explosive ever to have reached trial at the ICC. As such, it is testing the courtâ€™s claims to universality, impartiality, and professionalism in a public and palpable way”.
“In the 21st century, the ICC has become the pivot of Africa-West political and diplomatic relations, eclipsing European colonialism and post-colonial dictatorships which fed the embers of nationalism in the 20th century”.
According to Kagwanja, Uhuru’s two day absence from the country to answer to charges of rape, mutilations, forceful eviction of communities, murder and other heinous, abominable crimes of the first decade of the 21st century count into his legacy (what a fucked up legacy), which, the rant goes, is of a ‘humble’ President. This, of course, is a quasi-ethnic dishwater.
Reading through Kagwanja’s verbiage, words like ‘philosophically’, diplomatically’, ‘ideologically’, and whatnot are quivered to add onto an ‘intellectual’ analysis of a power handover event Â which activist Njonjo Mue termed as Â ‘a farce’, ‘a melodrama’.
“….had he traveled to The Hague without all the fanfare of signing legal instruments handing over power to his deputy, power would still have been automatically transferred to Ruto as it always is every time the President travels abroad,” observed Mue.Â Surely, Uhuru’s ICC tragicomedy cannot, and, should not be used to benchmark the nonsense that is claimed to be ‘legacy’.
The troubling aspect of Kagwanja’s “thoughts” is that they do not form any coherent body of knowledge. In reading Kagwanja, you don’t learn anything new, or worthwhile, rather, all that is repackaged is theÂ usual narrative of the Jubilee Alliance of being fixed by the West on one hand, their political opponents on the other hand but not themselves, yet, not long ago, ‘Don’t be Vague, Let’s go the The Hague’ was their incongruousÂ chorusÂ whenever the same people they accuse of witch-hunt called for local tribunal.
To keep the narrative of victimization alive, Kagwanja and other Jubilee Alliance apologists cannot dare revisit events that led to the Waki Envelop transforming into Ocampo 6. While they have been successful at twisting the ICC narrative, sometimes, their lies have been exposed.
In an earlier article, “Orders on country will put Africaâ€™s sovereignty at risk,” Kagwanja laboured to prove how the summons issued to Uhuru would offend what he referred to as ‘sovereign immunity’.
“The future of the sovereign immunity of Africaâ€™s sitting leaders is in doubt after judges at the International Criminal Court ordered Kenyaâ€™s President Uhuru Kenyatta to appear in person to a status conference on the future of his case on October 8”.
Fact is, Uhuru attended the Hague Court as a sitting head of state. He left the Hague Court as a sitting head of state and was received back in the country as a sitting head of state. This fact alone, that a sitting head of state appeared in person at the ICC and sat as an ‘accused’, for over three hours, though dubious as it is, and, however much a conspiracy media environment downplays it, debunks the fallacious myth that the ICC tries sovereign states, nay, it tries individuals.
Interestingly, as the country, in a mediated frenzy, has been pushed into forgetting this fact – of a sitting head of state at the dock at the Hague – the paranoia that it has created in several countries in Africa, ruled by strong men and dictators, could not escape this writer.
Fuming at the Ugandan Independence Day celebrations last week, Yoweri Museveni, facing a re-energized home ‘war’ from his long time ally and former Premier Amama Mbazazi in an increasingly tenacious opposition grouping, lashed out at the ICC as a “biased instrument of post-colonial hegemonyâ€.
The realization by most African strongmen of the African Union, who persistently opposed the appearance of President Uhuru Kenyatta at the Hague court, is that the argument of ‘sovereign immunity’, which is sobriquet forÂ Â ‘presidential dictatorship’, will never be a strong argument at the ICC. President Uhuru, a sitting head of state, cornered, inadvertently, shattered that political myth.