The Tyranny of Tallying

The dust will soon settle on the March 4^th General Election, amid serious questions raised about the conduct of the polls by the IEBC, specifically around the tallying process. In many ways, the tallying process was eerily reminiscent of that which took place in 2007.

Thinking back to the 2007 elections, I distinctly recall a polling day where Kenyans from all walks of life mingled freely and amiably as they waited patiently in queues to discharge their civic duties. Having participated as an observer in both 2007 and 2013, I can say without fear of contradiction that the environment on both polling days was quintessentially Kenyan: despite long queues and the blazing sun, there was a clear determination by all to persevere and exercise their constitutional right to vote.

Following that polling day in 2007, the tallying process presented a completely different experience: it began well enough, with results streaming in as expected. Then, after almost two days of tallying, the results simply stopped! After a prolonged period without results, rumours of a plot to rig the election began to circulate. The events that ensued are well known, a black spot on our collective national conscience, constituting possibly the darkest period in our nations history.

Fast forward to 2013 and again the polling day, despite numerous challenges, was characterized by an uplifting camaraderie among Kenyans in the wake of ethnically polarized campaigns. Sadly, following polling day a familiarly nefarious tallying process unfolds. In an admittedly more complex election, with significant investment in technology to increase transparency, we were forced to watch with incredulity as one check after the other failed, completely! None of the technology performed as expected, for reasons that remain unclear to date. The IEBC chose to abandon all systems and revert to a manual system, one that history had demonstrated was a recipe for disaster. The manual system was characterized by a litany of irregularities, including incorrect computations and in some areas, votes cast in excess of the number of registered voters. The recently concluded petitions challenging the results of the election have laid bare a number of these irregularities. That notwithstanding, the process produced a result, one which the Supreme Court has now adjudicated upon.

How can it be that in two consecutive elections under two different electoral bodies, Kenyans voted peacefully, only for the process to fall down spectacularly at the tallying stage? Is it possible that Kshs. 9 Billion of technological investment designed to streamline and safeguard the electoral process could fail completely?

As a country we are at serious risk of further entrenching electoral malfeasance if we allow these events to pass without interrogation, whether they occurred by commission or omission. We must vigorously resist creating a situation that would in future embolden those with the inclination and capacity to subvert the sovereign will of the people, with the benefit of the precedent set in 2007 and 2013, where the tallying stage has emerged as the Achilles heel of the electoral process.

Consider where we have come from as a country: Kenya is the land that introduced the world to mobile money, courtesy of Mpesa; of Vision 2030, Thika super-highway and Konza Techno City; a country that is the largest economy in the region and a financial and technological hub, to list but a few of our achievements. It is therefore inconceivable that for whatever reason, the one thing we are unable (or unwilling) to do is to conduct a transparent, credible election as envisaged by Art 81 & 86 of the Constitution. Just as we are a country of numerous achievements, we must also strive to set the bar for the conduct of our elections higher than we have in the past, and indeed higher than anywhere else on the continent.

The fact that dispute resolution mechanisms exist, and that they were used in the case of this electoral dispute is a positive development. Through this, Kenyans have demonstrated their belief and faith in their institutions.

For me, the important thing was not who would ultimately emerge victorious in the just-concluded electoral contest. What is of utmost importance, however, is that we secure and jealously protect the integrity of our votes, such that we create an environment in which future elections can be conducted in a transparent environment, and free from manipulation intended to produce a pre-determined result.

If we wish to hold more credible elections in future, with results that can be acceptable across the board, over the next few weeks and months we must take the time to critically examine the entire electoral process, with a view to understanding how such glaring irregularities occurred.

Good Laws Will Only Make Sense If We Elect Good Leaders

On August 27^th 2010, Kenya reached a milestone few other countries have been able to: the promulgation of a new constitution during ‘peace time’. The fact that this was done during times of peace is significant because historically, constitutional transitions often occur following periods of protracted conflict. In the case of Kenya, the new Constitution was the product of a decades long struggle to realize a new dispensation that would relieve Kenyans of the oppression and excesses of past regimes.

This momentous occasion ushered in a period of hope and optimism: that Kenya had finally come of age and was poised to chart a new path towards peace and prosperity. On my part, it was more with a sense of guarded optimism, as one of the very first acts of the Government was to invite Sudan’s President, Omar al-Bashir to attend the promulgation ceremony despite a pending warrant of arrest by the International Criminal Court, of which Kenya is a signatory.

The question we must ask ourselves, as we prepare for another election, is how much has really changed under the new constitutional dispensation? A cold analysis reveals that much remains the same, ‘business as usual’ for many in Government. Three situations illustrate this:

First, and perhaps the most poignant illustration of the lack of regard for the new order, was the appointment of the County Commissioners in clear breach of the Constitution. The High Court found that the appointment of the Commissioners was null & void because President Kibaki contravened several sections of the Constitution in purporting to appoint them. Justice Mumbi Ngugi opined that the President failed to adhere to the constitutional 2/3 gender requirement, failed to consult with Prime Minister Raila Odinga as required by the National Accord, and did not meet the constitutional threshold for competition and public participation in the making of public appointments. Despite this High Court ruling, County Commissioners continue in office to this day.

Secondly, there have been numerous violations of the Constitution and Political Parties Act, whereby individuals have held state offices and offices in political parties concurrently. In addition, there was a protracted back and forth regarding the attempt by Parliament to amend the Political Parties Act so as to allow party-hopping. This amendment, surprisingly moved by Gachoka MP Reverend Mutava Musyimi, was a blatant affront to the Act, yet was easily passed by Parliament amidst protestation from a cross-section of Kenyans. Furthermore, politicians from across the political divide continue to violate the provisions of the Act that prevent campaigning outside the official campaign period. No action has been taken on any of these illegalities, with the Registrar of Political Parties seemingly unwilling to act. The country has, as a result, been placed in the unfortunate position of being in permanent campaign mode, thereby escalating ethnic tensions and sentiment.

Thirdly, the Leadership & Integrity Act was reduced to but a pale shadow of the Bill it once was; just as the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act before it. The Bill sought to set a clear and discernible standard for ethics and integrity in leadership. Sensing imminent exclusion from public life, the Cabinet watered down a number of the provisions of the Bill; and Parliament obliged by quickly passing it. Though the Bill sought to prevent persons who do not meet the standard of integrity set by Chapter 6 from vying for public office, following the amendments, the Act has made it much more difficult to do so. The Act goes further to exempt those seeking elective positions from vetting by State agencies. Other public officers, however, remain subject to stringent vetting by relevant agencies. Without justification, the Act also removes the prohibition on state officers from participating in tendering for the supply of goods and services to the government, a clear conflict of interest by any standard.

These situations illustrate a determination by the leadership of this country to preserve the status quo: legislating to suit their narrow sectarian interests, rather than for the benefit of Kenyans at large. It is ironic that the very custodians of the law, in fact have the least regard for the aspirations of Kenyans as espoused in the Constitution. Such a ‘crisis of leadership’ and a conspiracy to subvert the new Constitutional dispensation through compromised legislation portends difficult times ahead for Kenya!

We have come a long way as a country, with improved infrastructure, both physical and institutional, and increased transparency and accountability in public affairs. However, we still have quite some way to go. That being said, the 2013 elections should not hang, as an ominous cloud, over us. Rather, this is a pivotal election that presents a unique opportunity to address the impunity with which leadership in Kenya operates. As a nation at a crossroads, it will be necessary to critically and carefully evaluate those aspiring to elective office, thinking beyond personal and ethnic considerations, if we are to preserve and uphold the spirit of our constitution. Credible, competent and committed leadership are in no short supply. The challenge is simply to take the time, and spare the effort to identify them.

Who Is To Blame For Poor Leadership? We Are!

We, the citizenry, are the authors of our own misfortune! We cry for leadership “change” with little inkling that the prevailing situation is of our own making. Not only because of the fact that we are responsible for electing our “leaders”, but more importantly because we, the Kenyan people, are in fact the primary merchants of impunity! An honest examination of our daily thoughts and actions, & we would be ashamed of the way we relate to one another.

Take the daily routine of Joe, for instance, an average resident of Nairobi: he wakes up at 5:30 am every weekday for the commute to his place of work. On his way, with traffic building he speeds down the wrong side of the road against traffic, flashing his lights at oncoming vehicles to get out of his way. Cognizant of the danger he is exposing other motorists and pedestrians to, occasionally he forces his way back into the slow-moving traffic where law-abiding wananchi are patiently waiting their turn. When confronted by irate motorists, incensed by his antics, Joe stares coldly ahead pretending he has done no wrong.

Eventually, following a few near-death experiences, he reaches the city centre and parks his car in a space paid for by another company (Joe has a standing ‘arrangement’ with the guard who, for a small fee, ensures his car is not towed away). Walking the short distance to his workplace, he realizes his phone is out of airtime, and urgently needs to call his mistress to arrange the evening’s excursion. Joe approaches the nearest vendor, buys his airtime, and proceeds to scratch the card, top up his phone and drop the card on the pavement despite being less than 10 meters from a dustbin. He then smokes his obligatory cigarette outside his workplace where numerous others are gathered for the same purpose. All dispose of their cigarette butts by stamping them out underfoot & leaving them for a perceived minion to clean up.

The day goes by largely uneventfully, apart from an altercation with an askari in the bank during his lunch hour. The fellow had the audacity to politely request him to refrain from the very loud conversation he was having on his mobile phone, as it was a nuisance to other customers.

The drive from work was not dissimilar to his morning commute, except that this time Joe was in even more of a hurry, as his latest conquest eagerly awaited him at his favourite watering hole. As for the hapless individual who he hit on the head with the half-eaten packet of masala chips he threw out of the window, Joe did not spare him a second thought! I do not know how or when we became a ‘me, myself, and I’ society. It is a wholly un-Kenyan trait. Even the more ethnically-inclined amongst us would be forced to concede that our various cultures promote a sense of community, and respect for others.

Is a character such as Joe capable of electing competent & credible leadership? Highly unlikely! This kind of behaviour is what is sometimes described as personal impunity: believing that laws do not apply to us as individuals, yet in the same vein we expect to hold our leadership to high standards which we ourselves are unwilling or unable to achieve.

We cannot claim to be in pursuit of better leadership when we have become better at flouting rules and regulations than the leadership. Ultimately, our leadership are not the real problem, we are! They are simply opportunists, alive to the ways of the Kenyan psyche, and willing to take advantage of the situation for as long as the real merchants of impunity, the Kenyan electorate, will allow them. They say our leadership is a reflection of ourselves: truer words were never spoken!

If we really aspire to improve the quality of our leadership in this country, we will have to review our own behavior and relations with fellow Kenyans, so as to embody the national values as espoused in Art 10 of the Constitution; failure to which, we will not be in a position to identify, let alone elect the kind of leadership we yearn for. Chapter 6 of the Constitution on Leadership and Integrity will serve no useful purpose if we do not proactively internalize the guiding principles contained therein, and apply them in the electoral process.

While Joe may be a fictitious character, he is very much alive and living within each and every one of us. If we are to improve our leadership, that “change” must begin with each and every one of us.

Redefining Leadership for a New Kenya

The very mention of the word ‘leadership’ in the Kenyan context conjures images of a small, albeit powerful, group of individuals who have gravitated around the center of power since the Moi regime. It is this small clique that is working feverishly to redesign, rebrand, and repackage themselves in the quest for the presidency of the Republic. This group will have you believe that leadership is the preserve of their various elites; to be determined by way of ethnic arithmetic or tribal alliances masquerading as political parties. The question for us as Kenyans is whether leadership really is the preserve of this small group of individuals?

We stand on the verge of the first general election under the new constitutional dispensation which creates a wide range of new elective positions and seeks to define the kind of leadership Kenyans can expect. Chapter 6 of this document is dedicated in its entirety to the issue of Leadership and Integrity. That being the case, the time has come for us to determine what leadership in the new dispensation should look like.

Chapter 6 touches on the ‘Responsibilities of Leadership’ (S. 73) and sets out guiding principles of leadership including: personal integrity, competence, impartiality in decision making, selfless service based on the public interest, and accountability to the public for decisions and actions. Furthermore, it sets a high threshold as to the conduct of State Officers (S. 75), defining not only what is deemed to be acceptable behaviour (or not), but also precludes those in contravention from holding any other State Office.

Clearly, the Constitution contemplates a different breed of leaders for a new Kenya: embracing those who embody the attributes above, while excluding those embroiled in corruption and other behavior that is unbecoming of public officers. How, though, do we arrive at this new generation of leaders?

The first step requires each and every one of us to make a personal commitment: a commitment NOT to make elective decisions purely on the basis of ethnicity. The second step is to make a further commitment to critically evaluate ALL those who aspire to elective office, with a view to arriving at the best possible choice for a given elective position based on merit, values, and qualities.

In retrospect, under the old order, the incentive for Kenyans to vote along ethnic lines was the assumption that some personal benefit would accrue; be it the development of ‘our’ area, jobs, handouts etc. Realistically, how many people benefited from this paradigm? In most cases, it was only the few individuals in the inner circle of the ‘big man’ who benefited in any meaningful way. We must then ask ourselves one simple question: What has voting along ethnic lines done for us as a country, or for any one of us as individuals? For the majority of Kenyans, the answer to that would be ‘very little’ save for perpetual tribal clashes, displacements around elections and, of course, the PEV of 2008.

Fate has conspired with circumstance to provide us with an opportunity to put all that behind us. The coming election presents us with an opportunity to make a complete break with the past! While this state of transition finds us at possibly our most vulnerable, it  is also the time when we are most optimistic, and simply cannot afford to revert to doing things the same old way we always have, especially when it comes to leadership selection. Having struggled for over two decades for a new constitutional order, it is necessary that we conform to the requirements of that order.

The magnitude of the opportunity before us cannot be overstated: for it is an opportunity the likes of which many of us will never see again. The new Kenya demands a new breed of leader! In order to achieve that, we shall require a new breed of voter as well. This new breed of voter is cognizant of the mistakes of our past, determined not to repeat them; aware of the potential for our future, and prepared to work diligently towards the realization of that collective national goal; yearning to rediscover our lost sense of nationhood, and aware that only principled leadership will get us there.

Competent and credible leadership will not come about by chance. That being said, I am convinced of the fact that there is no shortage of this kind of leadership in Kenya. The time has come to start the conversation on leadership that will inform the national discourse and culminate in a shared understanding of the solution to our leadership quagmire.

I sense that in this transitional moment, Kenya has the potential to undergo a monumental transformation: socially, economically, and politically. It is entirely upto us, the Kenyan electorate, to determine the direction this country will take. As is typical of our country, this magical moment has the potential to manifest itself in one extreme or another: ethnic mobilization resulting in an outbreak of violence worse than that seen in 2008, or the rebirth of a country ready to take her rightful place as a trailblazer on the African continent.

Leadership, Integrity & EACC

Chapter 6 on Leadership & Integrity is, in my view, one of the cornerstones of our new Constitution. Without it, the aspirations of the Kenyan people for effective and accountable leadership remain elusive. Chapter 6 seeks to define the parameters within which State Officers ought to carry out their duties. Essentially, this Chapter is intended to reign in those who have in the past operated with impunity, and those who use their respective public offices for personal or sectarian gain. Much has been discussed in the public domain about the effect of Chapter 6 on our current crop of leadership, and whether they meet the threshold for integrity as contemplated by the Constitution.

Chapter 6 alone, however, will not rid us of an avaricious and self-seeking political elite. Legislation is required to breathe life and inject substance into the Constitutional provisions. Perhaps one of the most important pieces of legislation to be debated to support the Constitution is the Leadership & Integrity Bill, which is set to be debated by Parliament shortly. The Bill will determine the kind of leadership we can expect to see contesting the next election, and those assuming public office thereafter. In its draft form, that legislation is fairly robust. For example Section 35 of the Bill bars anyone from seeking to be appointed or elected to a State office if, while serving as a State officer, that person contravened a code of leadership and integrity under the Act. Furthermore, the Bill sets high standards of integrity and professionalism which State officers are expected to comply with.

The Bill also requires each Commission to establish a specific Code of Ethics and Integrity for the State Officers for which it is responsible, thereby offering a guideline as to what constitutes acceptable conduct for State Officers.

Clearly, if passed in its current form, such a piece of legislation is likely to have far-reaching effects on the caliber of leaders eligible to seek elective office at the next elections; not to mention a career-debilitating effect on the current political elite, many of whom would not meet the threshold under such progressive legislation. The obvious hurdle to the passage of this legislation is Parliament itself, and whether those in a constant struggle to increase their salaries and emoluments are likely to debate and pass a law that would confine them to the annals of Kenya’s political history!

More recently, the thorny issue of the leadership of the Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission has taken centre stage with three previously rejected nominees appointed as members (though the Chair has now been blocked by the High Court from assuming office). The same Parliament that months before found that the nominees “lacked passion” to fight corruption, recently made a complete turn-around and unanimously approved the nominees. What changed? Furthermore, in rejecting the nominee for the position of Chair, Mumo Matemu, the Parliamentary Committee on Justice & Legal Affairs expressed reservations as to his integrity in relation to conduct during his tenure as a Commissioner of the Kenya Revenue Authority.

If Mr. Matemu were to assume office, we would be faced with a situation where a person whose integrity has been called to question will steward they very body (EACC) charged with assessing the integrity and suitability of others, including candidates for elective office!

The Leadership & Integrity Bill & the issues surrounding the leadership at the EACC cannot be viewed in isolation: there appears to be a distinct link between the two and the ramifications of the two issues on the current political elite. One cannot help but feel a sense of apprehension for the fight against corruption and the quest for responsive and credible leadership in Kenya, which faces tremendous hurdles in the short-term.

While it would appear that MPs have once again showed their hand, the ultimate indication of the direction the current leadership wish to take on the critical issues of leadership and integrity will play out on the floor of the House, in the manner in which they address debate on the Leadership and Integrity Bill. As an issue that is so central, not only to the conduct of the next elections, but also to future generations and the caliber of their leadership, Kenyans would be well advised to watch VERY carefully how Parliament seeks to implement Chapter 6 of the Constitution, and specifically, how they deal with the Leadership and Integrity Bill.

What remains to be seen, then, is whether the spirit of the Constitution or political imperatives will carry the day. My prayer is for the former!

National Discourse in 2012 Must Transcend ICC

In the past few weeks, the national imagination has been completely consumed by the ICC and the confirmation of charges against four Kenyans. What has happened since that confirmation is cause for national concern.

Two of the suspects in particular, William Ruto and Uhuru Kenyatta, have held a number of “prayer rallies”, well attended by a cross-section of their supporters. It does not go unnoticed that these prayer rallies have been held largely in the perceived strongholds of the two in question. It is an insult to the intelligence of Kenyans to suggest that prayer is the primary motivation for these rallies. Characterized largely by political innuendo and the provocation of ethnic sentiment, what is of greatest concern is the effect these rallies are having on inter-relations between Kenyans.

With the anguish of the PEV still vivid in the minds of many, it is dangerous, if not outright irresponsible for people who claim to be leaders to engage in actions clearly calculated to excite the very ethnic sentiments that were partly responsible for the PEV in 2008. What message does this send to the victims of the violence and their families? How many prayers were said for the victims of the PEV at these rallies? Ridiculously, a significant proportion of media coverage around these events seems to portray the suspects as the victims, a chorus similar to that of a retinue of loyalists in tow! Is this some kind of strange post-ICC euphoria?

To be clear, I do not presume to adjudge the guilt or innocence of any of the four; that is not my place! I do, however, find the callous trivialization of the plight of the victims, and this kind of self-serving political opportunism to be not only in poor taste, but also capable of setting the country on the path to ethnic balkanization.
While I have consistently maintained that the fact that ANY Kenyan is facing such serious charges at the ICC is a blemish on our collective national character, I cannot help but be dismayed at actions that could very well lead the country back to where we were in early 2008. These are the actions of people who, purporting to represent their respective ethnic communities, seek power for the purposes of entrenching their own sycophantic political elite, rather than serving the communities they claim to represent, or Kenyans at large. Is whipping up ethnic sentiment the only way to remain relevant?

To be fair, ethnicity cannot be blamed on the political class alone. It is deeply entrenched in each and every one of us, even those who might think they have risen above it. What is also clear is that we cannot continue to operate in this manner. To continue to make national and elective decisions purely on the basis of ethnicity is surely a recipe for disaster, capable of casting us over the proverbial precipice that we came so close to in 2007/8.

It has never really struck me just how deep ethnic bigotry runs in our society, until recently. Naively, I have for some time assumed that my generation (30 & 40-somethings) would be perfectly poised to slay the dragon of ethnicity once and for all. A string of recent experiences indicate that the opposite may, in fact, be more accurate! Predicated on the assumption that this generation is fairly well educated and cosmopolitan, my thinking was that this demographic would not subscribe to the ethnic proclivities of generations gone before. Sadly, I was wrong. Over the last few weeks, I have heard some of the most potent ethnic vitriol coming from the lips of my own contemporaries! Quite a shock to the system!

At this critical juncture in our nation’s history, we cannot allow the sum total our national discourse to be reduced to the cause of a few individuals facing charges at the ICC, whether presidential aspirants or not. Forty million Kenyans are far more important than ANY individuals! Furthermore, we have many far more pressing national priorities to attend to. We have a constitution to implement, in the spirit in which it was intended; a host of legislation, to breathe life into the new constitution; preparation for upcoming elections, and establishing value-based criteria upon which to make elective decisions; and to establish a national identity, that will help us break free of our ethnic shackles.

Most importantly, we need to appreciate that our beloved country is at a crossroads. Therefore, the choices we make RIGHT NOW, will to a great extent determine the direction we as a country will take. If we accept to make those choices based on ethnicity and demagoguery, we will have only ourselves to blame for the resultant calamity.

Urgent Need to Rationalize Public Service Salaries

Finally, some sanity! It came as music to my ears to hear recently that MPs are likely to face a pay cut following the next election. MPs salaries have long been a favourite topic of debate, in the national media and by wananchi across the country. While few would contest the fact that salaries and allowances for Kenyan legislators are grossly excessive, the more pertinent issue revolves around the salaries of public servants at large, particularly those at senior levels.

Firstly, let’s consider some facts: as of 2010, Kenyan MPs earned a monthly base salary of roughly Kshs. 851,000 ($126,000) making them among the highest paid MPs in the world! Secondly, if the Constitution of Kenya (Amendment) Bill 2011 is passed as is, it will not be possible to know the exact number of MPs following an election due to the one-third rule on gender representation. Coupled with the fact that the size of Parliament is increasing significantly anyway, the burden of salaries & emoluments for an unknown number of legislators at the current level would be an unacceptable burden on the taxpayer.

Turning to the public service, the average annual pay in 2010 was Kshs. 394,131 compared to private sector employees at Kshs. 393,760 (Economic Survey 2011). The public sector wage bill has increased at an annual average of 36% over the last 5 years. The bulk of this “growth” is attributed to the hefty salaries of senior public servants which have risen disproportionately in comparison to those in the lower and middle echelons of the service. As a result, Kenya now has the dubious distinction of being one of the few countries in the world where senior civil servants earn more than their private sector counterparts! I, for one, have never come across any economic or management paradigms that justify these kinds of disparities.

Let’s look at it another way: according to the IMF, the top to minimum ratio in Kenya is 118:1. This means that top officials earn an incredible 118 times more than the lowest earners! The disparity is further highlighted by a regional comparison, which reveals the top to minimum ratio in Uganda as 25:1; Tanzania as 20:1; and Botswana as 30:1.

Sadly, we have created a situation that is simply not sustainable and encourages the pursuit of public office for purely financial and selfish gain. Why reward the self-seeking and avaricious gravitation towards public office? The very notion of ‘public service’ is rendered superfluous as professionals and the politically connected jostle for what are in many cases, the most lucrative jobs in the Kenyan market. This raises some questions: Is the Treasury capable of sustaining these levels of salaries for senior public servants? Or more existentially, should public office be the place to amass unimaginable wealth? This, in an environment where a vast majority of the population lives on less than a dollar a day, and our economy is suffering possibly the worst slump in its history!

We need to ask ourselves whether as a country we can sustain this kind of legalized looting of public coffers. This wanton abuse of public trust when bestowed with the privilege of serving in public office is symptomatic of a much greater problem. While it is encouraging that the public sector is growing, if that “growth” is predominantly and disproportionately manifested in the highest ranks, it is in fact false growth and counter-productive to development. It serves no useful purpose other than to further entrench the very corruption that we claim to be trying to address.

The time has come to reinject the notion of service in public service: service to the people and Republic of Kenya. There is a need to rationalize the salaries of upper and lower cadres of public servants. The eagerly awaited Salaries and Remuneration Commission may be well advised to embark upon this process expeditiously, not only so as to save taxpayers their hard earned money, but also so as to preserve a sense of integrity in public service. There may even be an argument for tying the wages of the lowest paid civil servants to the highest paid civil servants, such that any increase at the higher levels in the service would necessarily require a corresponding increase at the lower level.

While the new constitutional dispensation ushers in tremendous promise, it also brings with it a hefty burden in the form of salaries for new public officers. To continue on the current trajectory, given the prevailing economic situation would be sheer lunacy. One can only hope that the Salaries and Remuneration Commission will be able to restore sanity to the salaries of public servants.

(Also appeared in Nation newspaper: http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/-/440808/1281562/-/item/0/-/knq50m/-/index.html)