The Role and Rights of Citizens

This is an excerpt from yet-to-be published book by Development Studies professor, Dr. Stuart Fowler. I believe he aptly captures the Kenyan situation and is providing us with a viable solution to the leadership wrangles we quite frequently encounter.

The classic definition of democracy is: “Government of the people, by the people, for the people”. Today’s dominant Western “democracies” fall far short of this. About all that remains is the rhetoric.

The reality is that the people are governed by powerful organisations (political parties) composed of a small elite group. These organisations carefully tailor policies that appeal to the people in a periodical contest (elections) to win the right to govern. Once they gain this power they govern the people as they will under the claim that they have a “mandate from the people” to do so.

The one and only role that the majority of the people have is the right to choose which one of these parties is to have the power to govern them. They have no say at all in how this power is used.

The one Western nation that has a model of democracy that give all citizen an active, and effective, role in the processes of government is Switzerland. A nation of 26 ethnic groups, some very small and others large, this model has been a key factor in the nation’s long history of political stability.

In an ideal world some variation of this system would be perfect for Kenya. As it is, the fractured nature of Kenya’s culture as a result of the years of British occupation, make such an option unrealistic.

However, there are some important steps that we propose towards strengthening both the role and the rights of citizens:

1. The constitution should only be amended with the approval of a two thirds majority of citizens voting in a national referendum. Proposals for such amendments should be put to the people only after they have been approved by a two thirds majority of the parliament. The provision for two thirds approval of parliament is designed to minimise divisive political rivalry in the conduct of the referendum.

2. This process for constitutional amendment should be embedded in the constitution so that it remains as a fundamental right of the people.

3. Together with this, a Bill of Rights defining inalienable rights of all citizens should be developed as a fundamental component of the constitution. Two rights that we regard as fundamental for ensuring the people’s freedom:

i.  The right to freedom of speech, with any infringement of this right through any form of intimidation, whether by physical threat or any other means, being regarded as a serious criminal offence.

ii. The right to freedom of peaceful assembly, subject only to the requirement that any such assembly does not infringe the rights of others including the right to freedom of passage in order to engage in the lawful activities of daily life.

4.     In making policy changes affecting citizens, the nature of the proposed change should be publicly announced and a committee of inquiry established to which citizens are invited to make submissions. Should this committee of inquiry identify widespread objections to the proposal, the parliament should be required to either abandon or amend the proposal to meet the concerns of citizens.

5. Official identities of citizens, whether in the form of ID cards or electoral registers, should not include any indication of ethnic identity. ID cards, as well as electoral registers, should be linked to place of current residence, both in terms of place of issue and recorded details. Place of birth alone should be recorded in birth certificates without ethnic identity.

We respectfully submit these proposals to our political leaders, and any persons appointed by them to review the political structures of our nation.