Leaders should talk, not resort to violence 

The alleged physical assault on Wajir Woman Representative Fatuma Gedi is the latest such attack on a woman leader by a male colleague. The incident in the precincts of Parliament, which was reported widely in the media, points to a disturbing trend that must be strongly condemned.

While it is noted that the assailant, Wajir East MP Rashid Amin, was arrested and arraigned, every effort must be made to check this trend that follows similar attacks on women politicians.

It is instructive that the attack on Ms Gedi came just 12 days after the ugly Madaraka Day altercation between Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko and Woman Representative Esther Passaris. Watching footage of the exchange, the city boss seems to have responded to Ms Passaris’ grievances with sound arguments until he went completely off-track. Telling a fellow leader that he is not her husband was both uncouth and uncalled-for and we have already condemned Mr Sonko’s verbal attack on Ms Passaris in an earlier editorial. Former Nairobi Governor Evans Kidero slapping of then Woman Representative Rachel Shebesh in 2013 followed a similar pattern.

While we cannot apportion blame in highly contestable matters, some of which, like the Kidero-Shebesh case, ended with the parties seeking an out-of-court settlement, one thing is clear: Resorting to physical, verbal, psychological or any other form of violence during an argument is simply gross. No matter the provocation, two wrongs do not make a right. What the attackers – all of who carry titles of ‘Honourable’ and ‘Excellency’ should have done – is to seek dialogue in rational ways. This is possible where facts are left to speak for themselves without recourse to personal attacks that skirt around the issues at hand.

Gender-based violence, and especially when aimed at women, brings out the worst in men. It seeks to intimidate the other such that by creating fear and dodging the truth, the weaker party is cowed into submission. Abusive language does not advance rational and wise discourse that could lead to a mutually agreeable solution.

Can our leaders live up to the ‘honourable’ title the public accords them? Can they carry themselves with dignity both within and without the august House? Can they seek mediation when they find it impossible to address issues with decorum? Refusal to reason spells two things: Arrogance, which has no place in civilised discourse, or vacuous minds that insult the voters.