Let’s be serious; immunity for governors would be a disaster

First, it was Kakamega Governor Wycliffe Oparanya speaking out against the ruling by a chief magistrate, a High Court judge and then Court of Appeal judges on the requirement that once a governor has been charged with a crime, he or she should step aside.

Ostensibly, Mr Oparanya was speaking on behalf of the Council of Governors when he argued that forcing his colleagues to keep away from their offices was denying innocent Kenyans vital services. He is wrong, but let’s give him the benefit of the doubt. Not every governor is complicit in perfidy.

A number of governors who feel threatened by the ruling have weighed in, some insisting executive heads of counties should enjoy immunity from prosecution, just like the President does. In other words, they want governors to be above the law.

However, some sober minds have also had their say on this stuff and nonsense, describing it as a looming disaster for the country.

My take is that if governors don’t want to be treated like ordinary criminals, they should be treated like extraordinary hoodlums.

As if the ruling against errant governors is not enough, now the CoG wants to take the matter to the Supreme Court for an interpretation of the Constitution in reference to the powers enjoyed by governors. Kenyans can only wait to know what this court in its wisdom will say on this matter, but public opinion is certainly against giving these chaps any more latitude for, indeed, some have proved to be either irresponsible or clueless.

Many Kenyans have only recently come to realise that they elected the wrong people and it is not at all certain they will not do the same in subsequent elections. Indeed, some things are very mystifying. How a certifiable buffoon and a cartoon character can be elected to the highest offices in a county just because the candidates belong to a certain political party or just because they are adept at populism is something that has baffled many a thinker. But it happens all the time, which means that we voters are decidedly to blame.

It is not easy to understand how voters can be taken in by election euphoria to the extent that they do not know what is good for them. One of the problems is that those people who are woke, especially those in the middle class, are all mouth but no action. They do not vote, leaving that important civic duty to fellows who sell their votes for paltry sums of money. Indeed, in Kenya, if you have a persuasive tongue and loads of cash for bribes, and you can command all the razzmatazz that defines our politics, you don’t need a brain or a manifesto to get elected.

The second thing that happened recently is the declaration by a senator that he intends to table a Bill that will shield governors from any prosecution, whether civil or criminal, so long as they are in office. This idea by Nandi Senator Samson Cherargei is plainly ridiculous and can only pass if all the other senators have gone bonkers, a highly unlikely possibility. Giving governors a carte blanche to do whatever they wish is a definite no, for some have proved they cannot be entrusted to run a village grocery store, let alone a multi-billion concern like a county.

There are two reasons, probably more, why Mr Cherargei wants the immunity of governors legislated. The first is that he most likely wants to run for the gubernatorial seat. The second is even more important; he and his ilk have been busy politicising the war against corruption and believe that only politicians allied to Deputy President William Ruto are being targeted for prosecution. That narrative has been around for some time now, and is becoming quite tiresome. After all, a crook is a crook, regardless of political affiliation.

Says Senator Cherargei: “Let governors be pursued and charged after they leave office... the fight against corruption should not be used to settle political scores or intimidate governors.”

What can one say about such Neolithic reasoning? So governors should be allowed to steal and pillage all they want for five or 10 years and only then should they be charged? That is imbecilic. And this from a man who chairs the all-important Legal Affairs and Human Rights Committee in the Senate! How about persuading the thieving honchos to keep their long fingers off the till?

It is becoming quite clear that the people who undermine the war against corruption are the same people who loudly proclaim that their own government has failed to fight the vice. Such people, speaking from both sides of their mouths, are a great danger to society, for they end up confusing the rabble while enjoying their loot all alone. One can only hope that in the future, corruption will not dominate the national discourse without a resolution of one kind or the other. It is a new year after all.