Check out our NEW online marketplace.

Kenya: Pre-Election Violence Brings Tension

With general elections for the Kenyan presidency less than three weeks away, campaign violence has claimed the lives of at least 16 civilians. This number comes from government reports which non-government groups including the Catholic Justice and Peace Commission have refuted, claiming the actual number is 24 [1]. Over 200 homes have been burned down and 8,000 people forced to flee, creating a sense of insecurity ahead of what may be the closest presidential elections in Kenya since independence in 1964 [2].

Many have voiced concerns that those forced out of their homes in areas where violence has erupted may not return to cast their votes on December 27, leaving thousands of votes out of the national polls [3]. In such a close election, these numbers may be enough to sway the outcome. As a result, some blame the politicians themselves for instigating violence in order to displace their opponent's supporters [4].

Recently, a report published by the UN Development Program in Kenya and a local public opinion research firm have raised concerns about the media's role in stirring political and ethnic tension. The report finds that, while media coverage of the leading candidates has been mostly evenly distributed, negative coverage has been consistently less for incumbent President Mwai Kibaki than for his main opponent Raila Odinga [5]. While biased coverage from the government run Kenya Broadcasting Corporation (KBC) raises concerns, community based radio stations may also be contributing to poll-related violence by using language and programming that incites ethnic division and tension [6].

Kenyan politicians often draw their base of supporters from along ethnic lines, and election violence is nothing new. A close race between the two front-running presidential candidates, both with checkered public profiles makes this election especially interesting. In 2002 Kibaki succeeded Daniel arap Moi, promising to target widespread corruption and to restabilize the economy. The Kenyan economy has boomed during Kibaki's presidency, largely thanks to a lowering of interest rates and Kibaki's efforts to attract foreign investment through economic liberalization [7]. Kibaki has also gained support for introducing free primary education and expanding freedom of the press [8].

However, Kibaki’s critics are numerous, and his failure to put a stop to endemic corruption in national politics is apparent, as many high-ranking officials in his administration have been implicated in corruption scandals, costing the country hundreds of millions of dollars [9]. Furthermore, Kenya's top anti-graft official resigned and fled the country in 2006 after speaking out against the Kibaki administration’s corruption practices. And Kenya's parliament recently passed a law shielding officials from investigation of events that took place before 2003 [10]. As corruption detracts public support from Kibaki's bid for reelection, many have also voiced complaints about a lack of infrastructure and an uneven distribution of economic growth across all sectors of the population [11].

These frustrations, combined with continued ethnic violence and widespread crime in parts of the country, have created room for a strong opposition candidate like Odinga, who is largely regarded in Kenya as a king-maker for his involvement in previous successful campaigns [12]. A wild card candidate, Odingo now heads the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) and has been in and out of several political parties and coalitions, leading some to claim that he is power-seeking and volatile. He fell out with Kibiki in 2005, when he campaigned against Kibaki's constitutional referendum because it did not include promised checks on executive authority [13]. Since then, he has become a fierce critic of Kibaki, labeling his efforts to eradicate corruption as insincere. Odinga promotes himself as a champion of the poor, although he is a successful businessman and his policies might not likely to differ substantially from Kibaki's [14].

Voters will weigh the economic gains made by Kibaki and his administration with lost opportunities to fight corruption, and with the ethnic ties of both of the candidates. Kenyans voted against Kibaki's proposed constitutional referendum in 2005, and this election will determine if economic recovery and Kibaki's stronghold among Kenya's majority ethnic group are enough to secure another term for this controversial administration. Voters are questioning whether or not Kibaki will follow through on his promises of 2002. Moreover, they are wondering if the national elections will proceed with transparency and fairness in an atmosphere of tension. Political leaders, including Kibaki and the foreign embassies in Kenya, have spoken out against the use of violence to upset election procedure. The International Institute for Justice & Development is concerned about the Kibaki administration's lack of transparency and questionable record of going after corrupt officials. Both domestic and foreign investigation and political pressure should be increased with regard to these serious abuses of power.

The IIJD stands among those calling for peaceful and fair elections in Kenya. Towards this goal, the IIJD requires the following factors to be present in the event of governmental elections to be acknowledged as free, fair, and legitimate: An independent national electoral commission must exist within the country to carry out and monitor the election process without influence from political parties or the existing government; A fair, just, and transparent electoral law must be recognized as such by all members involved, including members of the government, political parties and voters; There must be free and open media coverage regardless of any dissent displayed by a candidate or their party; The citizenry must be registered and have free and unrestricted access to the media and press, and voters must also be able to make their decision and to vote without intimidation or persuasion; And all political candidates must have access to a free campaign in all areas of the country, even in traditional political strongholds [15].

The IIJD believes that continued development of a strong, multi-party democracy in Kenya is crucial to the national and regional security. Without accountable and transparent government, foreign and domestic investment will fail to address economic inequity and provide the foundation for continued economic growth.

_____________________________________________________________________________

[1] Catholic Information Service for Africa
[2] Aljazeera News
[3] Catholic Information Service for Africa
[4] Aljazeera News
[5] Voice of America
[6] Voice of America
[7]REUTERS
[8] ABC News
[9] IIJD
[10] IIJD [11] REUTERS
[12] BBC
[13] IIJD
[14] REUTERS 
[15] IIJD