Kimemia: Ruto, Raila and the politics of (dis)loyalty

My father was a catechist. He was among the initial converters of the traditionalists into the Catholic faith. I was baptised a Catholic at nine or 10. To date, I recite the rosary and attend Mass. I am the patron of the seminarian society in the Diocese of Nyahururu.

You also went to a Catholic seminary. How long did you last there?

About six years.

Why did you quit? Was it a case of the going getting too tough for you?

No! I left after I was appointed to be a District Officer by President Moi. I think I realised that power was sweet, so I continued with power while my brother went on to become a priest. Unfortunately, he died a few years ago, just after I won the elections. He died near Gilgil in a road accident.

Let’s shift gears and talk about the politics of the Mountain. Together with others, you have been taking Raila to the Mountain, yet this is the same man who has been demonised there for ages. What has changed now, and do you genuinely feel he stands any chance there?

Raila stands every chance in Central. The locals have no fundamental issues with the former prime minister. If you recall, the ascendance to power by Mzee Jomo Kenyatta was partly because Mzee Jaramogi, the first vice-president, insisted that we cannot have independence in Kenya without the release of Mzee Kenyatta. Second, we have the “Kibaki Tosha” declaration by Raila at Kasarani at a time when Kenyans did not like what had been done by the second president. 

Raila went to Kasarani and declared that, and we saw the leadership come to the Mountain again. When we managed the transition in 2013 and some people told him to go to court, ultimately, he agreed that Uhuru had won the election and we moved on. That is the mark of a statesman. Somebody who has gone through a lot of tribulation under the State, including detention. Somebody who participated in the first and second liberation of this country.

There was a lot of demonisation and character assassination, but that is the nature of politics. You have to bear in mind that it is when these two communities came together that this country has enjoyed the highest economic levels and stability. When he brought Kibaki to Othaya after he had won, at every place they stopped, people would call him “Mutongoria, Njamba” or a very courageous fellow. He campaigned for Mzee Kibaki when he got the accident and they won. Mt Kenya people may appear as if they have amnesia, but I can assure that they will ultimately remember that.

Is this, then, a case of returning a favour?

We have asked him to sell his manifesto, his ideas. We are agricultural people. He has met the eastern and western Mt Kenya leadership and he is very conversant with their issues. He did not abuse either Deputy President William Ruto or his competitors and the people were happy. I think that is what we need in this country; people who can market their ideas, their ideologies and intentions, their philosophies without insulting our leaders.

There is criticism that some of the people taking Raila to the mountain have no grassroots sway, and that the region has gone the UDA way anyway...

No, the Mountain has not gone the UDA way. It is very intact and listening to various views. The mountain has its own challenges that must be confronted by the new head of government. This is why you saw business leaders, agriculturalists, and youth at Safari Park Hotel sharing their challenges and even giving potential solutions to the aspiring Head of State. A leader should not come up with his own solutions but must listen to what the people think, about the solutions of the community.

As you listen to him and also the Mountain, there are expectations of senior slots in government and the position of a running mate comes to mind. Your name and that of your counterpart in Laikipia, Governor Ndiritu Muriithi, among others, have been mentioned. Is this a discussion that you have had with Raila? 

We have not had any discussions and we believe he is a man who is able to weigh the options and get the best number two that can best serve him with loyalty. It has become very evident in this country that when picking the number two, loyalty should be a major consideration so that you are able to complete your term with respect and dignity.

Talking of loyalty, all is not well between the President and his deputy, with some accusing the DP of not being loyal. Yet some, on the other hand, say it is the president who has not reciprocated the kind of support he got from the DP. Which is which?

There is nothing like a co-presidency in the constitution. There is only one President and only one deputy. He is not called a co-president, but a deputy. Even during the nusu mkate era of Kibaki and Raila, it was very clear that there was a President, and there was a prime minister. There can be only one head of an institution, whether in the private or public sector. We can only have one centre of power who can give directions and instructions to the country and the agents who run operations.

You can imagine the anarchy of having two commanders giving orders to the police and military. There is no room for that confusion. It can only be man-made, it can only be the height of disloyalty. It does not help and has not helped. We need to return this country to what it was, when seniors respected the juniors and the juniors respected the seniors.

According to supporters of the Deputy President, what may sometimes appear as insubordination or two centres of power has roots in the 2010 constitution. Their argument is that we have a deputy president and not a vice-president like in the previous regimes, that this is a constitutional office. They were elected together and no one can sack the other.

I was part of the team during the constitution-making process. We put those safeguards to avoid a situation where you have a president who reduces his deputy to nothingness. So we put in a little duties and functions here and there to give face to the deputy president. However, when you look at the constitution, we ensured that the person in-charge of the country is the president.

Though he may be in consultations with the deputy, he is the main person. If it occurs that the president does not discharge his duties, such as securing the country, it is him who will be impeached, not the deputy. The head of any institution must be just one, you can be called a vice, assistant, senior vice, a deputy… it does not matter, you are still a deputy. You are not the president. There is only one Head of State and government.

You had the privilege of working with both the DP and the former Prime Minister in government. How do you relate with the two, separately?

They are quite intelligent people. I, however, found Raila very accommodative. I have been telling people that the Raila we found in Kibera when there was a lot of activism there and the Raila we found in government are totally different people. In government, he was a technocrat, a very professional minister and we never mixed politicking with the public service. He never allowed any political agents to come to disturb him at the office. He is a very good person to work with. He is a nationalist who loves this country and believes in it. This is something Kenyans need to know, that the Raila they see in public rallies and the Raila in public service are two different things. One is very efficient in public service and another, a very professional politician.

That sounds like a case of a split character...

No, he knows how to separate his roles. He would leave Cabinet and go for his meetings in Kibera every Thursday with his youth, then go back to the office the following day with a suit, chairing a very serious international meeting. That is the beauty of Kenya, that dynamism, that multi-variance of things in politics and economics.

How about the DP?

As I said, the DP is quite an intelligent person. I worked with him a lot though I was not the Head of Public Service as the functions were split then, so I was just the secretary to the Cabinet.

You occupied a powerful seat during the transition from Kibaki to Uhuru. From your experience, what happens during a presidential transition, and why must Kenya’s next president assure Uhuru Kenyatta of his security in retirement?

A General Election, especially when you are having one commander-in-chief leaving and a new one coming on board, is one of the greatest security threats to a nation. It is up to those charged with the responsibility of overseeing the transition to make sure that you create hope in the outgoing leader that he will be secure and comfortable in retirement. It is very risky to scare a president who has completed his term and has been a Chief of Defence Forces.

It is almost ungodly to think about making him or her uncomfortable when he wants to exit. This way, you give him the opportunity to hand over properly, and not just to anyone; he needs to ensure that he hands power over to somebody who’ll ensure that there is continuity of security.

The other thing is to build hope in the investors. In 2013, even the diaspora kept on remitting money home, so we did not have any issues with the forex. Those levels of confidence are very important, not just for the people but also for the Head of State as he leaves office. The security organs must be aware of the possible occurrence of post-election violence by mapping the hotspots, making sure there are no people planning violence.

You must up the intelligence and make sure your nation is not attacked when you are most vulnerable when everyone is focused in the ballot. So, transition is very complex and it is not a one-day issue. It will take a whole year to manage an election. I am sure it has already begun.

Were the country’s security agencies ready for a Raila presidency in 2013?

Securing a country under such circumstances goes beyond deploying the police or the security apparatus. During elections, the people should be ready for whatever outcomes. I can assure you, in the 2013 elections, we were ready to swear in whoever won, whether it was Uhuru or Raila.

We had no special preferences. We let democracy take charge and whoever emerged the president would be sworn in. Anybody who qualifies to run for president is a potential winner and the state has a duty to give security to them. There was somebody whom we had to accord state security by force in 2013.

Who was that?

No, I do not want to mention names. However, you can imagine if on election eve the guy is hijacked or assassinated, then you have to postpone the elections. The damage that would do to the country would be immense.