Kenya Referendum Opens Church to Public Scrutiny
 |
| Kibaki confers with Kenya's christian clerics P.Courtesy |
In the 2005 referendum, the church leadership, perhaps out of unmitigated “wisdom” was “unpartisan” only asking the flock to vote with their conscience.With the clock ticking, church leadership has to contend with emerging crevices within its rank and file. A section of the clergy has resolved to stand tall and rally Christians to support the proposed constitution. Operating under the banner, Christians for Yes, they have accused the church leadership of intimidating Christians to reject the proposed constitution “by peddling propaganda and lies about the document.”
The Church has been at the forefront in spearheading reforms in the country since the early 1980’s. It spoke strongly against the rigging of the 1983 and 1988 General Election and was the strongest voice when the ruling party in 1986 adopted the insidious mlolongo (queue) voting system.
Since independence, the church in Kenya has offered primary challenge to the closed political regimes of Presidents Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi. During Kenyatta’s reign, for instance, the church stood against alleged rampant political killings and oath taking pitting one ethnic group against others.
President Moi’s regime was also riddled with allegations of political killings, corruption and massive election rigging. After the early elections in 1983, the state machinery was set in motion and many of the people Moi wanted in parliament were brought in while many of the people wanted out were cheated out. During Kenyatta and Moi reigns, fear was the order of the day resulting into a culture of fear in national life. Many institutions, which were critical of these governments were intimidated and some succumbed to silence apparently leaving the church as a lone voice of the people.
The three leading churches in this endeavour were the Anglican Church, Catholic Church and the Presbyterian Church of East Africa. Their efforts were boosted by the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK). This was mainly done through vocal clergy such as Okullu, Gitari and Njoya.
The church in Kenya has hence been known to critique the structure of power whose core was one-party system, get involved with local and national political controversies and upheavals and participate actively in the provision of information through civic education to the electorate.
The church took upon itself the role of advocating democratisation in Kenya. In criticizing excesses in the exercise of state power, the church relied not only on its institutional power-base but on the self-declared limitlessness of its Christian imperative as well.
The validity of this sort of church involvement in politics hangs on consistency in pointing out error and providing worthy example in leadership.Regrettably now, the church in Kenya has failed as a consistent critic and is rooting for the status quo.
Certainly, the Kenya church leaders ought to have guarded against political opinions being mixed with veiled ethnic, sectional and vested interests. Unfortunately the church in Kenya has sometimes, out of convenience, engaged in politics on the same plane as the world. Take the Anglican Church of Kenya and the National Council of Churches of Kenya for instance. In the reign of the retired President Moi, these two institutions were on the forefront in pointing out evil limiting the freedom of the people.
But times seem to have changed when the present government took over power. The question is what has actually changed apart from the people in government? Why did these institutions relegate their prophetic role? This inconsistency has reflects badly on the church as conscience of society.
The inconsistency of the church’s political witness has been attributed to various factors chief among them being tribalism. In Kenya, as is indicative in this referendum in some parts of the country, tribalism is the deciding factor behind voting trends. Party manifestos are written for legal purposes and kept away on shelves.
The wider populace is largely ignorant of the manifestos content and rally behind individual politicians from their ethnic group. This evil results to the rampant nepotism. The church in Kenya is largely organized and split along tribal lines. The main reason for the amicable church-state relations under Kenyatta was that the CPK and the Presbyterian Church were allegedly increasingly dominated by Kikuyu.
It is also important to appreciate that the negative ethnic factor in Kenyan politics has its roots in ‘the reaction to colonialism that started on the basis of ethnic association.’ The colonial church did not attempt to make matters better when it divided the land among different mission agencies. As a result, many people who plunge into politics, Christians and non-Christians alike, consciously exploit tribal feelings to their advantage.
The church must guard against involvement in politics as a defence of its own interests as this greatly compromises the Christian witness. In Kenya some churches have had a sort of established status by their association with the head of state. Some have ended up receiving ‘gifts’ like being allocated public land in a scandal commonly referred to as ‘land grabbing.’ Totally compromised, these churches were seen to support the government of the day and turn a blind eye to political rot.
It is not in dispute that church leaders represent an important constituency. However, equally, the constitution of the Republic belongs equally to all Kenyans, irrespective of their race, creed, ethnicity, class, station or status. Within the same church, there are individuals who hold diverging views over the draft constitution. Do they listen to the clergy or their conscience?
Like many Kenyans, the clergy agree that the proposed constitution is a largely very good document. But is rejection the way to resolve this dilemma? This will reverse Kenyans gains in the democratic journey, twenty years back.
It is only prudent that church leaders reconsider their decision to reject the document because of the few “mistakes” it contains. Scripture has a very clear way forward. Instead of rejecting the Proposed Constitution of Kenya, church leaders should forge a united front in amending the document immediately the new constitution is ratified. Which constitution in the world is perfect?
If August 4, is the big day for Kenyans, then August 5, will be the day of reckoning and soul searching for the church.
By Kasembeli Albert.
Editor, Business Journal Africa, a regional business and finance monthly magazine. Email: [email protected]