Federalism in Kenya popularly known as “Majimbo”

In the last few months, debate has been raging on whether or not Kenya should do away with its current Central system of Government in favor of a Federal one. As Kenyans head towards the ballot, it seems, the Majimbo debate could be the determining issue on who carries the day among the three top presidential candidates. The incumbent, President Kibaki and his team, is opposed to Majimbo system and has on as many occasions dismissed it as a “recipe for chaos by politicians bent on advancing tribal politics with the sole purpose of acquiring power”. Instead, Kibaki is for a unitary system with lesser powers vested on the Executive and “appropriate institutions of administration” at the grassroots. His main challenger at the poll, Raila Odinga, is fronting for Majimbo arguing it is the best for Kenyans to ensure equitable distribution of resources countrywide. Kalonzo Musyoka, another contender for State House job, is for Majimbo in what he calls, Economic Federalism. Kalonzo promises to build institutions and structures to the grassroots to ensure national resources trickle down to the ordinary Kenyan. Raila’s version, many analysts say, encompasses both a Political and Economic Federalism where Federal States will be based on tribes with each State being under the political headship of a Governor who, with the assistance of a selected team of regional leaders, will likewise oversee the economic affairs of the state.


Raila Odinga, ODM Presidential Candidate, has been the chief proponent for "Federalism" or "Majimbo". His flamboyant party has made the issue its main agenda in this year's election.


Opponents of the system, locally, see it as ethnic relativism/Puritanism. Others look at it as a sort of messianic revival of ethnic apartheid aimed at creating ideal conditions for ethnic exclusiveness. Its chief proponents claim to be nationalists though scholars seem unanimous that nationalism and tribalism can never be one at the same time. Proponents of the same say it is the best system to divide power between the Central Government and constituent units/states to give people at the grassroots say in decision-making.

Genesis
The issue first rose in early 1950’s as Kenyans prepared for independence. It cropped up soon after the declaration of a state of emergency in 1952 following a widespread insurgency by Africans, popularly known as the Mau Mau rebellion, against British colonial rule. The outbreak of the Mau Mau paved the way for constitutional reforms and development in subsequent years. In 1955, a myriad of political parties were formed all over the country after the colonial Government yielded to their formation. Elections were held in March 1957, after which racial barriers in the Government began to be lifted. By 1960, Legislative Council (LEGCO) – equivalent of today’s Parliament - had an African majority. In the same year, Kenya African National Union (KANU), which advocated for a unitary government was formed. In 1961, Kenya African Democratic Union (KADU) which advocated for Majimbo was also formed.

Just as today, the two emerged as the dominant political parties that would eventually shape the destiny of post-independence Kenya. As a political phrase, since it does not exist in the Swahili dictionary, Majimbo was introduced into the country following the Lancaster House (London) Constitutional Conference of 1962. In Uganda it is called federo while Nigerians simply call it federalism.

Majimboism envisaged a system of government where executive, legislative and financial powers were shared between central and regional governments. The bulk of the power, however, still remained with the central government. The regional boundaries were loosely based on ethnic boundaries carved up by the British.

The Majimbo issue had split the African leadership down the middle in the run-up to independence in 1963. To a large extent the system was predicated on the fear by the leaders of “smaller” ethnic groups that their communities would be dominated by the “larger” groups on national matters – economical or political.

KADU drew its major support from communities in Western, Rift Valley and Coast. In its leadership were Daniel Moi (Rift valley), the late Ronald Ngala (Coast) and the late Masinde Muliro (Western). Kanu, on the other hand, commanded the support of the “larger” ethnic groups. It was the party of influential tri of Jomo Kenyatta, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga (Raila’s father) and Tom Mboya (assassinated in 1967 and was among those tipped to succeed Kenyatta as President). Muliro and Jaramogi were later in history to be instrumental in agitating for a return to pluralism in 1992.

Majimbo was scrapped before it was properly implemented, according to many observers. Kanu, which won the first full franchise General Elections held in May 1963, never really wanted the system as it considered it expensive and a threat to national unity in a country of 42 tribes. In June 1963, Kenya attained internal self-government. On December 12th of the same year, independence was achieved with a complex Majimbo constitution which conceded much autonomy to the regions. There were to be 6 Jimbos (regions) constituted along ethnic lines. Tribes with close similarities were put under one region e.g Coast and North Eastern provinces were put under one state as the two are predominantly Muslim while Kikuyus, Embu, Meru were put in Central State.

The Majimbo debate died after President Kenyatta coerced parliamentarians to reject multipartyism. The first Vice-President, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, resigned on April 14, 1966 and formed the Kenya People’s Union (KPU) re-introducing multiparty politics. Joseph Murumbi, then Minister for Foreign Affairs succeeded Odinga as VP on May 13, 1966. Six months after Odinga resignation, the Upper House (Senate), and the Lower House (House of Representatives), were amalgamated to form the National Assembly, technically ending federalism.

Sessional Paper No. 10
Written in 1963 by the planning minister, the late Tom Mboya - arguably Kenya’s most intelligent and charismatic leader of all times – was aimed at addressing then growing economic inequality in the emerging nation. The paper gave birth to a divergent of views as to what was best strategy to address the growing gap between the rich and the poor. The paper, though widely backed by political leaders across the divide, some felt federalism was the “ideal” answer. Former powerful Cabinet minister, late Peter Habenga Okondo dismissed the contents of the paper, arguing that the “rich would continue being rich at the expense of the poor” as development was only centered around Nairobi and Mombasa. He advocated for “African Socialism”. Okondo, a native of Western Kenya, said Majimbo was the way to discourage people from crowding in the two cities to look for jobs. “What is produced by a certain region should be able to provide employment to the region’s residents,” he stated.

It resurfaced in 1980’s during Moi regime. But contrary to 1963, it was being advanced for political expediency by the ruling elite to elicit ethnic conflicts across the country, thereby creating the right environment to crackdown on perceived dissidents. The issue later emerged in early 1990 ahead of the 1992 General Election and the subsequent 1997 polls. The debate, sponsored by the state was aimed at triggering tribal clashes in opposition strongholds to discourage voters turning out for the polls. Appellate Judge, Akilano Akiwumi (now retired), was later appointed to head a commission of inquiry into the tribal clashes though none of the commission’s recommendations were implemented.

Come 1997, and the debate re-emerged at the height for clamor for new reforms that later gave birth to the constitution of Kenya review process. During then, Raila Odinga’s National Development Party (NDP) - now defunct - started courting its nemesis Kanu, which culminated with a merger in 2002, months to the General Election. During the time, both parties came up with a joint draft for a Majimbo constitution.

They proposed that Kenya be led by a ceremonial President while a Government headed by a Prime Minister. In the draft, they proposed regional governments would have their own legislatures and boundaries. The President and the PM would head a 3-tier federal system of national government, regional authorities (provinces) in the middle and counties (districts) at the base. The regions, with their own legislatures, would roughly follow the current provincial boundaries, although new regions could be created. They would be in charge of their own Judiciary, police force and civil service. Kanu and NDP suggested that the President should be a non-executive Head of State, elected by MPs from among three candidates presented by the PM. He would remain the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, sign Bills passed by Parliament in consultation with the PM. Other duties would be ceremonial. It is said that Raila had by then been promised the Premier’s post on condition that he dissolved his NDP party and crossed over to Kanu.

The document, said to have been the brainchild of Raila, was modeled on KADU’s 1962 Majimbo. The only difference was in that while Raila proposed that each region to have its own Judiciary, KADU had proposed that it would be branch of the national Government.

Draft constitution
According to the draft document, rejected by Kenyans at a National Referendum in 2005, the word “devolution” was used instead of “federalism”. In the Swahili version, “ugatuzi” was used instead of “Majimbo”. The clause elicited heated debate at the conference held at Bomas of Kenya (BoK) in Karen. Government representatives wanted the clause deleted or amended, a request delegates would not listen to. At the end, a compromise was reached. In the arrangement regions/districts would be the chief point of devolution, a 6-tier federal system. The 1963 system was 3-tier – National, Regional/States and Local Authorities.

But the most disturbing clause has been the one touching on “permanent residence”. Just as then, none of the proponents of the system has clearly come out to state the meaning of the phrase. To an ordinary Kenyan, one would be restricted to his own native region and would require a pass to move into or operate from a region other than his/hers. Within such understanding, Majimbo would outrightly interfere or obstruct free movement of labor – disenfranchising people in their own country – at least within the confines of such understanding.

Why majimbo?
As seen from history, the debate has always risen during an electioneering period. It is quite evident that the burning desire to introduce the system has been to settle political scores among the ruling elite rather than address salient economic matters affecting the nation. Prior to independence, it was felt that KANU, the party that enjoyed widest following, was dominated by two tribes, Luos (Nyanza) and Kikuyus (Central). The Western, Rift Valley and Coast leaders thus regrouped to agitate for Majimbo with a view to accommodate the interests of other tribes and in the end isolate the two from the heart of national leadership. They formed KADU to counter the rising KANU wave.

Just as then, today, the desire to have a Majimbo Kenya is moved by the desire to isolate a particular ethnic group – Kikuyus and their Meru, Embu kinsmen – seen to have economically benefited at the expense of other tribes by being at the heart of national leadership. Raila is attempting to use the idea to antagonize the three (them) against other tribes in order to win national-wide support for Majimbo.
Ends…