A presidential system with reduced
powers best for Kenya
What system shall Kenyans adopt to rescue themselves from a past of dictatorship? A popularly elected presidency with reduced powers or an executive premiership that is not elected directly by the people but is head of government with more executive powers than the appointing president?
Will it be a hybrid system that has both a popularly elected President and an executive prime minister appointed by the President from the political party with the majority seats in Parliament?
Let's start with the hybrid system, which seems to be most appealing to the Bomas delegates.
In this system, the President will be popularly elected but will be a ceremonial Head of State while the head of government with executive powers will be a prime minister he will appoint but cannot fire.
To me, this system is inherently undemocratic because it will take sovereign power from the leader who is the direct choice of millions of people to a prime minister who is not directly elected by the people.
More technically, if the popularly elected president and the executive prime minister he appoints belong to the same majority party, there will be no conflict in Government. But what happens if the popularly elected President belongs to a minority party while the executive prime minister belongs to the majority party with a different manifesto? By what manifesto will the country be governed?
There is real conflict that will render the hybrid system unworkable. We must choose either one or the other but not both.
What about the parliamentary system led by the executive prime minister without a president? It is better than the hybrid system in terms of avoiding conflict, but it can harbour dictatorship if the prime minister is given too much power.
Remember Uganda's Prime Minister Milton Obote and Pakistan's Ali Bhutto. They were both dictators. A prime minister elected by 210 MPs cannot be a substitute to a president elected by five million Kenyans.
If what we want is a new constitution that will give us most democracy, freedom and power, the executive presidency is that system. No leader can be more democratic than a president chosen by millions of people in a free and fair election. Such a presidency should, however, never be vested with powers to detain citizens or be above the law.
In the Kenyan situation, the executive prime minister position was conceived only as a check against an all-powerful president. If we democratise the presidency, what further need shall we have for an executive prime minister?
Some people, however, argue that a popular presidency is less accountable to people because its holder does not come to Parliament to answer questions from MPs. But I don't see any reason why a President cannot attend parliamentary sessions to answer questions. If it has not happened in the past, it can be made to happen.
In any case, ministers are always in Parliament to answer questions on behalf of his government. If, however, the president turns dictatorial or breaks the law, Parliament should be given powers to impeach him and remove him from power through a vote of no confidence.
If in writing our new constitution and choosing a system by which we want to be governed, our aim is not to give executive powers to politicians who know they cannot win power through popular elections, then a presidential system with direct elections and reduced powers is our best cure for dictatorship.
KOIGI WA WAMWERE,
Subukia MP.
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now
