Minister of Justice and Copnstitutional Affairs:

“I am an optimist”

Hon. Martha Karua was a key member of the opposition politicians who struggled for the reintroduction of multi-partyism in the 1990s, and later formed a coalition movement that won power in 2003. Now the shoe is firmly on the other foot. As Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, she speaks about democracy in Kenya

By Ian Gatere and Morten Bonde Pedersen

13. juli 2006

Q: What is democracy?

A: I think it’s a system of government where people have a say in running their own affairs.

Q: So then the next logical question will be to which extent is Kenya a democratic country?

 A: I think to the full extent. In that people elect their representatives and they also audit their performance they are able to speak out about them and they speak out against what they are doing, they are able to censor them and to push them to do what it is that they want. And I think democracy is dynamic it is not static so it is subject to constant improvement and I think that is what is happening in Kenya.

Q: So there is room for improvement?

A: In any society not just Kenya. In Kenya today I would say there is greater openness than there has ever been in discussing issues and that is a great attribute of democracy. When things are discussed in the open, they force those in authority to respond to them.

Q: But still you would say that there are some challenges, what are biggest challenges?

A: A society like ours is under a reform process. There was a period when there was reversal of democratic (gains). So the greatest challenge is to make sure every player moves with the reform agenda, to make people understand they too have a responsibility to behave responsibly. Corruption is a challenge, it went with the breakdown of institutions of government in the previous regime. It is major in the sense that when corruption has been almost given a seal of approval, it is not a day’s work.

Q: Do you feel that the war against corruption has been won?

A: Can you sincerely ask whether the war has been won four years into the war? Corruption cannot be uprooted at once. It is not like water where you open a tap and shut it. It is a process. I believe we have made significant gains but we have to keep at it, improving our methods, learning from weaknesses that do crop up. It is also for the private citizen. Corruption cannot thrive without the giver and the taker and the giver most likely will be from the private sector from the citizens or the taker is most likely going to be from those working in the public sector. To get the mindset changed it takes time.

Q: People say this is an inherited civil service that doesn’t have a democratic culture…?

A: That is somebody who has not given much thought to the statement. Why don’t we say the citizens are inherited? Where are we going to get a civil service from: Mars? We are the same country, we are the same players who run down our own institutions, we must consciously try to change our mindsets, our attitudes. I am not a pessimist. I am an optimist. In any society however bad there are good people. Those good people, whether few or many, are the ones who will win the day. All they need is backing.

Q: What measures do you think can be put in place in order to help enhance democracy?

A: I think it is more or less awareness, getting out as much information as possible. We must devise means of getting out the relevant information to the people. Here I would say it is not only the government although I would like to acknowledge that as a government we have the primary responsibility, but civil society, the media.

Q: Do you think the Kenyan public feels there is too little change coming too slowly?

A: Obviously they are feeling there is too little because everybody expects a miracle. Change of government came with expectations of nothing short of a miracle. It may not happen as fast as you want but definitely something is happening and the economy says so. We didn’t come from a 0.2 (% GDP) growth to a 6 because nothing is happening.

Q: What do you feel should be the role of international development organizations in promoting democracy?

A: In fact, I would want to ask you as a development agency that question. To me it appears some think supporting development is synonymous to inciting. Like the land issues: the land issue will not be solved by anyone inciting people to invade farms. When people are incited to invade, are you really helping them to be able to stand up for their land rights? Or are you trying to create mayhem? To agitate for their rights is their right. It’s those who agitate who bring changes. We also had to agitate for multi-partism. So up to there I’m totally okay with it. But when you then agitate people and incite them to invade, that’s where we part company. Democracy presupposes a constructive engagement that brings positive results. Not being on the rampage. Organizations that claim to support transparency must first be transparent and accountable to all. So supporting constructive engagement ought to be the role of development partners.

Q: What did you mean when you were quoted sometimes recently, saying that the Kenyan government will not give in to donor pressure?

A: I said the government must and will take responsibility to all policies implemented. Therefore, if a development partner proposes something we don’t think is tenable, we say no. At the end of the day, it is us as a government who are answerable to our people.

Q: Were you (commenting on the) conditions of democracy and human rights?

A: Are those conditions? Denmark didn’t bring democracy to Kenya. The Kenyan people fought for it. Fought for the colonialist to leave. It is Kenyans who have once again agitated to go multi-party. How can democracy be called ‘a donor conditionality’? The donors would be crediting themselves with too much.