Separating facts from fiction on the BBI proposals in todays perspective

BBI proposal: Losers in presidential election need to be involved in the governance of the country.

Mwangi’s reason: Losers will always represent large percentages of citizens with opposing political opinions

2010 Constitution: Losers in presidential election are not allowed to be involved in the governance of the country

The 2010 constitution

My reasons for supporting the 2010 Constitution to counter the BBI proposal:- Presidential aspirants compete on ideologies and policies.

The winner is given latitude to implement his/her policies. Inclusion of losers is a collision of ideologies and policies, prone to stalemates in decision making.

The Constitution sets out to strengthen parties and member ownership. The Party leader is expected to be the first among equals in the party membership.

Related stories

Leaders and Cultism

Today, leaders are party owners and their word is law with possibility of cultism. The architecture of the governance provides for a bipartisan Parliament.

All MPs approach national matters with independent minds to make laws for posterity and oversee performance of other arms of government as an institution to sustain independence of the Legislature.

There are neither Government nor opposition benches in Parliament. Cabinet Secretaries don’t sit in Parliament to form the front bench that would warrant creation of back benches for the opposition MPs.

Government Business in the House

The Majority Leader (governing party) introduces Government business in the House to which the Minority Leader (opposing side) responds.

This allows MPs to take party positions in challenging each other on the floor of the House until consensus is reached to enact or reject the proposed law (Bill).

And- Constitutional democracy like ours is about producing winners in elections confirmed to have been free, fair and credible. Involving losers in governance will kill the taste of and dilute competitive democracy.