Kenya: Citizens Could Vote for New Constitution

April 30th, 2008

electoral vote

Posted to the web 30 April 2008
Abiya Ochola, Beauttah Omanga, Evelyne Ogutu, Susan Anyangu, and Morton Saulo
Kenyans could vote at another referendum if a new roadmap unveiled on Tuesday gives the country a new constitution within the year.
But there were concerns that voting at another plebiscite only months after a disputed presidential election, which almost ripped the country apart, could further polarise the country.
Pessimists argued that campaigns for or against the document could plunge the country into another round of high stakes political games and brinksmanship. This was witnessed in 2005 at a referendum on the draft constitution, which the Government side lost.
This view appeared grounded in the argument that the Grand Coalition Government, cobbled together to haul the country out of the crippling post-General Election violence, may have not gained a strong foothold in just a year.
On Tuesday, the National Dialogue and Reconciliation Committee gave the strongest hint yet that the country could have a new constitution in a year and told Kenyans to brace for another referendum battle.
Negotiators at the Serena mediation talks said the referendum was mandatory on a day they unveiled a five-phase roadmap towards a new constitutional dispensation.
The mediators mandated Constitutional Affairs minister, Ms Martha Karua, to within two weeks come up with a draft constitutional referendum Bill, which will form the basis for a new constitution process. This will serve as the first phase of the process.
The urgency of the matter was underlined when the negotiators agreed that the Karua draft be the subject of discussion when the talks resume on May 14.
The constitutional referendum Bill, once passed, will establish the powers of the stakeholders and provide a legal framework for the review process.
Beat one-year deadline
Present at the session of the Serena talks were Cabinet ministers, Mr James Orengo, Ms Karua, Prof Sam Ongeri, Mr Mutula Kilonzo, Mr William Ruto and Mr Moses Wetangula. Dr Sally Kosgey, the Higher Education minister and a member of the team, did not attend.

allafrica.com


Tags: ,

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 30th, 2008 at 12:55 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

14 Responses to “Kenya: Citizens Could Vote for New Constitution”

  1. Jaycob Says:

    Thing is, that author drew inspiration from and acted in his present day.Where are this generation’s founding fathers?

  2. Petrina Says:

    I like that the submitter knew well enough to put all of that in past tense.

  3. Buster Says:

    Upmod for reminding people of the Alien and Sedition Acts passed by the founders.

  4. Jenae Says:

    Don’t you see that nobody cares anymore? Most of all our government.

  5. Terrance Says:

    The OP and every poster in this thread is wrong.These links prove me right.I dare you to read all of them!http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2007/10/31/taxation_revolution_and_some_other_rebellions/and here:http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1023/p13s01-bogn.htmland here:http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4026/is_200607/ai_n17187913/pg_1and here:http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:u1pjfiO0X_8J:www.historycooperative.org/journals/wm/62.2/holton.html+woody+impera&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=operaand here:http://cyberjournal.org/authors/fresia/

  6. Balfour Says:

    The word ‘citizen’ appears NOWHERE in the Constitution or Declaration of Independence. There are some uses of the word by James Madison in the Federalist Papers but a person who wants to live in a United States wherein The Constitution REALLY is the foundation of rights and law would not bother himself with discussions of whether someone is a citizen or not.The concept of Citizens vs. non-Citizens is a construct of the US government, not of the Constitution.

  7. Edytha Says:

    “There are, however, states’ rights – rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards.”http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul120.html

  8. Colby Says:

    We live in a Republic, not a Democracy, thank god…

  9. Chad Says:

    you are truly rare

  10. Jolene Says:

    Why is the title contradictory?The Constitution was written to regular the government, not the people… and yet in the same sentence it says what the rights of the citizens were?Isn’t telling someone what rights they have and don’t have, by definition, regulation?Seems like democracy101 needs to go back to English101.

  11. Fitz Says:

    “Regulate the government”? “Rights of citizens”?This don’t even make no sense.

  12. Elicia Says:

    Downodded for same reason.Come on people, do we really want Bush to find out that he has the legal right to deport any Iraqi-American citizen he wants, simple because of their race? (Yes, that part of the acts had no expiration date and is still legally enforceable.)EDIT: Just to remind that it was the Federalists (the bad guy founding fathers) that passed this law. Many, many of the others were against it.

  13. Deandre Says:

    I’m glad someone agrees with me that direct election of senators was a huge mistake. When the senators were elected by state legislators, if the senators tried to increase federal power, the state legislators would never reelect them because they would be losing power. Their interests were perfectly aligned, and the end result was preserving the small federal government that the Constitution created.