Kenyan Politics by Other Means: Looking for Loopholes

On 20 June 2016, Kenya’s main opposition party, the Coalition for Reform and Democracy (CORD) announced the indefinite suspension of the party’s weekly protest campaign against the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC). These protests have brought Nairobi and several other cities to a near standstill each Monday for the past eight weeks. However, while the announcement brought much relief to Nairobi’s business community, the protest suspension is not indicative of a reduction in CORD’s efforts to challenge the current government’s apparent grasp of the 2017 election and ascertain power for themselves. As such, a peaceful run-up to the vote is far from guaranteed. 

As the ruling Jubilee administration continues to present a strong and united front, it is looking increasingly unlikely that CORD will gather enough support for an outright victory at the next election. CORD’s recent anti-IEBC demonstrations have been symptomatic of this, escalating in levels of violence from week to week. Despite some legitimate historic grievances with the commission, CORD’s use of violence has resulted in a growing opinion that their overall ambition is destabilisation rather than reform. Whilst it is unlikely that CORD has used the ensuing unrest as a means to directly undermine the government’s authority, it is possible that they have attempted to set the foundations to dispute the legitimacy of the 2017 election result and to demand a government of national unity. Such an arrangement is likely to sit well with CORD’s ageing presidential candidate Raila Odinga, who is unlikely to be in a position to contest another election.  Yet, these actions have not only decreased sympathy for the party’s cause but have also alienated CORD from the business community and civil society. Furthermore, this strategy has not been widely accepted within the party, leading to several internal disputes. A number of key CORD politicians, such as their Head of Strategy, Andrew Mondoh, as well as Abubakar Zein, principal advisor on electoral affairs, have prepared to abandon Odinga’s team, criticising him for ignoring their advice and trying to gain unnecessary political capital out of the IEBC.  

In contrast, the Jubilee government has aimed to purport itself as calm and accommodating; initiating the concept of a parliamentary select committee to resolve the IEBC issues. The attempt at dialogue was welcomed strongly by both civil society and the wider international community. Although CORD’s 20 June announcement has also been seen as a willingness to engage in the talks, there is little precedent to suggest that this commitment will continue. CORD has already opposed the parliamentary select committee on grounds of being bias towards the current government. In addition, CORD has threatened to escalate violence further in response to the recent government-led arrest of some of its members, together with Jubilee politicians accused of inciting hostility and violence on 17 June. CORD’s threat of a “million-man march” in response to the arrests has further served to undermine their legitimate anti-IEBC grievances. This latest threat of violent unrest has added to the growing commentary over CORD’s disruptive strategy ahead of the vote. 

With no guarantee that the IEBC talks will be fruitful nor serve to directly benefit CORD’s ambitions, any breakdown in the process is likely to cause a renewed wave of violence as CORD seeks to express their dissatisfaction through demonstrations. Further pre-election violence is therefore highly likely, with CORD keen to use any means possible to gain a stronger hand in the run-up to the vote.