Confidential Dossier On Meetings That Led To The Formation Of Narc

archive
Conclusion of discussions in early 2002:

Second and final part of our secret dossiers on how Narc was formed

In a nutshell the opposition (read NAC) will only have itself to blame if they lose or do not put up a credible fight come the general election. It is clear from the results of the last two elections that unity is the way to go.

Apart from tribalism and selfishness, what is to stop NAC becoming one party? The modalities can all be worked out. What excuse will NAC have to go to the election as separate parties under NAC and lose when they could have gone as a single one. NAC are up against a formidable group and must pull out ALL the stops to ensure that they have the best possible fighting chance.

This can only be achieved by forming one party.

It is our conviction that this is the way to go and we urge the NAC council to give this proposal their deepest consideration. We must be prepared to compromise to make progress.

Initially the Strategic committee’s proposal was met with indifference. Especially among the Democratic Party members there was a feeling that to join hands in one party would rob them off their majority in the opposition and reduce their bargaining power.

As time went by it became clear to all that this was actually a serious consideration to be made and since legal implications were many. Kirautu Murungi was seconded to the strategic committee. A few weeks later Chris Murungaru also joined the committee.

At this point the committee has shifted base and was meeting at the Ford Kenya headquarters on Argwings Kodhek rd while the Coordinating committee met at DP offices in Lavington. Council meetings were still taking place at Silver Springs hotel.

The committee then divided in two with one group to develop an ‘Alliance’ formula and another to develop a single party formula or ‘radical departure’. Two who were sent to discuss the pros of this were Lucas Mboya and Ngengi Muigai while Mike Tanyasis and David Mwiraria discussed the cons. (Muigai was one of the strongest supporters of the ‘radical departure’ though due to illness and a subsequent operation he pulled out of NAC and supported his nephew Uhuru Kenyatta):


National Alliance for Change

Strategic planning committee.

Based on deliberations this committee has had over the past one month we have come to the following conclusions with regard to the way forward for NAC.

NAC needs to quickly decide which structure to adopt between the Alliance, Coalition and merger options.

With this regard the committee has prepared this brief that seeks to evaluate the strengths of two different structures. The ‘New Party’ and the ‘Alliance’ options.


New Party Alliance

This would be the ideal way forward. It would remove all the previous obstacles that have seen the opposition come unstuck the past two elections.

This we believe would bring the best chance of success. Captures the imagination and would produce a euphoria that NAC would be able to capitalize on.

Removes political apathy from Kenyans, revitalizes a failure plagued opposition. It would also be attractive to Kanu fallouts, undecided candidates/voters as well opposition groups outside of NAC

This is the least expected option. It would undoubtedly disorganize kanu and other opposition groups outside of NAC.

Creates economies of scale, would be easier to attract funding under this guise.

Would create a party that is more representative of communities in Kenya than any other party including Kanu This would kill the opposition parties’ ethnic tags.

T.O.R.S of memorandum of understanding would remain the same thus keeping the NAC more stable.

No internal elections required. Thus saving both time and resources.

No loss of identity in respective party strongholds. This would enable party’s to retain the allegiance of party faithful.

Less acrimonious. It would make it easier for NAC to take care of individual and party interests in the short term.

Name recognition, little or no marketing required.


Registration of a New Party.

The committee then went on to explore the possibility of registering a new party as opposed to having all NAC candidates standing on an existing party ticket.

As a new party, the name ‘National Alliance of Kenya’ was floated. The committee noted though that the chances of an opposition party being registered at this stage were very slim indeed. With this in mind the committee felt that the best option would be to have all NAC candidates stand on an existing party ticket.

The committee considered using the following criteria to select an existing party to field NAC candidates:

1.Should be a small party that is not well established.

2.A party that is willing to dismantle its’ internal structure.



Alliance.

With regard to the ‘Alliance’ option the committee noted that a way must be found of binding all the NAC members together as both individuals and as parties. Possibly through a legal contract or constitution that would be enforceable in a court of law.

In addition the committee recommends the setting up of two more committees.

1.The ‘Communications Committee’ to deal quickly with developing situations that may not require the council to meet, particularly negative press. With this in mind the committee feels that it is critical that NAC is seen to function as a unit. As such specific criteria must be drawn up detailing who should and how to respond to
critics. The committee feels that it is important to let criticism against any NAC members (parties not individuals) receive a coordinated response from NAC itself rather than the criticized party. The committee feel that NAC must agree on how make different proposals public. In the light of recent press reports on the shadow cabinet and merger discussions it becomes clear that ‘lone ranger’ tactics by anyone or group in NAC will lead to its’ eventual collapse. This does not negate the fact that these proposals have been received with optimism by the public. As we learnt to appreciate during the recent seminar, trust must be built up between NAC members. Statements or information that are made public without following a laid down procedure will derail NAC and at the very least cause mistrust amongst NAC members. Similarly meetings that are called by NAC members (excluding party meetings) to deliberate NAC issues should be called through the current laid down NAC organs.


2.A ‘Standing Legal Committee’ to give NAC the necessary input on matters of structure and to explore avenues for both registration of candidates under a joint structure and any other technicalities that may arise from time to time.



The Way forward.

Finally the committee feels that a plan of action must be developed to keep the momentum NAC has gained going. These include:


- a rally at Kamkunji to explain both the economic blueprint and Constitutional change proposals to Wananchi in layman’s terms. (NO POLITICKING).

-Meetings with various stakeholders groups including, the Business community, particularly:

The Association of Kenya Manufacturers.
Chamber of Commerce.
Kenya Private Sector Foundation.
The donor community.
Religious organizations.
KNUT.
Women’s’ groups.



The turning point came at the crucial Elementaita meeting.

Eventually it was agreed that one umbrella party would be used and the name National Alliance Party of Kenya (NAK) was chosen. It was agreed that the “P” would be silent. This opened a furore with the Nginyo Kariuki led National Alliance Party. Since it was anticipated that NAC would have problems registering the new NAK party at the Registrar of Societies, it was agreed that use be made of an already existing party, i.e. change its name to the National Alliance Party of Kenya. Initially the Conservative Party of Kenya led by Mr. Gabriel Mung’ ura was approached but things could not work since some of its officials objected. This is when the National Party of Kenya (NPK) led by Charity Ngilu, Titus Mbathi, and etc was approached and requested to change its name to National Alliance Party of Kenya (NAK). The NPK accepted.

Another milestone was when NAK established a joint elections board, i.e. NAK Elections Board (NEB) and a joint Board of Party Officials with Titus Mbathi as Chairman and Burudi Nabwera as Secretary- General. All this took place in August 2002.

The Crucial Elementaita meeting was held in August 2002.

At this point it was clear that things were still touch and go. Charity Ngilu, Ngengi Muigai, Shem Ochuodho, William Okoth, Mike Tanyasis, Musikari Kombo and a few others formed the front that was pushing for the single party approach. In particular Kiraitu and Matu Wamae were not convinced. The night before the retreat ended intense lobbying took place. It was at this time that Kibaki changed his mind and realized that the only way he would be president was through a single party approach. Ngilu made it clear that she would pull out if this approach was not adopted.

The next day while Kibaki made it clear that in his opinion, the radical departure was the way to go. This caught a number of his close confidants off guard and the deal was done.

At this stage things moved into high gear. Most of the committees started meeting on a weekly basis and the resource mobilization committee started sourcing funds for the parties activities.

The group met with South African experts on coalition governments at the Fairview hotel over two days where they were encouraged to put their differences aside for the sake of the country. It was the first time that the issue of trust and tribalism had been addressed openly and created a new atmosphere of confidence.

A lot of progress was made on how the party would be structured and a lot of proposals were put forward such as the following from the strategic committee:

Strategic Planning Committee (NAC)

Merger Option

The objective of this brief is to develop modalities that could be used to transform the NAC into a single party.

It is clear that the larger parties in NAC are keen on keeping their supporters and hence remaining as separate entities while the smaller ones are keen on the merger. Public opinion seems to lie with the merger option. At the last council meting most members said that ultimately this was the way to eventually go.

What we are trying to explore here is whether this can be done immediately and the how best to go about it.


Structure:

This new party could be structured in just the same was as most NAC member parties currently are.

That is an executive (NEC, chairperson, vice, treasurer, vice general secretary, deputy etc) while the party structure would include branch officials and staff.

We propose that the chairperson of the new party should NOT be the presidential candidate and that the chair, presidential candidate, and vice chair would be from different parties. We propose that the chair would then be selected for prime ministers post in a new government.

Considering that the Democratic Party not only have the most MP’s but as such are also the official opposition party it would be logical to give them more positions in this new party than the others. (proportionate representation).

For the time being the individual party structures would remain in place and all NAC MP’s would simply stand on the new party ticket. The parties themselves would remain in place. If NAC succeeds in taking government then it would proceed to dissolve those parties.

No party elections would be called until after the election. Thus the office bearers would be interim.


Nominations

Nominations for the New Party would be done based on the current parties setup. That is each party would fund and organizing its’ own nominations (of course under the new name whatever that might be). The current NAC parties would still carry out their own elections using their own structure (these structures would only be dismantled after the elections when grassroot elections could be called and the parties integrated into one unit). It would also be wise to observe how Kanu goes about it’s nomination process and learn from their mistakes.

A riskier option but carrying more benefit (because it puts pressure on other groups to emulate a good example, pressure normally exposes cracks) is to hold a successful (without acrimony) nomination before Kanu (and any other groups) in the hope that theirs will be acrimonious and thus strengthen the publics’ perception that Kanu (and others) are in disarray while NAC is organized.

Once the modalities and a time frame to the above have been agreed upon then the New Party can swing into campaign mode with confidence.

Rally can then be held with confidence and all planning will take place with the infrastructure in place. NAC can now consolidate its’ position.


NAC leadership structure.

As of now it seems that the current operating structure of NAC is adequate considering that NAC in itself will not become a registered body. The council could propose any changes to the structure in order to streamline NAC’s operations.

To date we have not heard any more about the setting up of the two committee’s

(Communications and Legal).

Shadow Cabinet.

The initial shadow cabinet list seemed to go down well with the public (by default) and obviously rattled a few bones (Kanu). The committee feels that it would be a good idea to draft a real shadow cabinet that would incorporate NAC party members as well as those in DP (the official opposition) under whose mandate this would fall.

The cabinet could then lobby strongly for bills that NAC feels are important, particularly the Media bill. This of course would endear NAC to the press and the public.

Additionally this cabinet would be the strongest yet indicator that NAC is functioning as a unit, and make it clear to the public that there is a functioning government in waiting.

Part of the job of this cabinet would be to highlight the governments failings in specific areas especially those of immediate public concern (media bill, deforestation, the upcoming budget etc). The next step would be to start touring and introduce the cabinet to the public.


Presidential Canadidate.

The committee feels that NAC must address this issue as a council and not leave it up to the three principals alone. We must keep in mind that this is an issue that can make or break NAC and the input of all NAC members should be sought. The Council should know for example whether the principals are finding it difficult to select a single candidate so that the council may work out its own criteria/modalities of doing this.

At this point a number of NACC members began to go against the memorandum. All the members had agreed that they would not discuss the issue of a single presidential candidate until a later stage. In particular they wanted it to be clear that Kanu would field Uhuru so that they could agree on a Kikuyu candidate to face him (Obviously Kibaki).

Initially Joe Donde of Ford Kenya who was the convenor of the economic committee present during the unveiling of the NAC economic blueprint, announced his candidacy for the presidency.

This of course disrupted NAC as it was intended to do. Joe Donde was acting on the advice of one misguided former MP, Otieno Kopiyo. The two believed that it was high time they came into the limelight. They were convinced that a Kikuyu President was not a good thing for Kenya and were determined at all costs to make sure that Kibaki was not chosen as the single candidate.

Privately Kopiyo confirmed that he was intent on wrecking NAC. Their plan was to cause chaos in NAC and then proceed to stage a coup in Ford Kenya. Thus they would capitalize on Luo votes by telling their community that Ford Kenya was originally started by the late Jaramogi and was his party. This they believed would also unbalance NDP who were in the middle of a ‘marriage’ crisis with Kanu.

Their coup of Ford Kenya came a cropper as they found Wamalwa was not the pushover they thought he was. Mboya who was privy to what Kopiyo was up to had already told Musikari Kombo to be aware of an impending coup.

Donde and Kopiyo then faded away to reveal another threat in the form of NACs own secretary and coordinating committee member Shem Ochoudho. He to announced his candidacy for the presidency against the NAC MOU. This was after Ochoudho had announced his new party, SPARK and persuaded Mboya and others who were reluctant, to join him.

At this point, Alfred Getonga (Kibaki’s P.A) received his brief to scuttle SPARK and ensure that Ochuodho withdrew his candidacy. Getonga wanted to make sure that Kibaki would be elected unopposed (within NAC).

He took advantage of the fact that he and Mboya were on good talking terms and asked Mboya to persuade Ochoudho to withdraw his candidacy.

In due course Ochuodho called it off but not before he tried to get the NAC to look favorably on the Mutava Musyimi as a compromise candidate. This caused a falling out with the Kibaki camp and Ochuodho’s political career now looked uncertain.

At this stage Kibaki and Raila began to have private meetings to see if a way could be worked out for them to join forces. Raila even when in Kanu had a plan ‘b’ with a second party (which turned out to be LDP).

As these meetings gained momentum it became clear that LDP and NAK were going to reach some kind of working relationship. The issue still remained who would be the presidential candidate.

The ‘Summit” group was informally convened as was another group that went to work on how the two parties could be integrated. The NAK council was expanded to include members of LDP and shifted their meetings to the Milimani hotel.

With three months to go before the election Kanu had made fatal mistakes in dealing with internal dissent. The firing of Joseph Kamotho and George Saitoti in particular had hurt them.

Additionally the appointment of Musalia Mudavadi to the VPs post with only months to the election was seen as a slap in the face to the Luyha rather than the bonus it was thought to have been.

Key in the decision making process at the time was Mois’ son Gideon. Suprisingly Nicholas Biwott had avoided the Uhuru bandwagon and had warned Moi that the plan was doomed to fail as had other key Kanu operatives. Moi thought he knew better. Arrogance brought his downfall.

Finally, Raila now campaigning openly with NAK and having joint rallies did some quick arithmetic.

To propose himself as the presidential candidate would not go down well with NAK which had a larger following and particularly the Kikuyu community behind it. This would have led to a split and LDP would have had to go it alone against Kanu, NAK (under Kibaki) and Ford People under Simeon Nyachae.

The result of this would be that either Kanu or NAK would get it and he would be regarded as a spoiler. His desire to destroy Kanu that had led him on a ‘wild goose chase’ for the last four years got the better of him.

He decided that his ambition had to be put on hold. It was more important to Kenyans, to himself, to his new party (he is the real boss if you didn’t know) that Kanu was swept away.

There was only one alternative left. Support Kibaki for the president. Get as much as possible for himself and associates as possible and have the last laugh over Moi.


POSTSCRIPT.

Recently it has looked like NARC is losing the plot. After only three months the coalition seems to be wracked with controversy, many claiming that a Kikuyu mafia is controlling the country.

The truth of the matter is problems exist, but they are not insurmountable as some would have you believe.

In this coalition we basically have two parties, LDP and NA(P)K forming NARC. Whether political observers agree or not, the real winner of the election was the NA(P)K Council. Without it there would not have even been a fight against Kanu.

LDP took advantage of a situation that the NA(P)K council had worked for and nurtured in some form or another for a year and a half. Meanwhile LDP (or is it NDP) were flirting with Kanu.

Almost all LDP members are ex-Kanu and that is something the people of Kenya cannot afford to forget.

Kibaki and the new Government though have themselves to blame for the current crisis if it can be called that.

It is not possible for a ruling party to have NO PARTY.

The party participation in public affairs and the running of government is non-existent. In their paranoia that Moi might resurface through some hidden orifice, Kibaki and his inner circle have kept affairs of state to themselves as much as possible. In the process they have emasculated their own Council (NA(P)K that incidentally got them into power) and left LDP to run the show.

That is why LDP are so keen on the Summit. They have realized that as a party their level of cohesiveness is far above that of NA(P)K and if they can dominate at the top then there is no more resistance.

NA(P)K were advised that as soon as the elections were over they should dissolve their constituent parties and hold grass root elections to consolidate their approach and put the ghost of tribalism behind them once and for all.

Personal interests have put paid to this for the time being.

It is not possible to say whether due to Kibaki’s illness or the lack of insight of his inner circle, these poor decisions have been made. The fact remains that a so-called elections board (that NA(P)K council voted into office) under Alex Mureithi have exercised undue authority over Council affairs. This group went as far as appointing their own treasurer (Peter Kubebea) without the Councils consent, opening their own account and so far providing no report as to how the funds raised by the party have been spent.

When a few weeks ago the council demanded an accounting and the number of the bank account, the account they were given was that of one Njoki Ndungu, nominated MP. As you can imagine the council led by Noah Wekesa are not taking this lying down.

A good percentage of the NA(P)K Ministers and assistants were only months ago members of the Council including, Kiraitu Murungi, Chris Murungaru, Charity Ngilu, Kipruto Kirwa, Mukisya Kituyi, and others. Only one so far, Mukhisya Kituyi has had the humility and respect for the council to grace a meeting and personally thank the Council for putting NARC in power.

This speaks volumes. Without the council behind it and their ability to strategize and organize the party as well as connect the party to the grassroots that elected it, the government is at the mercy of LDP and any agreement it might make with the Kanu dominated opposition.

Wife cuts off husband's penis flashes it down the toilet.

The surprising real reason why more and more Kenyans are having steamy extra-marital affairs

Woman Murders Her Best Friend To Steal Her Husband As Science Proves That It Is Deadly For Women To Have Casual Sex

How Kenyans can now easily start a lucrative Internet business from any remote part of Kenya for only Kshs 100/-