Confidential Dossier Tracing The Formation Of Narc

archive

(The truth about NA(P)K and its formation)

Ever since the re-emergence of multi-party politics in Kenya in 1991/2, there had been several efforts to forge a united opposition front. Some of the most notable of such efforts were the FORD initiative, UNDA, NCEC, Middle-Ground Group, Friends of Democracy (FOD), and so on. Then came later efforts like the Ufungamano Initiative, Mageuzi, Ukenya, "Breakfast Meetings", Progressive People's Forum (PPF), Central Kenya PG, KPSF/NCCK/Catholics (Coalition), FORD-Family, Kenya People's Coalition, National Dawn Conference, etc.

While each of these efforts served some purpose with some results, no single one of them galvanized opposition political leaders, and with the seriousness that was to be witnessed with the NAC.

In August 2001 or thereabouts a group of young people led by the former Rangwe MP Dr Shem Ochuodho assembled fortnightly at Trisan Hotel, Lenana road.

The group calling itself Progressive Elements Forum consisted of a cross section of MP’s including Moses Muhia, Kipruto Kirwa, Noah Wekesa, Waithaka Mwangi, late Kapten, Ochuodho, Kituyi, late Ndilinge, late Enock Magara, etc.) and even Kipkalya Kones of Ford People as well as members of civil society.

Key in this group were one Alfelt Gunda, Lucas Mboya (son of nationalist Tom Mboya), Catherine Odera, Cecily Mbarire, Titus Magara, Hon James Magara and a number of University students among many others.

The group continued to meet through to the end of the year changing their location to Professional Centre as they got bigger.

Meanwhile the members of Parliament from the group met separately at the same venue where they discussed the same issues the civil society group were discussing, namely opposition unity. Occasionally MPs graced the civil society meeting and vice versa.

The Civil groups agenda centered on how to get accountable leadership in Parliament and how to bring Civil Society into the mainstream of decision making (policy) in the country.

Meanwhile breakfast meetings had started between the ‘big three’ Kijana Wamalwa, Mwai Kibaki and Charity Ngilu.

The Civil group decided after many months of debate that they would like to raise funds to sponsor responsible leaders for civic and parliamentary seats (this never came to pass) and that the opposition must form an alliance of sorts if ever they can defeat Kanu.

The groups continued to meet well into November, December 2001. The Civil Society group decided to change their name to Progressive People Forum (PPF):


Opposition Unity talks.


Trisan Hotel.


15/11/2001.


Present:


Odour On’gwen

Hon Shem Ochuodo

Hon Henry Obwocha

Hon Kipruto arap Kirwa

Hon Kipkalya Kones

Hon Noah Wekesa

Hon Katuku

Hon Matu Wamae

Hon Farah Maalim

Mwendawiro Mganga

Lucas Mboya


Absent with apologies:


Hon Kiraitu Murungi.



Shem Ochuodho opened meeting.


Purpose of the meeting was to analyze the recent by election in Kilome


The opposition went for all but one civic seat. Hon Katuku thanked all the opposition parties and members for their support. He said they had jointly raised KSh 499,450 for the election. He said that they had done their best and expected to carry the day. He observed that Pick and Kanu had spent phenomenal amounts of money. The press too was partly to blame for the loss as they published a misleading story to the effect that the NPK candidate had withdrawn. Both Kiss FM and Nation carried the story yet it could not be ascertained as to the source of the story was.

Members urged Katuku to pursue the matter with the electoral commission. NPK though won a civic seat in Kitui.

It was noted that Pick were using ‘unofficial’ bribery that is by building roads and quickly finishing stalled projects in the area. It was not clear what the role of Pick was in the election. Whether they were really in the race or acting in concert with Kanu to split the votes and give Kanu the lead.

Kipkalya Kones gave an example of a by election in Sotik in which women were being ferried to the polling station in groups of up to 40 all in GK registered vehicles. The women would they say they cannot read and someone needs to mark their ballots for them. This of course ensured that they voted for Kanu. Apparently they had been paid some money to vote at a paying point set up by the resident DC, and do in the same ward. After voting they returned to the payoff point and received the ‘balance’.

They then went to another polling station to vote again having been told that in multiparty elections they can vote twice.

Noah Wekesa noted that wananchi needed to be informed about the tactics used by the Kanu/NDP axis during elections or they would continually be hoodwinked. Basically civic education was of paramount importance.

He observed that money played such a role in elections that it was not possible to upstage Kanu without ensuring that proper civic education was carried out. He also advocated having a mole in the Kanu/NDP camps just as they had their people in the opposition. A serious campaign must be mounted to get the electoral commission to take its role more seriously. He asked members to come up with ideas on how the joint nominations could be improved and if possible criteria that could be adopted to standardize the process. He said that Ford would present a document describing how to move forward in the next two weeks as a result of the five meetings so far comprising the Ford initiative.

Matu Wamae said that some mistakes were made in announcements during the Kilome by election. For example some ballot papers were printed without the candidates names. He noted that there was poor organization on the ground and that at one rally, there was not even a p. a. system and Kanu activists were addressing the crowd while they waited for the rally to begin.

He also suggested that there be proportional representation in the next general election that is nominations could be based on the number of votes that party received in the last election.

Farah Maalim noted that Naivasha was a tricky area as a lot of the constituents were not from the area. Many of them came in from other places to work in the factories and plantations around Naivasha. He pointed out that there had been many meetings about opposition unity but they had so far not concretized anything.

Shem Ochuodho also noted the weak organization. He said that money and organization were important but that alone would not win an election. Ultimately grassroots support was the most crucial part and this required the party’s involved to have an all-inclusive approach to elections.

He suggested that they support whichever party looks the best on the ground and that goodwill between all prospective candidates needed to be cultivated or the opposition would continually lose to Kanu.

He added that a list of candidates could be drawn up for each constituency in order of popularity and where the most popular candidate was not from the strongest party they candidate could agree to stand on another party ticket.

Lucas Mboya suggested having a separate strategy for approaching the by elections as opposed to the general elections. He also asked what strategy was there in place to popularize a party if the Kanu candidate was genuinely the most popular.

Kipruto Kirwa pointed out that the press was a major stumbling block to the opposition when it came to election. There was often negative coverage or no coverage at all.

This he said must be tackled. He also suggested that there needs to be a mechanism under which the joint nominee could raise more money. Possibly a pledge of monetary assistance from all the parties concerned.

He suggested that two scenarios need to be developed with regard to the joint oppositions approach to the general elections. One with no or minimal amendments made to the current constitution and the other with major amendments so that the opposition would not be caught flat-footed.

The meeting ended with a resolution that Shem Ochuodho draw up a proposal for a joint nomination process that would work for both by elections and the coming general elections.

This proposal would be debated at a meeting in the near future where all the opposition parties would be represented. The meeting stressed the need for the party leaders to attend so that there would be no further delay in agreeing on the process to be adopted.



Opposition Unity Meeting at Trisan Hotel.

Thursday 15 November 2001.



Comments
From this meeting the following factors can be gleaned:

Hon Shem Ochuodho was mandated to draw up a proposal that would be placed before the five or six opposition blocks including, Democratic Party, National party of Kenya, Social Democratic party, Ford Kenya, Ford People and Ford Asili. This does not exclude any other parties that wish to see a united opposition front.

Hon Farah Maalim in particular was quite frustrated at the relative lack of progress in this direction. He also questioned the role of ‘Safina’ in the process.

It was also noted that the electoral commission cannot be relied on the organize a ‘free and fair’, election. In the case of Kilome, the commission has made no effort to uncover how a report that the NPK candidate had been withdrawn was published in the ‘Nation’ and of course its’ effect on the outcome coming only a couple of days before.

Additionally the mandate of the commission is to ensure that there are a ‘roughly equal number of people in each constituency’. The last two general elections have seen numerous cases in which a constituency of 100,000 people gets 1 parliamentary seat (opposition) and another of 7,000 people (Kanu) also gets one seat. The result of course is that the combined opposition with two thirds of the vote get one third of the seats in the house.

It is clear that the people of Kenya wish for a change of government regardless of the haphazard mathematics of the electoral commission. The commission of course relies on the statistics from the census report. This same report indicated that in the last census, North Eastern province a largely Kanu zone was reported to have had the greatest increase in population to the surprise of most Kenyans. The same area has had in the last 10 years unprecedented drought, is a hideout for bandits and cattle rustlers and is currently being supplied with relief food from several Ngo’s.

The meeting noted that only when unified could the opposition make progress against the Kanu/NDP.

The proposal should show how the blocs could work together to

1.Keep their current seats in parliament (those who are defending them).

2.Make inroads into constituencies held by the Kanu/NDP axis.

3.Present a strong and credible challenge for the presidency.


This of course would be subject to developing criteria that would enable the parties to approach by elections and the next general elections with a pre arranged understanding of how to select a single candidate for both eventualities.

It was noted that ‘Pick’ could be spoiler for all opposition plans as they proved to be in Kilome. It is imperative that their role both by elections and the general elections be reviewed. Will they work with Kanu/NDP simply to split votes or will they work as an entity of their own? Keep in mind that finances for Pick will not be a problem.

Probably an electoral college can be created that will have members of civil society on it panel as well as a limited number of representatives from each party. This panel would be given the mandate by the blocs to select the best candidate based on the criteria developed in the proposal.


Selection of candidates for by elections.

Assuming six blocs:

The most popular party in the region will naturally be the one to field a candidate.

Where this is in dispute the most popular candidates in the opposition bloc should be allowed to go it alone on a party of his choice. The candidates would be presented to the panel and they would have the authority to pick the most suitable one.


Selection of candidates for the general election (parliamentary)

This could be done using the same format that was proposed for the by elections. This would not prevent parties from having their own party nominations. The selection would only be done from those who have already been cleared to stand by their parties.

It is important to keep in mind here that refusal by any party to adhere to the laid down procedure if adopted could lead to the withdrawal of that party from the pact. In such a case the public would be left to pass judgment. Such a move could fracture the united opposition and lead to numerous candidates being fielded in the same constituency as Kanu again take the spoils.

Alternatively the parliamentary aspirants could be ‘allocated’ constituencies based on the performance of their party at the last general election. Such a party depending on the percentage of votes they got would be given a corresponding number of constituencies to field their candidates.

This though might prove unpopular because it does not take into consideration the new parties or parties that feel they may do better that they did the last time. It would have to be a compromise position based on the formation of a government of national unity after the election, which would then see a number of those new or small parties who conceded to the pact, be rewarded with nominations to parliament of their members.


Selection of a presidential candidate

This could be done according to the by election method. But more likely a pre arranged agreement would be necessary.

Possibly DP as the ‘official opposition’ could field the presidential candidate but on condition that they give a number of their constituencies to the other parties so that they would have less than half the total opposition seats. There would also be an arrangement to give cabinet posts accordingly. The Vice presidency could be given to second largest party in return for a few of their constituencies and so on.

This of course could be modified to take into account possible changes in the constitution and structure of government.



By December 2001 it had become clear that without linking the ‘big three’ it would not be possible to get a commitment from an opposition bloc to have a joint approach to the polls.


After many aborted meetings the group finally got Kibaki, Ngilu and Wamalwa into the same room with representatives of most opposition parties. At this meeting the name National Alliance for Change was coined (NAC). Credit to Dr Ochuodho:


National Alliance for Change Meeting held on Tuesday January 29 2002. Trisan Hotel


Present:

1. Matere Keriri DP

2. Matu Wamae DP

3. C Murungaru DP

4. Shem Ochuodho PPF

5. Noah Wekesa (chairman) FK

6. Mohammed Kussoma SSA

7. Ngengi Muigai SSA

8. J Okwisa A LPK

9. M Kituyi PPF

10. Clement Gachanja SDP

11. Kiraitu Murungi DP

12. Jimmy Kagia SSA

13. Beth Mugo SDP

14. Kijana Wamalwa FK

15. Mwai Kibaki DP

16. G Ogango SDP

17. Patroba Mboya LDP

18. Mike Tanyassis SSA

19. Chris Gibagiri SSA

20. Joseph Kioko NPK

21. George Nyamweya DP

22. Kepta Ombati NCEC

23. Kivutha Kibwana NCEC

24. Kipruto arap Kirwa Kanu

25. John Katuku NPK

26. Charity Ngilu NPK

27. Johnson Muthama NPK

28. T K Mbathi NPK

29. Musikari Kombo FK

30. C Munyao DP

31. Hon Mwalulu DP

32. P Karuri SDP

33. Wanguhu Ng’ang’a SSA

34. A Galgalo FK

35. Jamal FK

36. Joe Donde FK

37. Alfelt Gunda PPF

38. Lucas Mboya PPF


The first half hour of the meeting is spent debating how many delegates should represent each party and how they will be selected.

It is resolved that the party chairman/lady will select four delegates who can represent the party at future meetings.

Additionally the Ngo’s present are put to task to explain their role in the NAC.


-Kepta Ombati. The Ncec is committed to progressive leadership regardless of whether it comes from kanu or the opposition. The Ncec has played a legitimate role in democratization of Kenya.

-Ngo’s are also useful in the monitoring of elections as well as civic education

-Shem Ochuodho. Suggests small parties and Ngo’s should be treated on a case by case basis. Respective members of Ngo’s can be invited as individuals rather than as organizations.

-Mwalulu. Supports inclusion of Ncec. Notes that not all progressive groups can be enjoined to the council. Suggests that the council concentrate on its’ strengths rather than weaknesses. Private sector and Ngo’s have solutions to offer political parties.

-Mutunga. Rules: the initiative will include DP, Ford Asili, NPK, whichever section of SDP wants to be included, Safina, Saba Saba Asili, NCEC, PPF. Ford People have been invited severally but not attended thought they had agreed at the highest level to do so.


The Council agreed to change the name from National Alliance to national Alliance for Change, NAC.

-Mutunga. Suggests the convening of a strategic committee.

-Beth Mugo. Suggests that the delegates should be close to the principal to ensure a reliable decision making process. Asks whether the NAC can soon hold a public rally in Nairobi.

The council decides to hold of on a public rally until the modalities of the NAC have been worked out and the NAC formally launched.

-Shem. suggests that id chits should be used for registration of voters. Cites the example that in last election the Electoral commission allowed voters in Keiyo to register with chits if they had not yet received their id’s. Use Feb to mobilize Kenyans to collect id’s and register for voters cards. Try to push EC to continue with voter registration through March 2002. Suggests that a petition be given to EC.

-Kibaki. Asks how far has the drafting of a memo for the Ghai team come.

-Kiraitu. Says constitutional committee is processing all parties’ papers on constitutional change with the intention of creating a single document that encompasses all their views. This will be presented to the committee. It should be ready in two weeks together with a separate document on electoral reforms.

-Wamalwa. Suggests that the final documents should be adopted by the council then distributed all over the country and publicized through the media so that wananchi can have its contents in mind when speaking to the Ghai team. Possibly have it serialized by the dailies. Urges the council to consider itself a government in waiting, a viable alternative to Kanu. Reminds the council that this is the first time in independent Kenya’s history that the economy has registered – growth.

-Kibaki. Asks whether the council is actually convinced that the NAC can win the election and take over government. Says there is no point going ahead with all the plans if we are not sure.

-Munyao. Supports the earlier suggestion that all constitutional amendment proposals should be morphed into one document.

-Mutunga. Asks whether the council wants elections with minimum or maximum reforms.

-Kibaki. The issue of interim changes should not arise. The Ghai teams mandate is to be ready by September 2002 and they have publicly said that they will meet that deadline. Says the council must be decisive and complete the constitutional changes document in one week and have it in to the commission.

-Kombo. Asks the council to adopt Kibaki’s proposal and do this in 1 week

-Wamalwa. Also agreed with the suggestion that document be prepared in a week. Says what the public want to know is will the opposition be united or not?

-Ngilu. Agrees with the proposal. Cautions the council. Moi has weapons. As of now the Ghai commission is still not entrenched in the constitution. Says we must come up with own plans that are independent of what Moi/Kanu will or will not do.

The council adopts the proposal to have the document ready in 1 week.

-Kibwana. Suggests the formation of a committee of the principals including the leaders of the various Ngo’s in the NAC. Says that the public must see that this time there is a different mood.

-Mugo. Asks whether the issue of a single presidential candidate can be resolved now. Says all the principals are here.

-Murungaru. Opposition must unite. The issue of economic reforms is a derivative of the opposition unity.

-Muigai. The principals should be formally approached and asked to decide on who will be the single candidate. This though should not be made public as it could give Kanu an edge. The public want to know that there will be a single candidate. Questions why Nyachae is not present yet he was invited and confirmed that he would be here.

The council prepares a press statement saying the following:


The NAC we are working on a formula to approach the constitutional changes and general elections as a unified pact.

This will be presented to the country shortly and a final decision given to the public about the deliberations on the single candidate and joint nominations for parliamentary seats.

The NAC appeals for a one month postponement of voter registration to give people more time to get id’s

Appeal to Kenyans to register as voters.


-Wekesa. Asked the council how to respond to the press when they question the absence of Nyachae. He said that he had personally met Nyachae and he (Nyachae) promised to be there.

-Shem. Said Nyachaes' letter was undelivered, though Kones knew but did not attend either.

-Donde. Told the council that there was a Ford people delegation at the hotel as early as 7.30 am for another function and they knew about this meeting but clearly chose not to attend.

-Kibaki. Suggested that the council avoid any discussion about Ford P

-Mugo. Asked all parties to ask their members to attend so that they would feel that they were included in the process.

-T Mbathi. Asked all council members to be punctual and ensure that information about the meetings got out in time.


The next meeting was scheduled for Wednesday February 6 2002 at Trisan hotel.



Meanwhile behind the scenes the PPF was lobbying with Fredrick Eibert Foundation, the Gender Center and other Ngo’s and embassies to support the effort. Some did others did not. PPF also met with members of the Kenya Private Sector Foundation to press for support for their own agenda but were not successful.


The group then seek a bigger and more up market meeting place and begin to develop some cohesiveness under NAC. They start meeting every fortnight at the Silver Springs Hotel where each Opposition party is represented by 4 members. In due course a memorandum of understanding is signed to formalize NAC.

These meetings were facilitated by PPF and sponsored by the Gender Centre. At a later stage other members of the council approached the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, who sponsored a number of retreats.

At this stage committees were set up to look into various aspects of the joint opposition strategy.

Key among the committees is the Strategic planning Committee convened by Hon Musikari Kombo and Hon Katuku.


COMMITTEES AND THEIR TERMS OF REFERENCE

Co-ordinating Committee:-

i. Develop a framework for consummating the Alliance

ii. Develop a common front for constitutional & electoral reforms, and in particular, a common position on the process led by the Ghai Commission

iii. Evolve a common economic blue-print for the Alliance

iv. Identify a suitable Secretariat for purposes of harmonizing and co-ordinating activities of the Alliance.

The Co-ordinating Committee was assisted in its work by several sub-committees:-

Constitutional & Electoral Reforms:-

i. Political direction of constitutional reforms

ii. Advise on legal processes and necessary roadmaps

iii. Common position on comprehensive constitutional reforms

iv. Common position on electoral reforms

v. Comprehensive Draft constitution.


Economic Reforms:-

i. Package for economic revival and sustainable growth (long & short term)

ii. Specific sectoral interventions (eg. Agriculture, Infrastructure, etc)

iii. Poverty reduction & wealth creation strategies

iv. Economic blue-print for a prosperous New Kenya (ultimate goal).


Strategic Planning:-

Whereas NACC co-ordinated activities of all the sub-committees and gave a political face to NAC, as well as overseeing its public relations, the Strategic Planning Sub-Committee was to produce a political action plan, and serve as the official think-tank for NAC.



Resource Mobilization:-

Raise and manage funds for logistics, secretariat, political action and general elections.

Two sub-committees, Communications Strategy (to gather and carefully disseminate intelligence, and handle media relations), and NAC Constitution Drafting, were also formed.

This committee met at the PPF offices on milimani road (ironically beside CID headquarters)


Their agenda was basically to see how best to integrate the opposition parties and to how to present themselves to the electorate. A crucial issue. They also kept tabs on Kanu and Ford People:


Strategic Planning Committee (NAC)

Meeting of 21 March 2002 at PPF office.

Attendance:

Michael Tanyasia absent

Kipruto Kirwa present

Noah Wekesa present

Ngengi Muigai present

Lucas Mboya present

Mwiraria absent

Musikari Kombo absent(with apologies, Convenor)

Kepta Ombati absent

Hon Katuku present


The meeting began at 12.00pm


This meeting was convened by Hon Kirwa and Hon Wekesa to speed up the activities of the strategic planning committee who were yet to hold a meeting.

The meeting was chaired by Hon Wekesa.


The meeting made the following observations.

The NAC should keep the youth in mind as they proceed with their different agendas. It was observed that in the past the youth had been sidelined from policy making yet they represented the largest block in Kenyan society and were the future of the nation. Their role is yet to be clearly defined in NAC.

The issue of a single presidential candidate is of utmost importance. The meeting observed that Kenyans were waiting to see whether NAC could agree on this and the result would determine the commitment of NAC supporters. Additionally it was not lost on the meeting that the press have all but ruled out the possibility of a single presidential candidate.

The meeting deliberated on how to go about having joint rallies and where and when they would begin. It was decided that for the time being the most important factor would be arriving at a working formula for the general election then selling the same to the electorate.

The meeting also focused on the issue of a secretariat. It was noted that NAC urgently needed a secretariat at this stage and that the setting up on one need not be an expensive or tedious affair. The basic requirements would be premises, minimal office equipment and a phone. The office would be manned by volunteers.

It was proposed that each member of NAC (individual) give KShs 5,000 to this cause. It was resolved that this would be handed over to the resource mobilization committee.

The meeting also decided that it would be in NAC’s own interest to ignore the on goings in Kanu in as far as they did not directly relate to NAC affairs. It was observed that more progress would be made by focusing on NAC’s own agenda and timetable and being active rather than reactive.

The meeting also observed that the last 15 years or so of misrule has had a negative psychological effect on Kenyans. As a result it would be necessary to formulate a strategy to rebuild Kenya lost sense of pride and patriotism. Equally Kenyans needed to be reassured that the organs of state are there to serve not harass them. The organs of state and all government officials are servants of the people not the other way round, therefore a redefinition of government offices and officers as well as their roles including that of the executive is in order.

The meeting agreed to come up with a draft structure for a government of national unity to present to the council. It was agreed that the draft would be ready the first week of April 2002.

The meeting observed that the activities of the NAC were not filtering down to the Mps’

who were not part of the regular NAC council or coordinating committee meetings. It was recommended that the strategic planning committee or the coordinating committee compile a report that could be presented at a joint meeting with the nec’s of all NAC affiliated parties to bring the members up to speed.

It was observed that both the economic proposal and the constitutional amendments proposal were well executed and presented.

Finally the meeting observed that NAC had worked very well so far and as such become the main axis of the opposition. With this in mind it was further noted that the NAC was in effect functioning as one party.

The committee strongly recommended the formation of a single party comprising of all NAC affiliated political parties. This the committee believe will solve the ‘grey areas’, problem in agreeing on which parties will field candidates in which areas and simplify the nomination problem.

It was observed that a radical problem needs a radical solution.

The benefits of forming a single party were noted as:

1. Likely to reduce tribal tensions all over the country.

2. The party will be very well received by wananchi all over Kenya. It will prove that the opposition is ‘serious’ and ‘mature’.

3. The party will receive a lot of support from foreign governments and organizations.

4. The move would completely and utterly disorganize new Kanu.

5. The move would be more radical than the Kanu NDP merger.

6. Since the NAC are already working together it should not be as difficult as it looks to execute.

7. The single party would be more representative of Kenyans from all communities than any other party in Kenya including Kanu.

The meeting agreed to continue agenda at the next meeting scheduled for 27 March 2002.



Strategic Planning Committee (NAC)

Meeting of 27 March 2002 at PPF office.

Attendance:

Michael Tanyasia present

Ngengi Muigai present

Lucas Mboya present

Mwiraria absent

Musikari Kombo absent(with apologies, Convenor)

Kepta Ombati absent

Hon Katuku present


The meeting began at 11.00pm

The meeting received a draft proposal for a government of national unity from Hon Katuku.

It was agreed that all members would go over the document and present their views on it as well as recommendations for any changes at the next meeting.

The committee then continued to debate the proposal of forming a single party.

Among the proposals made were:

1. Adopt the NPK as the party all NAC members would join. The reason being the national alliance of Nginyo Kariuki may prove problematic to acquire. Secondly the National Party of Kenya already had the name National in it (NAC). The NPK has fewer members than the other two larger parties and would seem more neutral. The NPK has not run in a general election before.

It was observed that the NAC principals may not want to join the same party. It was recommended that should the principals refuse to join they could run on their own party tickets independently of the ‘new party’ if they could not agree on a single candidate.

It was further agreed that the committee has recommended a principle to be followed and that a proposal to form a single party would be drawn up and presented to the full council as soon as possible.

A further meeting was scheduled for April 3 2001.

The committee continued their deliberations while other committees were meeting in various places in the city, including the membership committee, recruitment committee and the coordinating committee that comprised the principals of all parties. This group gave guidance to the committees and reported to the NAC Council that was the decision making body.

By May 2001 great progress had been made and it was evident that Kanu were in trouble with NDP and their merger. A bonus for NAC. The issue now became whether the parties would go under the banner of an alliance or as a single party. Of course the other issue was who would be a presidential candidate and how to avoid stepping on each other's toes.

These issues were given to the strategic committee to deliberate and report to the Coordinating



To Be Continued Tomorrow

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/-