Revealed:Why NASA changed presidential candidate at the last minute

The truth is, NASA took a long time to decide on its presidential flag bearer. While they tried hard to convince Kenyans that the discussions were cordial and there was unity, many suspected otherwise. Today, I’ll share insider details on what was happening behind the scenes to show you just how contentious the decision was. Let’s start with a leaked, confidential document from NASA’s steering committee outlining their choice for the flag bearer.

This document, drafted by a lawyer, is significant. Lawyers carefully choose their words, and this one explicitly states that Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka was the selected NASA presidential candidate for 2017, pending ratification by the NASA Delegates Forum on March 22, 2017. The language is critical here. Words like “decision” and “confirm” make it clear that the steering committee’s choice was meant to be final—no further debate or discussion. The principles (party leaders) were not even mentioned as part of the ratification process, suggesting they were to learn of the decision along with everyone else at the delegates' forum.

This implies that the steering committee had full authority to choose the flag bearer, bypassing the principles. However, it seems the process was hijacked before reaching the delegates' forum. Instead of following the intended process, there were interventions and significant changes, altering the final outcome. The document makes it clear that the original plan was for the committee’s decision to go directly to the delegates for ratification without interference.

The word “ratification” itself means giving formal consent to make a decision officially valid. It does not suggest further deliberations or negotiations. Clearly, something disrupted this original plan, leading to a tug-of-war among NASA’s top leaders.

To understand what happened, we must examine the events following the date on this leaked document. On February 22, the steering committee had selected Kalonzo Musyoka as the flag bearer. By March 16, Kalonzo had gone to Wiper Party headquarters to receive a nomination certificate in a highly publicized event, complete with press coverage and speeches. This move seemed designed to assert his position, as Kalonzo likely anticipated that his candidacy might face resistance.

Statements like "No Kalonzo, No NASA" and public outbursts from his supporters, such as those by legislator Francis Nyenze, started to make sense in this context. These reactions reflected attempts to defend Kalonzo’s position amidst growing tension within NASA. Other significant events, such as the Machakos meeting dubbed the "Machakos Declaration," also point to the power struggles within the coalition.

It’s clear that Kalonzo’s nomination by the steering committee faced resistance. His supporters believed he was the most strategically placed candidate to win votes from Jubilee strongholds, particularly in Central Kenya, Rift Valley, and Northeastern regions. Kalonzo himself declared in November 2016 that he was Kenya’s “Donald Trump,” positioning himself as the best candidate to defeat Uhuru Kenyatta.

Analysts argued that Kalonzo’s candidacy might have made NASA more acceptable in Jubilee-dominated regions compared to Raila Odinga. However, national appeal and decision-making capabilities—both critical for a president—were areas where Kalonzo’s leadership was questioned. For example, ongoing internal disputes within Wiper highlighted leadership challenges under Kalonzo, with key figures like Senator Johnson Muthama and David Musila leaving the party due to unresolved grievances.