Kenyans React with Alarm to Proposed Presidential Term Extension

 

The Kenyan public is in a state of anxiety following Senator Samson Cherargei’s proposal to the National Dialogue Committee to extend the presidential term from five to seven years. Drawing parallels with Rwanda, where President Paul Kagame serves seven-year terms, concerns have escalated, especially after former IEBC commissioner Roselyn Akombe remarked on Twitter that if this proposal were implemented, President William Ruto could potentially serve for 19 years. This would include the possibility of starting afresh in 2027 for two additional seven-year terms.

Akombe’s comments highlight that Kenya faced a similar constitutional change in 1992 when presidential term limits were first introduced. Many Kenyans fear that the Kenya Kwanza government, with its parliamentary majority, could push through this proposal, as seen with the Finance Bill 2023.

Is This a Genuine Threat to Kenyan Democracy?

The proposal has sparked debates across the nation. Some believe it’s a calculated move from UDA to test the waters, following similar comments from Fafi MP Salah Yakub in 2022 about scrapping term limits entirely. While critics argue this might merely be a tactic to divert attention from pressing national issues, others see it as a serious attempt to consolidate power.

Historical Context: Lessons from 1992

Kenya’s history offers insights into the origins of presidential term limits. In 1991, under mounting internal and international pressure, President Daniel Moi reintroduced multi-party democracy and presidential term limits. However, these moves were strategically crafted to maintain his grip on power for another decade, despite the opposition's optimism at the time.

Today, 2023 is vastly different from 1992. Kenyans are more politically aware and mobilized, making it unlikely for such a move to pass without significant resistance.

The Constitutional Hurdle and Public Sentiment

For such a proposal to succeed, it must pass through Parliament with a two-thirds majority and then be subjected to a public referendum. Historically, no government in Kenya has successfully rigged a referendum, as seen in the 2005 defeat of a government-backed constitutional draft. Moreover, the overwhelming public frustration with the government’s performance could make the referendum a battleground.

A referendum on this issue could incite widespread public unrest, potentially leading to unprecedented political instability. Analysts warn that a revolution could erupt if Kenyans perceive their democracy is being eroded further.

Conclusion

While the proposal has caused alarm, the likelihood of it succeeding remains uncertain. The legal, logistical, and public challenges it faces are formidable. However, even the mere suggestion of such a change risks aggravating tensions in an already volatile political climate.