For the elected legislators to have independent decision making on matters presented to them in their respective floor then the electorate to start interrogating election of representative on independent candidacy

In Kenya’s contemporary political landscape, there is an undeniable sense that elected officials, particularly those in the National Assembly and the Senate, have become entrapped by forces that compel them to affirm almost any policy or directive presented before them, regardless of its merit. One striking case study that exemplifies this is the impeachment debate of the Deputy President. This case exposed the deep entrenchment of political coercion, where political parties, intimidation tactics, and external pressures manipulate elected officials into endorsing decisions they might not personally agree with.

The debate over whether to impeach the Deputy President was a glaring illustration of this political captivity. Allegations were brought forward, accusations of gross misconduct and violations of constitutional responsibilities, yet the evidence presented seemed flimsy at best, failing to substantiate the claims. The National Assembly's proceedings, which were meant to be an impartial examination of the facts, quickly turned into a mere formality. Public perception had already solidified around the view that the National Assembly had morphed into a rubber stamp for executive whims. This shift was no longer shocking to the Kenyan public. Sober minds expected little from the National Assembly, having long since recognized its compromised position. However, the case was forwarded to the Senate, which until this point had been held in higher regard.

For many Kenyans, the Senate had represented a last bastion of independent thought and critical decision-making. It was viewed as the chamber where matters were deliberated upon with a degree of impartiality and statesmanship, and thus, when the impeachment was passed to the Senate, hopes were high that it would be subjected to rigorous scrutiny. Unfortunately, the Senate, too, succumbed to external pressures, and the outcome was a near-replication of the National Assembly’s verdict. Despite widespread acknowledgment that the allegations lacked substance, the Senate still approved the impeachment in what appeared to be a predetermined outcome.

The ease with which the Senate fell in line with the National Assembly's position demonstrated a profound shift in Kenyan politics. For many observers, this was not just another political move but rather a reflection of how political institutions had been captured and rendered impotent in their duty to act as checks on executive power. The esteem that the Senate once held was eroded in the public’s view, as it became clear that even this institution was vulnerable to being pocketed by external forces.

The Role of Political Parties in Political Slavery

One of the key factors driving this form of political enslavement is the dominance of political parties. In Kenya, political parties wield immense power over their members, often at the expense of independent thinking and decision-making. Party loyalty is prioritized above all else, and those who deviate from the party’s official position face severe consequences, ranging from being sidelined from committees to outright expulsion from the party. This reality creates an environment where elected officials are not free to exercise their judgment but must instead adhere to the dictates of party leadership, regardless of whether the policy in question serves the public interest.

Political parties in Kenya are often more concerned with maintaining power than with fostering good governance. They act as gatekeepers, ensuring that their members toe the line, even when it means endorsing policies that are clearly flawed. In the case of the Deputy President’s impeachment, it was evident that many lawmakers were not convinced of the merit of the allegations. However, they were compelled to vote in favor of impeachment, not because they believed in the case, but because the party demanded it.

This scenario highlights a significant flaw in the political party system as it operates in Kenya. Rather than serving as vehicles for the representation of the people’s interests, political parties have become tools for controlling legislators. The party whip system, where members are reminded of the consequences of straying from the party’s official position, ensures that dissent is rare, and meaningful debate is stifled. In essence, political parties in Kenya are contributing to a system of political slavery, where elected officials are little more than puppets, their strings pulled by party leaders.

The situation is exacerbated by the fact that Kenyan political parties are rarely ideologically grounded. Unlike in other democracies where parties represent distinct political philosophies, Kenyan parties are often built around individuals and ethnic loyalties rather than coherent policy platforms. As a result, there is little room for principled disagreement within parties, and the expectation is that members will fall in line, regardless of the policy or issue at hand. This further entrenches the system of political slavery, as members are bound not by a shared vision for the country but by loyalty to party bosses.

The Consequences of Party-Based Intimidation

The intimidation of elected officials by political parties has far-reaching consequences. When leaders are unable to make decisions independently, it undermines the democratic process. Lawmakers are elected to represent their constituents and to make decisions based on what is best for the country. However, when party interests take precedence, the needs and desires of the people are sidelined. This leads to poor governance and a lack of accountability, as lawmakers are more focused on pleasing their party leaders than on fulfilling their duties to the electorate.

The case of the Deputy President’s impeachment is a perfect example of how party-based intimidation can lead to poor decision-making. Had lawmakers been free to vote based on the evidence before them, it is likely that the outcome would have been different. Instead, the need to comply with party directives led to an outcome that many believed was unjust and unwarranted.

Furthermore, the prevalence of political intimidation discourages capable individuals from entering politics. Many Kenyans who might otherwise seek public office are deterred by the knowledge that they will be expected to sacrifice their principles in favor of party loyalty. This results in a political landscape where the most ambitious and independent-minded individuals are sidelined, and mediocrity thrives. The end result is a political system that is less responsive to the needs of the people and more focused on maintaining the status quo.

The Case for Independent Candidates

Given the stranglehold that political parties have over elected officials, there is a strong case to be made for promoting the election of independent candidates. Independent candidates are not beholden to party interests, and as a result, they are free to make decisions based on their judgment and the needs of their constituents. By electing more independent candidates, Kenyans can begin to break the cycle of political slavery that has characterized the country’s politics for so long.

Independent candidates offer a way out of the party-based system that currently dominates Kenyan politics. Without the pressure of party leaders breathing down their necks, independent candidates can engage in more thoughtful and logical decision-making. They are free to evaluate policies based on their merits and to act in the best interests of their constituents rather than in the interests of a political party. In the context of the Deputy President’s impeachment, for example, independent candidates might have been more willing to challenge the flawed case presented against him, leading to a more just outcome.

Moreover, electing more independent candidates can foster a more accountable political system. When lawmakers are not bound by party interests, they are more likely to be held accountable by their constituents. This can lead to better governance and a political system that is more responsive to the needs of the people

The debate over the impeachment of Kenya’s Deputy President exposed the deep-rooted political slavery that grips the country’s elected officials. The forces of political parties, intimidation, and external pressures have ensnared lawmakers, preventing them from making independent decisions based on evidence and reason. The National Assembly’s rubber-stamp behavior and the Senate’s disappointing capitulation to these forces highlight the urgent need for reform in Kenya’s political system.

To break free from this cycle of political slavery, Kenyans must begin to consider the election of independent candidates. By electing leaders who are not beholden to party interests, the country can move toward a political system that values independent thought, accountability, and good governance. This shift is essential if Kenya is to develop a truly democratic and responsive political system.