Forward from Uncle Sainey on the Kenyatta potential Presidency....

 Demba,

The problem with Kenya since gaining political Independence is no
different from other African countries, only that theirs had the
"Land" and "Landless" issues; from Kenyatta to Moi.It was this same
"Land' issue which was one of the major catalyts in their war of
Independence, that brought about creation of 'Mau Mau'. Fifty years of
independence, and the same problems !!!

The history of their fathers in the political struggle to liberate
Kenya was one of determination and sacrifice.Mzee Jomo Kenyatta and
Jaramogi Odinga Oginga were comrades in the initial phase of the
struggle for political independence, the latter had a more radical
position on the land issues and nationalization.Oginga became the
first Vice President to Kenyatta.

Their children have taken  different political agendas, which is not
uncommon in African and also world politics.The trouble with Uhuru
Kenyatta, is the wealth in millions of dollars and the amount of land
he and his family have amassed in the name of their late father.He and
his family are accused of owning vast media oulets, including TV
channel K24, several radio stations, and the 'The Peoples Newspaper'
and many more private enterprises.This becomes a problem about his
honesty, and leadership qualities; but he is a tough kid who wouldn't
go or be pushed out of politics easy.Basking on his late fathers
shadows, he may not win this time around, but he isn't giving up
either.As for the ICC case and indictments, many observers belief that
is the least of his worries; with his supporters calling the charges
as foreign interference on domestic matters.Even if he won and became
President, he would be only the second president in Africa to be
indicted by the ICC, next to Sudan's Bachir; and how far has that gone
?

Jomo Kenyatta, died in 1978 and was replaced by Arap Moi; who brought
both the children of the founding fathers to the political lime light;
only to find out that they are not what he had envisioned.He too
messed up big time, and the challenges coming from them will consume
him and led to an economic and political nightmare, not even seen in
the "Mau Mau' uprising.

The issues about Uhuru Kenyatta, are not that new in the African
political landscape; it's just another 'deja vu' in other
words.Timothy Gachanga, gives us a better picture many years ago, of
the ongoing struggle in Kenyan politics, all tied to the 'Land'
question.
Below is an article he wrote seven years ago, on the roots of the
culture of political corruption in Kenya, starting with the old man
and first head of state Jomo Kenyatta.
Sainey


Kenya: "The Land Is Ours"

by Timothy Gachanga
June-October 2006
africafiles.org

Introduction

It is unfortunate that the problem of landlessness in Kenya was not a
passing phase after all. It was not a problem to be shed like the skin
of a snake and then tossed away and forgotten. After forty three years
of independence (achieved in 1963), landlessness continues to dominate
political discourse among politicians who use it over and over again
to gain popularity and power, creating a class of politicians who
ultimately become masters of the double discourse of theory and
practice in their in dealing with the issue. While on one side of this
double discourse politicians openly condemn government failure to deal
with the issue, on the other side they exacerbate the issue by giving
land to their cronies in return for political support. This has made
independent Kenya, especially during the Kenyatta and Moi regimes,
contradict and bring shame upon what had been promised as independence
for the country.

Background

The problem of landlessness in Kenya goes back to the advent of
colonialism when white settlers hived off parts of the Kenyan
highlands and claimed ownership. But subsequent hopes that the land
would revert back to the Africans were never fully realized. In an
interview with a local TV station this year during the Madaraka
celebrations (Madaraka is celebrated on June 1st every year to mark
the day Kenya gained independence), ex-Mau Mau veterans were still
expressing disappointment over Kenyatta’s declaration that no land was
free. Kenyans had to work for it. "This was a humiliating betrayal for
Mau Mau. After spending years in the forest and risking our lives, we
thought Kenyatta would recognize our sacrifice by rewarding us with
land grants," complained an ex-Mau Mau veteran. They expressed
disappointment over the absurdity of having to pay for "land that was
rightly theirs". Understandably, the majority of landless people were
unable to raise even the basic sum needed as a down payment for the
purchase of "their land". They had no option other than to let go of
the land which they regarded as their mother or the umbilical cord
through which their spiritual and mental contentment was realized. It
is this spiritual attachment to the land that made the Mau Mau
sacrifice their lives and take arms to topple British colonialism.

Some landless Kenyans were accommodated as squatters by the remaining
white farmers or the new bourgeoisie. Others joined cooperative
societies or limited companies that purchased large farms which were
later subdivided and shared out among the various members. (Even
today, some cooperatives are still in operation and are subdividing
land and sharing it out to their members.) This, however, was not
without flaws. The process was riddled with blunders, quick-witted
recoveries and fascinating power plays — all spiced with an occasional
tinge of unscrupulousness. The directors were the new bourgeoisie who
could use their influence to acquire more land and give it to their
political cronies.

Later the government introduced alternative, cheaper schemes for
settling the landless. In 1965, the Squatter Settlement Scheme was
initiated whereby land was obtained through government expropriation
and from confiscated mismanaged lands and donated lands. These schemes
were marred by political interference, with politicians using the
opportunity to reward their supporters. The Kenyatta and Moi regimes
were notorious in this regard. They failed to recognize the fact that
it is impossible for the government to resettle the landless without
first possessing the land through a major nationalization programme.
Even today, thousands of acres of land are still owned by former
colonial settlers which they run as ranches or as wildlife
conservation areas. As well, former home guards from both the Kenyatta
and Moi regimes and some top NARC (National Rainbow Coalition)
politicians themselves own thousands of acres that may have been
acquired dubiously.

The Kenyatta and Moi regimes have also come under criticism because
decisions about distribution and redistribution of land were made in
offices behind closed doors. There was little listening to how people
who live close to the African soil express their sense of belonging
and practise their values. Because the Kenyan Government relies on
land laws and policies established under the British colonial
government, many disadvantaged groups are denied ownership of their
ancestral lands. A good example is the Ogieks who live in the Mau
Forest in Rift Valley Province.

The Ogieks

The Ogieks are a local hunting and honey-gathering people that have
lived in the Mau Forest for hundreds of years. The colonial Forest Act
did not recognize them as forest dwellers. Instead it regarded them as
"outlaws". If you were not a forest officer, living in the forest was
outlawed. The Trust Land Act (Cap 288), Forest Act (Cap 385), and
Government Lands Act (Cap 280) of May 1963 do not regard the Ogieks as
a forest dwelling community. Moreover, the courts are reluctant to
address indigenous rights.

Efforts by consecutive governments to resettle the Ogieks were marred
by the lack of clear resettlement policies and political greed. This
happened in 1963 and again in 1976 when the Kenyatta government tried
to resettle them. Politicians seized chunks of land for themselves and
their relatives at the expense of the Ogieks. The Ogieks ended up
losing the land which they claim was rightfully theirs. In the
mid-1970s, the Maasai, like the Ogieks, lost huge tracts of land
through the old colonial legislation when they were relocated from
land that was subsequently included within Amboseli National Park, one
of the continent's most famous wildlife reserves. In response, Maasai
groups began systematically killing many of Amboseli's most prized
tourist attractions, including dozens of leopards, elephants and
rhinos. This programme of extermination was undertaken as part of a
desperate protest campaign designed to counter the growing threat that
tour operations posed to Maasai land rights. Although a compromise was
later reached, the Maasai lost many of their traditional land rights
to profitable government and environmental interests.

In 1988, the Moi Government also made an attempt to resettle the
Ogieks. The government initiated a settlement scheme at Ndoinet in
South and Western Mau in which the Kipsigis and the Ogieks were to be
resettled. But the Ogieks refused to participate in this scheme
arguing that it was their ancestral land and that they did not need to
share it with the Kipsigis. The government nevertheless appeared
determined to have the Kipsisgis benefit from the land.

Since 1993, the government has been carving out huge parts of the Mau
Forest for settlement but the Ogieks have not benefited. Instead
senior state house officials have ended up securing huge chunks of the
land, and senior Rift Valley politicians have used the land to reward
their supporters. Attempts by Ogiek representatives to Moi and to
other officials in his government to protect them proved unsuccessful.
In 1997 they went to court to stop the surveying and allocation of
their land to others. Their lawsuit eventually went to the High Court,
but the case was dismissed in March 2000. Judges ruled that there was
"no reason why the Ogieks should be the only favoured community to own
and exploit natural resources, a privilege not enjoyed or extended to
other communities" (Daily Nation, May 30, 2002).

Forests

In February 2001, the Government issued a gazette notice of its
intention to take 167,742 acres from the country’s 14 forests,
ostensibly to settle landless people. This was met with considerable
opposition. The then environmental minister had earlier claimed that
much of the forest area to be taken was already occupied by squatters.
However, it has since been established that the forests were indeed
intact and had not been occupied by squatters. The notice did not
explain the reasons for expropriation neither did it supply
information on specifically who was to benefit. It merely said later
that the move was meant to rationalize forest boundaries with
developments on the ground (Quarterly Peace Monitor, 1:2, 2002, p.
23).

After publishing the gazette notice, the government reportedly
deposited the proposed boundary plans in a remote district forest
department’s offices allegedly to deny those who opposed it a chance
to scrutinize it before the 28-day notice period expired. Though the
proposal was made on January 30th, it was only released on February
16, 2001, further justifying public suspicion. On January 21, 2002, a
Daily Nation insight report exposed the government’s attempt to treat
the 28-day notice to expropriate the forest lands as a mere formality.
While the allocations had been made illegally, the gazettement would
legitimize them and thus quell the public outcry. Many forests had
been allocated before the notice was made. In Mt. Kenya Forest
government surveyors had moved in even before the expiry of the notice
(Daily Nation, January 21, 2002).

Current Policy

When the NARC Government came to power, it recognized landlessness as
one of the root causes of poverty and inequality. Their election
Manifesto stated:

Land is one of the most contentious issues in Kenya today and has been
so since colonial days. Land is of particular interest to Kenyans
because of a number of factors, including the fact that 80% of Kenyans
are rural peasants who eke their livelihood out of land. For such
people land is life and any threat to their land resources causes fear
and panic. Indeed our struggle for national independence revolved
around the land issue.

Unlike the Kenyatta and Moi regimes, the NARC Government recognized
the need to repossess the land still owned by white settlers so as to
resettle the landless. In the draft Constitution, which was one of the
promises made to Kenyans, it stated that no foreigner would be allowed
to lease land for a period exceeding ninety nine years. Any land with
a lease greater than ninety nine years would revert back to the State.
Though the draft was rejected, this clause was not contentious,
meaning that the Government and the people were in agreement that the
land was rightfully theirs (Kenya Gazette Supplement, 2005). When NARC
eventually came to power, there was limited repossession of small
pieces of land that had been grabbed by Moi cronies. There was also a
plan to repossess underutilized land to be distributed to the
landless. Addressing the media in early 2004, the then Minister of
Lands and Settlement, Mr. Amos Kimunya, said that the government was
touring farming regions to identify underutilized land. "We will tell
them 'we are giving you one more year, if you can’t demonstrate to us
that you can develop it then give us back the land,' Mr. Kimunya said.
'Our emphasis now is maximizing the land use. For us all land should
be economically and efficiently used'" (Daily Nation, February 11,
2004). Addressing the nation during this year’s Madaraka Day,
President Kibaki ordered the Ministry of Lands to issue title deeds to
squatters in Coast Province as one way of boosting the economic growth
(Daily Nation, June 2, 2006).

Popular Challenges

Despite the centrality of the land issue, the process and the existing
land laws are in conflict and in some instances their application is
not relevant in some parts of the country. Abuse of existing land laws
and other state powers has led to irregular allocation (the grabbing
of public land) to a favoured and privileged few. In January 2003 for
instance, villagers in Keiyo District invaded a 1000-acre public
forest area which they claimed had been irregularly allocated to a
Cabinet Minister. The land was to be used for a memorial in honour of
the Minister’s mother. The villagers cut the barbed wire fence at
several places to allow their animals into the memorial park. The
invasion was led by community elders. The elders claimed that the
forest was a trust land and a sacred ground used for traditional
initiation rites and that it was taboo for an individual to acquire
it, due to its cultural value (Daily Nation, January 9, 2003).

In March this year, over 3000 Ogiek squatters were left homeless after
police and forest officers razed 120 houses on forest land. Reacting
to the eviction, the squatters complained that they had occupied the
land since time immemorial. They depended on beehives and other
products of forests for subsistence as well as the maintenance of
their social, ethical and spiritual order. Among these groups, bride
price is counted in bee hives, not cattle. When they are displaced
from their land their economic and spiritual security is uprooted.
They wondered how a law passed in a far-away city could decide that
"their land" is no longer theirs. While the government views the land
as a strategic national resource worthy of protection, the squatters
view it as a cultural heritage and as inseparable from their life
(Daily Nation, March 13, 2006).

In Meru, the community is up in arms following irregular land
adjudication procedures. Late last year, at the sacred lake of
Bututia, located off Meru-Maua road at Kianjai, Meru North, elders
complained bitterly that they had been evicted from their ancestral
lands by outsiders who have been allocated land in their area. Some
have been rendered effectively landless in that they have been pushed
into a sacred lake area which the community believes should not be
settled. The lake is a gazetted area partially covered by water and
surrounding marshes. It measures approximately 250 acres (Gazzette
Notice no. 8988, The Antiques and Monuments Act, Cap 215). "This is
where all rain making ceremonies for the Ameru people were conducted
and no one is supposed to settle here," an elder said while pointing
to a bird on top of the water where the boundary mark for his land
was. The elders threatened to conduct a cursing ritual on the
outsiders who dared settle in their land. Cursing rituals are not new
in this area. On December 16, 2005, elders conducted a cursing ritual
so as to stop the encroachment and logging going on in Giitune sacred
forest located some seven kilometers from the town of Meru.

Conclusion

Since Europeans began exploiting Africa centuries ago, the value of
land to Africans and non-Africans alike has been determined partly by
the worth of its natural resources. Over the centuries, the desire for
agricultural products and valuable minerals led to violence,
population displacement, landlessness and environmental degradation at
the hands of colonialists. Though colonialism has ended, local and
regional conflicts over the control of land still threaten the peace.
In Kenya, the land problem has at times taken an ugly ethnic turn in
which thousands have been killed and thousands displaced from their
homes. The problem doesn’t seem to be coming to an end any time soon.
The rich continue to hoard and control land. The landless and the poor
continue to struggle for "their land". The result is continued
conflict. However, there is a need for correcting historical wrongs
and for finding how best to incorporate communal interests over the
years. Without this, the squatters, the indigenous communities and the
small holding peasants will continue to lose land rights to local and
national economic and political elites because of the distortions in
the structures regulating access to land.



















________________________________
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 10:09:29 -0800
Subject: Jombo Kenyatta's son Uhuru Kenyatta Possible New President -
of Kenya???
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
CC: [log in to unmask]


Uncle Sainey,

Was wondering if you or history students such as Dr. Jallow could put
some light on the possibility of former Kenyan leader Jombo Kenyatta's
son becoming new President of Kenya?  Any recollection of Jombo
Kenyatta's reign in Kenya, role in fighting for Independence in Africa
and promotion for African Unity and Pan African-ism...

It can be noted that Uhuru Kenyatta is currently allegedly indited by
the ICC for previous crimes and killings in Kenya... Would this
Jeopardize his potential Presidency and what would it mean on the
credibility of the ICC... LJD any opinion on this????

Thanks

Demba

--
"Be the change you want to see in the World"


-- 
"Be the change you want to see in the World"

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤