Kenyan opposition leader Raila Odinga, on a visit to Berlin, has been
talking about the security situation in his country, one year after the
Westgate attack. He is also campaigning for a referendum on the
constitution.
The visit of the Kenyan opposition leader Raila Odinga
to Germany coincides with the first anniversary of the attack on the
Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi in which more than 60 people were
killed and nearly 200 injured. Islamist group al-Shabab claimed
responsibility for the attack. DW's Andrea Schmidt spoke to Mr Odinga in Berlin about Kenya's security and political situation.
Mr Odinga, how would you describe the current political climate in Kenya?
I would say generally stable apart from the issue of referendum and
security. The security situation in the country is worrying,
particularly because of the threats from al-Shabab and the international
terrorism. The economic situation is a little bit difficult, the
inflation rate is high, the cost of living is also high for the people
in the country. But generally I would say the situation is stable.
You mentioned security in the country. Just one year ago
al-Shabab attacked the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi, videos showed
the security forces looting the mall and up to now nobody is taking
responsibility. What's your take on that?
It's very unfortunate that to date Kenyans don't know who was
responsible for the Westgate mall attack. When the incident took place
we came together, both government and the opposition, to mobilize the
people in face of this threat to national security. We urged that
investigations be carried out, the president promised investigations;
unfortunately later on he recanted and refused to set up a judicial
commission of inquiry. So the question is still out there: Who were
they? How was it organized and how was it handled? These are very
fundamental issues and we are still begging for answers.
You have been spearheading a referendum to change parts of
the four-year-old constitution, collecting already more than one million
signatures, but you yourself played an important role in amending the
current constitution. What is it that you want to change and why do you
think there is a need for its amendment now?
Well, let me take you back to the American constitution, which is a
remarkable constitution. It was amended within six months of being
promulgated. The same thing happened to the French constitution. So it
is not a question of longevity of implementation of the constitution
that's at issue. It is whether there are flaws which require attention,
and the answer is yes, there are. Particularly with regard to the
devolution chapter. The devolution chapter is a cause of concern, how
wealth is shared, how revenue is shared between the national and the
county government.
We want a clear formula which is not vague like it is right now.
Right now it is saying that it is a minimum of 15 percent, but does not
fix the maximum. We want to ensure that between 40 and 45 percent of the
revenue goes to the county government and the rest remains for the
national government. The other is the issue of ethnic inclusivity of our
constitution, and yet another one is to protect the property rights,
particularly the land issue, to reinforce the position of the National
Land Commission in the constitution. And then the other one is wealth
sharing, that is things like minerals and other things like wildlife and
so on which are found in the counties, how are these dealt with in the
constitution? How do we share the wealth between the county government
and the national government?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment