ODM-K: Selection By Delegates or Consensus?

By Prof. Mauri Yambo

I think the debate continues, but the ''consensus'' bloc just can't win it -- not with the latest assertion by Uhuru that whatever consensus is arrived at must be approved by the delegates. In the name of democracy, he is right to insist on that.

Incidentally, the route to consensus was inadvertently missed some time back -- the moment it was decided that ODM-K would be a unitary party with individual as opposed to corporate membership. And that was not a bad decision, either -- only that its unintended consequences are being felt belatedly.

The really amazing thing in this debate is the impression being given by the pro-consensus wing that there is no merit in nomination by delegates, while nomination by consensus has no demerits, and is the rational way to go. The questions that have not been answered are these: who will the parties to the consensus-building be? Will it be every Tom-Dick-and-Harriet who has declared an interest in being President? Supposing another 100 candidates declare their interest, will they also join the ''party''? Who will be the bouncers to keep out the many likely gate-crashers? Above all, how will the bash escape the tag of a ''private members' club'' -- a la Muthaiga Golf Club? What role for ordinary members, through their delegates, does the consensus wing have in mind: (a) a direct (deciding) role? (b) a rubber-stamp role? (c) none?

In my view, there are only two and possibly three (the third most likely squeaking through as a compromise candidate) of the ODM-K luminaries with any serious hope of winning the actual presidential election -- if they can secure the nomination in the first place. The problem is that the winner of the party nomination may be any one of a somewhat larger group. Depending on how the aspirants ''romance'' the delegates -- and there is going to be selection by delegates -- any one of five may win the nomination. These are: Raila, Kalonzo, Mudavadi, Ruto and Uhuru. The others, seriously, don't have a chance -- not this year. I simply I don't see where they will get the numbers -- and the passion. The sooner they stopped fuzzying an already complicated and very serious matter the better.

If the pro-consensus wing wins this debate, what is to stop it from insisting that even nominees for Parliamentary and Civic seats be selected by their own version of consensus?