On the professional practice of normal presidential retirement

The country is now experiencing an unexpected but highly welcome intermission from the unseemly spectacle of former President Uhuru Kenyatta’s farcical post-retirement meltdown.

When he summoned national media to declare that he was not afraid of anyone, and vowed to do everything he can to protect his family, there was little indication that a strategic retreat was on the cards, nor that it would take the form of a vacation abroad.

One hopes that that phase of transgressive absurdity is now in the past so that, in the time-honoured manner of loving families, Kenyans can commence the process of rehabilitating a dear elder by wilfully forgetting awkward moments.

In any event, we are all happy for the respite from prolonged distress due to persistent exposure to Kenyatta’s reckless infringement of elementary norms of professional politics and, in particular, presidential practice.

It is understood that the presidency is the absolute summit of political achievement, and that anyone who manages to ascend to its vertiginous prospect deserves the glory that comes with it, having prevailed against innumerable odds, formidable adversaries, accomplished rivals and the unrelenting demands of the infernal crucible that is Kenyan politics.

Superlatives are absolute, and there is nothing above or beyond the presidency; it is the glorious finale to every possible performance on the political stage.

This, really, is the basis for the well-established norm that after the presidency, a leader should have nothing further to aspire to in politics, and can only degrade their legacy with quotidian pursuits, or worse, pedestrian interventions in the wild helter-skelter of our politics.

In retirement, a wise president must promptly extinguish every inclination to venture into what I call subsistence politics and strive, through the good offices of the incumbent successor, to be associated with an appropriate iteration of ‘grand statecraft’.

This is how regional peace-building and mediation roles evolved to become the staple of presidential activity in retirement. Nothing is grander or statelier than that.

Moreover, in theory, a retiring president commands tremendous political capital on a national scale on two primary accounts being, first, the incremental political capital that enables them to ascend to the highest pinnacle and subsequently, that which accrues at exponential rates to the holder of the single most consequential office in the land.

As a phenomenon of the political reality, this political capital naturally exerts extraordinary gravitational force that can distort or disrupt any democratic mechanism anchored on the expectation of free and fair competition. In other words, by lingering on the scene, a retired president can revert into a backroom oligarch who manipulates democratic competition to create political monopolies and turn Kenya into a plutocracy.

Suspicion

A considerable portion of the backlash against PNU in the Rift Valley had to do with suspicions that apart from being the special purpose vehicle for Mwai Kibaki’s re-election, it had devolved into a Trojan horse to return Daniel arap Moi to active politics, after only 4 years of retirement.

Nyayo’s mandatory retirement had made it possible for the region to undertake a generational turn-over that was overdue by at least three decades, so PNU’s enigmatic posture was thoroughly unwelcome.

On the other hand, Mwai Kibaki was adamant in his refusal to disrupt his retirement, even briefly, preferring to read copiously and interact with his grandchildren. For this he is fondly remembered by all, including even his most ferocious detractors.

Despite growing up in close proximity to these titans, and being patronised by them with unusual indulgence, it is quite clear that Kenyatta took no note of their disparate approaches to the practice of presidential retirement and their monumental implications.

This explains the astonishing naivety with which he confidently declared intention to hand over power only to a successor of his choosing and propounded his democratic right to remain in active political leadership.

The first infraction, especially, is egregious and, as previously noted, exhibits abysmal civic ignorance. It is clear that Kenyatta had no grasp of the most fundamental constitutional black-and-white that directly and exclusively refers to the presidency.

The presidential hand-over is a wonderful civic nicety that affords Kenya, as a political community, the occasion to celebrate the culmination of the people’s sovereign self-expression and to clothe our democratic turnovers of power in spectacular ritual and moving ceremony. Beyond that, it is not a constitutional necessity.

Article 141 clearly says that a president-elect assumes office by taking and subscribing to a couple of solemn oaths: of allegiance to the Republic of Kenya, and of the due execution of the office of president, whereupon, Article 142 states, the predecessor’s term of office ends. The constitution is self-executing, and regardless of Kenyatta’s tantrums, he had no power whatsoever to legitimately affect his succession in the manner suggested by his handing-over ultimatums.

If President William Ruto’s swearing-in automatically extinguished Kenyatta’s term in office, it follows that Kenyatta’s ominous avocations had unsettling implications to the extent that he could only prevent Ruto’s assumption of office through extremely malevolent means.

- Mr Ng’eno is an advocate of the High Court.