In an article written by Anyang Nyongo’ in The Standard on June 28th he states that the NYS is a strategy for political mobilisation on behalf of the ruling coalition. This is essentially victimising an already vulnerable demographic group; the youth. Nyong’o seems to be stating that the youth in Kenya are inherently problematic and negative in disposition. What the NYS offers is the opportunity to develop skills and habits the youth can use to build productive lives. Why is Nyong’o making doomsday assertions that seem to indicate a fundamental disbelief in the positive potential of youth? Does he believe the youth are inherent trouble makers? Why is he criticising the fact that the government is bringing youth together to learn and evolve as Kenyan citizens? Why does he make the sinister assertion that youth coming together automatically creates paramilitary and troublesome ‘cells’? The current administration believes in the optimism of youth and their capacity to create a multitude of positive possibilities from the opportunities and skills they gain in the NYS. The real issue at hand seems to be a disgruntlement in Nyong’o that the latent power of the youth is being directed into constructive activities and that youth are no longer idle and therefore cannot be recruited in seditious activities orchestrated by the political opposition. Perhaps this bile is the resentment of the fact that the youth that are usually at the disposal of the political opposition to create political upheaval and instability are now being absorbed into more constructive activities. Further, as Nyong’o asserts, yes the government’s aim is to recruit more youth to the NYS because the current administration believes in providing opportunities for youth that seed positive self-evolution. Nyong’o perhaps needs to come to terms with the fact that the latent potential in our youth that was previously harnessed to create political instability no longer exists and that the notion that youth are pawns in a political chess game has passed its ‘sell by’ date.
It also important to address another article published on the same day in The Standard, in which Raila Odinga accuses President Uhuru of shielding Anne Waiguru. This allegation makes it clear that Odinga, although he has been in government and should understand the way government processes work, has no understanding on the due process and procedures of addressing allegations and subsequent suspension of public officials. Without belabouring the point, Odinga should be aware of the fact that the EACC must first make a recommendation to the President before any deliberation of suspensions are entertained. The EACC has clearly seen no need to so to in Waiguru’s case. If anything, the CS was trying to streamline operations and in realising the attempt to siphon public funds, wrote to the CID. This essentialised her as a whistle blower; a fact that should be lauded not criticised. It is worth nothing that no other Minister has ever called on any agency to investigate shortcomings within their Ministry. So the truth of the matter is that the CS is playing her role in working together with the President to arrest corruption. Why is this being criticised? We stifle our ability to fight corruption if we victimise public officials who are open about problems in their Ministry. This culture of openness should be cultivated and not ostracised.
The tactics used by opposition are glaringly obvious and one does not require any esoteric political knowledge to surmise that the opposition has reached intellectual menopause as evinced in their rudimentary attempts to slander, smear and slur noble projects by the current administration that are proving to be effective.