Advertisement

Army’s job is to protect us, but did it get the memo?

Saturday November 15 2014

Despite the “ban” on media coverage of the so-called disarmament exercise being carried out by the Kenya Defence Force on the Baringo-Turkana border, the stories are trickling out.

The results to date: The recovery of 20 guns. The charging of 19 persons, including a former Administration Police officer, in Kabarnet with robbery with violence.

Set those results against individual testimonies given to the media. Eighty Safaricom sub-contractors have indefinitely stopped installing a booster in Baringo county. They claim the KDF stole their food, money, clothing and shoes.

In Turkana County, a shopkeeper was allegedly beaten up and solar panels providing electricity to his store were destroyed. His daughter is missing.

The wife of a livestock trader claimed the KDF, while searching their house, stole Ksh2 million as well as all their mobile phones. Her husband was beaten and taken away. Her two children are also missing.

In total, a county representative reports, 40 people are now missing from Tangulbei alone. Some residents have sought refuge in a religious mission.

Advertisement

Others have left altogether. Students from the area from no less than five public universities and some private colleges have demanded an end to the exercise as well as an investigation into allegations of rape by the KDF.

They claim that, with the forced displacement of their families, livelihoods have been disrupted. They are nervous about fees payments and support.

Yet parliament been wishy-washy. The Speaker has said the “disarmament” exercise was authorised by the National Security Council.

Parliament itself, although calling for it to be carried out “with a human face,” called for it to be extended to the entire North Rift to maintain the balance of power. Frankly speaking, the removal of only 20 guns is hardly enough to tilt the balance of power.

The executive has remained adamant. The KDF, it says, has a constitutional mandate to assist in internal security operations. Meanwhile, the KDF has denied all the claims.

All our illusions and myths about the non-partisanship of the military and its professionalism post the 1982 coup d’état have been shattered. If its job is to protect civilians, it doesn’t appear to have received the memo to that effect.

The question is, why it is so difficult to demand accountability of it?

A colleague notes the preferential treatment of one security service over another is not unique to this executive. The first president relied on the Anti-Stock Theft Unit for his personal protection. The second on the General Service Unit. The third, oddly, on a resuscitation of the Administration Police. This executive seems to have singled out the military. Perhaps because, another colleague notes, the regular police are now subject to more public scrutiny.

The bigger question then is what this executive is protecting itself against? Who’s the big, bad wolf here? Not civil society — which is, at least, still “civil.” Not the political opposition — torn apart by internal wrangles as it is. Maybe internal dissenters?

Accountability must be demanded.

L. Muthoni Wanyeki is Amnesty International’s regional director for East Africa

Advertisement