KENYA'S PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: POLITICAL AND LEGAL CRISIS - THE DARKNESS BEFORE THE LIGHT FOR THE NATION? PART.1.

The Kenyan electorate needs to be able to fairly and peacefully exercise their comparatively democratic right to determine which of the two main political contenders, Uhuru Kenyatta and Raila Odinga, should form the next government. 

The last 'legal' Presidential elections resulted in violently contested results, which saw widespread bloodletting, displacement of people through fear, and destruction of property, after the elections. 

The crisis was eventually resolved through what could be considered a truce between the same contenders, and a compromised power sharing, with Uhuru being becoming the President and Raila the Vice President.

Following the disputed outcome of the most recent Presidential elections, which was apparently won by Uhuru, Railla decided that he would have none of it. 

He disputed the outcome and argued that it was not the product of a fair and transparent election process. This was despite the fact that the 'independent election observers', including those from both Africa and Europe.

Although many might have felt that Odinga's protestations were no more than more of the same from a disgruntled dynastic political oligarch. 

To the surprise, if not the astonishment of probably most of the world's 'Africa watchers', ordinary Africans and Uhuru and other Kenyans. 

Kenya's Supreme Court, after Odinga referred the matter to them, found in his favour, and nullified the election results and ordered that new ones should be held. 

This was a precedent of unheard of magnitude. All to the great chagrin of Uhuru, who saw the court's decision as robbing him of an election victory. 

Albeit one which Raila felt he was himself robbed of, due to, he argued, the electoral process not having been fair, and the Independent Electoral Commission having managed the process incompetently. 

So, it is probably as should have been expected, that Raila would not have been happy with the EC not being disbanded and reformed. 

Many might and have argued that other contenders, faced with the same situation, would have been equally unhappy. 

It might be another thing, as to whether Raila Odinga will be seen as placing the greater common good of Kenyans above personal ambitions. 

By pursuing a his case in a manner which could suggest that he is intent on holding the formation of the nation's government to ransom.

That the Commission should have been disbanded and reconstituted, is clearly a valid argument, as it would have lost much, if not all credibility and pretension to being 'impartiality.' 

But that did not happen, and Odinga chose the very last minute to declare that he would not stand in the elections, which are due to take place today; Thursday.

To be continued.