In a recent court session, Advocate Elisha Ongoya, representing Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua, stunned the courtroom with a powerful question challenging the transparency of Kithure Kindiki’s selection as Deputy President. Ongoya questioned whether Kenyans had been given a true opportunity to voice their opinions on Kindiki’s suitability, arguing that the selection process lacked public input.
Ongoya suggested that an open and formal mechanism, such as a public forum or email channel, could have allowed Kenyans to contribute their perspectives, reinforcing the nation’s commitment to transparent governance. “A structured platform would have enabled citizens to share feedback or raise objections,” Ongoya asserted, making a case for more inclusive decision-making.
He highlighted that Kenyans have shown a strong willingness to participate in national discussions, often overwhelming public platforms with their views on significant issues. The lack of such a platform in Kindiki’s selection, he argued, was a missed chance to engage those most impacted by the decision.
Ongoya also emphasised that top public appointments should involve the community to ensure leaders truly reflect the people’s interests. Without transparency, he warned, public trust in leadership may falter. His call for public input channels underscores a push for structural reforms that would give citizens a voice in key government decisions.
Ongoya’s remarks bring a pressing question to the forefront: should Kenyan leaders make it standard practice to open channels for public input in major appointments? His bold stance has set the stage for potential changes in governance, challenging how future decisions are made.
By Nairobi