I have always thought, with a degree of well-founded trepidation, that some of our governors have a false sense of importance.
I say well founded because, right from the start, they all wanted to be referred to as “Your Excellency”, which title they wanted engraved on their licence plates.
There was uproar as we all thought the title is reserved for the President, but the little lords insisted and today we refer to them as such. And how did this improve service delivery? You tell me!
We shall not even go into the issue of how they have made county governments their little kingdoms, employing relatives and sidekicks and having blank cheques (literally) to do as they wish, to the horror of their people.
The litany of misdeeds, even criminal offences, are well documented, from the wheelbarrows that cost over 0.1 million shillings each to hospital gates that cost a few million bob.
My beef is their recent demand for immunity for crimes committed while in office. Heck, they have just grown too big for their boots.
I know they equate themselves to the presidency. But since they are governors and not part of the presidency in terms of insulation from prosecution, they must be reminded they are just governors.
The president is insulated and cushioned from petty (or any) litigation while in office, as long as he is performing the duties and functions of the Office of the President.
The philosophy that informed this arrangement is that the President is the symbol of national unity.
Conversely, governors are symbols of devolved graft, ethnic jingoism and an appalling disregard for both the law and good sense.
Looked at differently, why would anyone who is comfortable that he or she is doing the right thing want immunity from prosecution? Is this not the case of the guilty being afraid?
If they have done nothing wrong, if they are beyond reproach like Caesar’s wife, why are they afraid?
Why would individuals whose integrity is beyond question want immunity from prosecution? Are they not the same folks who rush to court for anticipatory bail when sleuths come calling and asking all manner of questions about the sources of their wealth?
If anyone has wealth that they cannot account for, or has been fingered for shenanigans in the running of their dockets, let them face the law.
If anyone has a dark past they are afraid to confront, or are guilty of dipping long, sticky fingers in the public cookie jar, I say let them be hauled before courts of law.
After all, it is the taxes you and I pay that run the counties where some of these blokes have perfected impunity and shielded themselves from prosecution in their thieving ways.
It is not only preposterous, but absolutely out of order for governors to want to elevate themselves beyond the dizzying heights they already are, beyond reach of even their own voters.
The laws were made for all of us. You break the law, you face the music. There is no shortcut, or there should not be. I rest my case.
—The writer is Assignments and Special Projects Editor, People Daily