The discourse on reinstating predominant absences of common understanding detrimental to a nation’s progressive evolution is susceptible to outrageous ethical and technical debates best suited to restore pre-existent, admirable normality. Reconciliations solely attempt to serve justice, conclude existing subversive and oppressive regimes and inspire unanimous, equitable development pursuits. As a nation -quite reputable for diverse cultures and intolerant political alignments-one thing we would come to a consensus to, effortlessly is the avalanche disentangling; vigorous politicking has fouled us into.
The drafters of our legal masterpiece, in their unconcealed astuteness, clearly and remarkably specified referral constitutional structures and mechanisms to guide national appeasement. Laudable and contemptible at the same time however, is our (as a people) default ability to attempt to persuade diverging elements to our side. A trait most latterly, boldly highlighted by the pumped up, over -assessing of a non-existent constitutional crisis. Followed by conventional, robust calls for dialogue-culpable parties with their heads held up sky high joined the political commentary mouth runners in reluctant calls for dialogue.
Empty sacks cannot stand on their own and for months, the passionate, dialogue centered speeches meaninglessly reverberating in our ears did little to support the leaning tree from falling. Albeit a little behind schedule the over puffed words may seem to have materialized although devoid of inclusivity, honesty and good will. The question of honesty and benevolence even in the most desperate of situations is indispensable.
Sadly our political environment is a habitat for double speaking, self- interests, moral disregard and everything else counterfactual. Whatever happened in Harambee house may look and feel like national reconciliation but it was a well-orchestrated curtain raising campaign stint aimed at strengthening financial and political muscles in the build up to the forthcoming general elections. Theoretically, fictitious diplomatic missions are death bound. Practically though, we have been a first row audience to such testaments-former and present regimes have had their ironical success stories deeply founded on exemplarily drafted campaign blue prints.
For the greater, eternal good of our country, sober, all inclusive and truthful consultations have to commence. We have been duped into digressing from the pursuit of ultimate reconciliation by lauding a poisoned chalice. The ultimate bounties of national reconciliation are without a doubt, among others, the restoration of a state of normality; brotherly coexistence and unified diversity. Dialogue between representatives can only translate to reconcilliation if propagated via the tailor-made channels act as a prerequisite to viable national healing and restoration.
