Comrades demand for transparency and equity in Review Process

By Kirong Shadrack

Many comrades are now agitating for transparency and gender equity in the under covered and underway MUSO Constitutional Review process, which is being spearheaded mainly by students who vied during the last MUSO elections and lost. The group has formed an official and formidable opposition to oversee, what they are calling ‘reform agenda’, in the amendment and formation of a new students governing laws.

In as much as many comrades deny of any knowledge of the existence of the said group, others totally disagreed and wanted to know the methodology and the basis on which the group was formed and why the media is tight-lipped on the sensitive issue that they themselves should be on the forefront.

In the latest development the so called reformist, sought audience with the Dean of Students, Mr. Mureithi, on the way forward and they were granted a go-ahead. However, a reliable source who spoke to The 3^rd Eye on condition of anonymity after the closed door meeting held on Friday at Students’ Centre cafeteria (Mess), between the group and The 25th SGC, said that an eight member ad hoc committee on the process was formed. But ironically the committee still comprises of only a majority fourth years and the same students who vied and lost. In addition, the group is said to have vowed not to include the MUSO Finance Director in the committee, yet he is the one who approves Muso funds.

The decision has not gone down well with political analysts in the making, with some terming the stand as selfish, uncalled for, hell bend on settling political scores and doomed to scatter.

Here are the views some of the students whom were interviewed:

Question: Are you aware of any political opposition wing that has been formed and is now championing for MUSO Constitutional Review?

Stellar: (2^nd year engineering student). “I have not heard of the group, but I think having an opposition group in place will be healthy so as to keep the SGC officials on their toes. In addition we need a larger SGC body, to match the growing number of students in our campus.”

Erick: (3^rd year IS), claims he has not heard of the group and he is worried the said group might not do anything, but instead stir up a political temperatures in campus.

Susan: (4th year HR), “Yes I am. They should be gender sensitive such that, a third of the committee are from either gender. Also, all comrades should be involved in the amendment process before and after, and if need be we should participate in a referendum.”

Steve: (3^rd year HR), “Yes I am aware, but we are tired of hearing rumors, we need all media houses to report what is going on. Any constitutional process should be transparent and involve all the stakeholders.”

Faith: (2nd year BBM), “I’m hearing it now for the first time and I don’t know what to comment (about it).”

Naomi: (3^rd year edu), “I’m aware. We need change, but again we should be extra cautious on how and who should handle the process.”

Edu: (1^st year Arts), “I have never heard of it and if it really exist, we too deserve to be heard.”

Irene: (3^rd year Edu) “I’m not aware, but I fully support the move by the group because so far have not seen any action from the current SGC.”

Ken: (3^rd year Arts), “ka ni kutengeneza katiba lazima ibenefit macomrade wote. Hao watu wanajaribu kutueliminate using Machiavelli’s principle.”

Fred: (4th year BBM), “I’m and I feel this thing should be done once and for all, since most of those who have been seeking office, have been using it as a stepping stone to power and at the end no action is seen.”

Koome: (3^rd Year HR): “Automatically yes. I have heard about the movement. Politically speaking, reforms are not a toss-a-coin affair but rather a call for honesty and integrity. The group is rather made up of politically drowning creatures of raw ideologies”.