Does Kenya Practice Democracy or Epistocracy?

Abstract

The constitution of Kenya places the common person at the centre of democracy, starting from the preamble. Article 10 places public participation at the centre of decision making in matters affecting the common man, all government institutions are bound to involve the common person in policy making. The constitution prescribes public participation by giving the common man right to decide how he is to be governed, political rights such as vying for elective positions, voting and participating in constitutional referendums. This is based on the presumption that they can make informed choices. However, based on the elite theory of democracy where the elites are bound to rule - and as such use their wealth, connections and the fact that they are more educated than the average citizen, to control decisions and events within a state it is questionable whether in fact the common person does participate in effective democracy. There elites include ‘political’ brokers who are also ‘deep state’, and who influence legislation, appointments and even voting. These elites are sometimes referred to as epistocrats. The elites occupy a ‘privileged’ position in society that makes society listen to them. This then begs the question whether it is the common person or the epistocrats who actually determine the form of governance in Kenya. This paper uses a comparative approach on constitutional amendment procedures and practices to evaluate the sovereignty of the common person in Kenya.