|
FAIR PLAY - Envoy should name
and shame those involved in US visa ban
Saturday Nation
Story by PETER MWAURA
16. 02. 2008
Citing the confidentiality of the visa application process, US
ambassador Michael Ranneberger has declined to name politicians
and businessmen and women his country has slapped a travel ban on
for their alleged role in Kenya’s post-election violence.
However, the visa denial goes beyond what is personal. First, the
denial of visas is being done ostensibly to punish individuals for
the harm they have inflicted on Kenyan, not American, society.
Second, the procedure for issuing the travel ban warnings raises
issues of procedural fairness, natural justice and due process.
A US embassy official, who does not want to be named, suggests
that “the affected people can choose to share it with the public.”
BUT, AS WE ALL KNOW, PEOPLE CO-rrectly identified as inciters of
the violence will not choose to share their guilt with the public.
So in reality, the Kenyan public will never know, except through
rumours, whom the Americans have identified as backers of tribal
hatred and violence. This scenario raises important questions
about the US act of righteousness.
For example, how can America justifiably punish Kenyans for crimes
against Kenyans and not let Kenyans know who the criminals are?
Whom are the Americans helping, really?
The real value of the visa refusals in this case lies in naming
and shaming the individuals concerned in their own society, not in
the confidential immigration files of the US embassy in Nairobi.
So far, only Mukurwe-ini MP Kabando wa Kabando, among more than 10
other people implicated, has chosen to go public — for obvious
reasons. He believes in his own innocence. The newly-elected
legislator has cast a shadow over the credibility of the US
charges against him and threatened to file a defamation suit
against Mr Ranneberger.
He also claims, without evidence, that the envoy is targeting
President Kibaki’s supporters. The Kabando saga is a good
indication of why Mr Ranneberger should avoid giving anybody the
opportunity to show, even without evidence, that he has
preconceived opinions, a vested interest or personal involvement
in a matter that is really about the future and wellbeing of
Kenyans. He must be seen to act fairly, in good faith, without
bias and in a judicial manner.
Kenyans must feel confident that they will not suffer any
victimisation or discrimination in an exercise that is publicly
touted as a weapon to punish people who stoked the fires of ethnic
violence.
The people must feel confident that they are not being identified
as culprits because of their criticism of US.
The only way of restoring that confidence is to go public with the
names of those implicated and the reasons for doing so. Mr
Ranneberger says there is credible evidence linking the travel ban
victims to the post-election mayhem. He must bring out that
evidence.
In sending out letters to the politicians and business people
warning them that they will not be allowed to enter the US, the
envoy says that “people involved in inciting, supporting or
perpetrating violence must be held accountable and, for our part,
as the United States of America, we will hold them accountable by
not providing visas.”
Kenyans can only hold them accountable if they know who they are,
and the US can help by releasing the dossier that it has on them.
Another reason Mr Ranneberger should publicly name people he has
identified is to avoid further confusion and name-calling and let
the public be the judge. Already, there is unnecessary panic and
appearance of lack of procedural fairness.
Justice should be done and be seen to be done. As a decision maker
who is affecting the rights and interests of others, Mr
Ranneberger should not only act in good faith and without bias,
but also grant a hearing to any person whose interests will be
affected by the exercise of that decision before it is made.
THE KENYAN PUBLIC WHOSE INTERests will be affected by the decision,
and apparently in whose interest the US is acting, should be given
full details of the accusations and the factual issues and
allegations to enable them to see if justice is being done, that
the decision made is fair and unbiased and that Mr Ranneberger is
acting fairly, in good faith and without bias.
In the American law, due process, or fairness, is a cardinal rule
and a constitutional right that the US government must respect
when depriving a person of his or her rights and liberty. Due
process, or natural justice, places limitations on what the
government can do.
Kenyans accused or suspected of inciting violence should not be
denied due process just because they are not American citizens. In
any land, nobody shall be condemned unheard.
If the Kenyan public is satisfied that justice has been done, it
will continue to place its faith in the American ambassador.
Otherwise, he will be regarded as just one of the parties
interested in an outcome of the post-election negotiations to suit
his interests or those of his government.
Mr Ranneberger should name names or shut up.
|
