I watched with keen interest the Kenyan election process on to the final results which made Uhuru Kenyatta the 4th president of this great country.

Kenyatta is the son of Kenya’s founding President Jomo Kenyatta who, with 6.1 million votes earned himself a 50.03%  approval rating with the electorate. His nearest rival Raila Odinga came in second with 5.3 million votes earning him a 43% rating and Opposition Leader.
Though not a landslide victory, Kenyans have once again spoken. They have said in no uncertain terms that they want Uhuru Kenyatta to be their president.
Raila Odinga, who lost the presidential race has quickly marched off to court contesting the results. You might be familiar with this character Odinga, because the 2007 election brought him similar results when he promptly dismissed the justice system calling them biased and took to the streets. In mob-justice style – which is characteristic of those bad losers in Africa – death and despair were all around.  He created a situation of fear and foreboding throughout Kenya. To prevent further bloodshed and save that country from chaos, Kenyatta agreed to a shared arrangement by including Raila Odinga as prime minister in his cabinet. This agreement of sorts lasted for the last five years until now.
Five years on and another victory for Kenyatta and again a similar response from Odinga’s opposition, only this time he has resorted to the courts for a solution to the apparent impasse.
The problem is, Kenyan law stipulates that the winner must secure 50 plus one percent of the votes; something Odinga strongly upholds. However, the law does make provision for the person/party with the largest block of votes to be declared the winner and duly allowed to rule except there is no objection. Whether he succeeds in having a re-run of this tedious, archaic process one thing is very clear: Kenyans should not have to put up with the ranting of a loser.
Kenyans need to move on with their lives. In no shape or form can Odinga claim victory with 43% of the votes but instead of operating in the best interest of the country he is bellyaching with the thought that Kenyatta did not get a landslide or a clear 51% . Thus, with a slim 50.03% he should be denied the right to govern. This is his rationale and he is prepared to hold this country ransom.
Should this be the spirit of one who respects the rule of law or the democratic unity of the country? Is this someone the people of Kenya could look up to as having the well-being of country? Certainly not! Here we have someone who is thinking only of self, power-drunk if you may add. Instead of conceding defeat he is busily engaged in dividing the nation with his rabid obsession for power.
I have looked at the democratic process in Kenya and have decided to make a comparison with our own system here in Guyana. There are striking similarities between the two systems.
In 2011 Guyanese decided to elect the PPP/C to office albeit without an overwhelming majority. The ruling party gained the largest block of votes in 32 seats out of a 65-seat parliament. The nearest rival PNC/APNU gained 26 and the AFC 7 seats. There is no doubt in the minds of Guyanese who they want to govern them. They have given the PPP/C the mandate to rule. However, the PNC/APNU coupled with their comrades AFC have partnered together after the fact into believing that they are the government. Thus their ranting and raving this past year with empty rhetoric, as to who rightly earned the right to be the Government of Guyana.
At the end of the day, the majority 33 seats combined opposition cannot now say they were the people’s choice. The constitution does not recognise a combination of forces after an election. That arrangement should have been done prior to them going into the election.
So like in Kenya the opposition in Guyana, are bad losers and secondly, they are prepared to see a country go down just to flatter their narrow egos.