Relaxing stringent ID vetting could jeopardise our security

In the beginning of August 1998, unionisable staff in the banking industry went on strike over a salary dispute, resulting in long queues inside and outside banking halls. By August 7, the industrial dispute was still unresolved, forcing management to take up frontline services to calm customers who were getting restless.

At about 10 o’clock, the prevailing uneasy calm was interrupted by sounds of gunshots coming from the direction of the US Embassy. As panicked customers queuing outside surged into the bank, the gunshots were replaced by the sound of an exploding grenade followed by a deafening boom that left those standing in the banking hall reeling in their heels.

Luckily, being at the furthest point from the blast those in the banking hall only received minor scratches from falling debris while many colleagues in Ufundi House were buried in their cubicles by the collapsing building. When the dust settled, 212 Kenyans were dead, 4,000 wounded with many receiving lifelong physical injuries and emotional scars.

The death toll of the bombing of the US Embassy to this day remains the deadliest terrorist attack on Kenyan soil.

However, since 1998, innocent Kenyans have died from subsequent senseless terrorist attacks at Westgate Mall, Paradise Hotel Kikambala,Garissa University, Dusit Hotel in Nairobi and numerous attacks of innocent civilians in Lamu. Additionally, the northern border continues exposing both Kenyans and foreigners to kidnappings and abductions.

Within the last one month alone, five chiefs were kidnapped and 50 fishermen killed in Turkana by bandits from Ethiopia.

To contain these historical threats, successive Kenyan governments have instituted various security measures with mixed results.

After independence, the Kenyatta government instituted stringent measures to vet people from North Eastern seeking Kenyan identity cards (IDs) to prevent infiltration of Shifta warlords who were waging a secessionist war to join Somalia.

After the Shifta secessionist war ended, the stringent vetting was continued due to emerging threats posed by the collapse of the Republic of Somalia and subsequent rise of Al Shabaab terrorist group.

In addition to the vetting, the government also sought to create a buffer zone between Kenya and Somalia that resulted in incursion of our defence forces into Somalia. Other efforts to keep away undesirables have included attempts to build a physical wall to separate the two countries.

Given the historical threats posed by the North Eastern border, Kenyans have traditionally supported measures to secure the border which is why the President’s recent directive to relax stringent vetting has caused much concern.

For the President and those who have applauded repeal of the directive, relaxing the stringent vetting is imperative because it discriminates and violates the constitutional rights of Kenyans from North Eastern.

Many who have shared their tribulations of getting a national ID describe a convoluted process that is discriminating and riddled with corruption. Leaders from the region have also bitterly complained that the vetting process is so inordinately lengthy that it disadvantages members of their community in search of jobs and government services that require national IDs.

While no doubt the vetting is terribly inconvenient and discriminating, repeated security breaches have hardened the hearts of many Kenyans who have witnessed the senseless attacks of innocent compatriots.

Accordingly, although the President’s reason for relaxing the vetting sounds reasonable, on balance many feel the imperatives of national security supersedes the need to right bureaucratic inconveniences that are visited on a few. These sentiments follow the conventional wisdom that majority interest should take precedent over those of a minority.

Besides security concerns, a secondary reason the President’s directive has unsettled many Kenyans is widespread mistrust of the intentions of Kenyan politicians and Kenya Kwanza administration in particular. Due to deep-seated trust deficit, many Kenyans believe politicians will cheat and cut corners in pursuit of personal interest such that even well-meaning pronouncements are to be viewed with suspicion.

In a country where politicians are routinely accused of rigging elections, the President’s directive has therefore only served to raise widespread suspicion that the real intentions for removing the vetting is to facilitate importation of voters from neighbouring countries.

The fact that the President’s directive coincides with heightened campaigns for the 2027 elections has only added fuel to public suspicions of the government’s intentions.

Given the relentlessness of Kenya’s enemies to do harm, the last thing Kenyans need is to politicise national security.

Too many innocent Kenyans have died in the hands of bloodthirsty terrorists who are continuously looking for opportunities to take advantage of any loopholes in our security.

While every Kenyan has a constitutional right to be treated equally in their own country, the numerous threats emanating from our northern border is proof that security for the majority must remain the overriding concern of every government without compromise.