John Mukum Mbaku, Weber State University

How significant is Ruto’s decision to dissolve the cabinet?

On 11 July 2024, Ruto sacked almost all of his cabinet. He said he had done so in response to protests led primarily by Kenya’s youth.

He told fellow citizens he would engage in dialogue with all sectors of Kenyan society and then set up a “broad-based government”. This government would be “lean and efficient.”

The president apologised for the “arrogance and show of opulence” by the country’s political and bureaucratic elite and promised to make the government more accountable to the people of Kenya. Kenyans wait to see if the new cabinet will be able to respond more effectively to their needs, particularly those living in extreme poverty.

Since he came to power, Ruto has continuously been squeezed by the demands of lenders (such as the International Monetary Fund) who want the government to cut its spending, and those of citizens whose living conditions continue to deteriorate.

This is the first time since Kenya’s new constitution (2010) came into effect that an incumbent president has sacked most of his cabinet.

The only other instance was back in 2005 after the late president Mwai Kibaki suffered a humiliating defeat in the 2005 constitutional referendum. He interpreted the loss as a vote of no confidence in his government and subsequently sacked all his ministers.

Ruto faces a completely different institutional environment from Kibaki’s in 2005. Kenya’s 2010 constitution radically transformed the country’s institutions. It placed constraints on what had been an imperial presidency and granted the Supreme Court the power that enabled it to annul the 2017 election.

It is that same constitution that has “empowered” Kenya’s youth to demand that the government be accountable.

Ruto and whatever cabinet he chooses must pay attention to that constitution and the political reality that it has created in Kenya.

What does dissolving the cabinet mean for policy?

Protesters were angry that the government had “ignored [them] and left [them] without opportunities”. Its policies appear to have also failed to create jobs, as well as deal effectively with unemployment, corruption and economic regression. These issues are important to Kenyans.

The new cabinet needs to transform the status quo. Economic policy should emphasise entrepreneurship and wealth creation. The government must create an environment within which Kenyans can engage in activities that create jobs. This can be achieved by reducing corruption and streamlining regulations on entrepreneurial activities.

The government needs to:

• deliver public services (especially to rural areas)
• invest in health, education and other social sectors
• reduce poverty.

Self-dealing, a form of corruption in which bureaucratic and political elites serve their own interests instead of those of their constituents, must be dealt with ruthlessly by the new government. Ruto recognised this when he spoke of the “obnoxious opulence” displayed by some officials while many Kenyans live in extreme poverty.

Kenya’s constitution provides the tools for better governance. This would have three main features:

• participatory governance: citizens are able to participate in decision-making processes
• accountability: officials must function lawfully and are punished if they don’t; citizens are provided with mechanisms to monitor the use of public resources
• openness and transparency: enhances citizens’ ability to get information about government activities and policy choices; this improves citizen trust in the government.

The constitution calls for full and effective engagement of citizens, including the youth, in policy design and implementation. Without that engagement, a new cabinet is not likely to solve Kenya’s economic and political problems.

Could parliament be dissolved, leading to a new election?

In western democracies the loss of confidence in the government can trigger a snap election. This happened in both the UK and France in 2024.

In Kenya, there have been public demands for the president to dissolve parliament, pick a new cabinet and call for new elections.

At least one sitting MP – Daniel Manduku (Nyaribari Masaba) – has supported this idea. He argued that the recent protests revealed that the public had lost confidence and trust in the government and parliament.

He cited an article of the Kenyan constitution that grants the president the authority to dissolve parliament if it fails to fulfil its constitutional mandate by refusing to enact legislation or by delaying its passage.

But parliament didn’t refuse to pass Kenya’s Finance Bill 2024 or delay its enactment. If that had been the case, it could possibly have triggered a motion for dissolution in the Supreme Court.

The main issue was that the bill did not fully reflect the economic situation within the country: high unemployment, corruption, elite opulence and youth marginalisation. Instead, the Finance Bill would have exacerbated people’s suffering.

Whether this is enough to grant the president the power to dissolve parliament is a constitutional issue that is within the competence of the High Court to determine.

Dissolving parliament and calling for new elections would certainly add to the country’s budget woes.

A more sensible way forward would be for the president to consult with the Kenyan people and form a new cabinet of highly skilled technocrats who have the capabilities to re-energise the economy. Such a cabinet would create the confidence that would attract both domestic and foreign investors to sectors such as tourism, agriculture, finance and technology, and create jobs for highly educated but unemployed and restless young Kenyans.

John Mukum Mbaku, Professor, Weber State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.