The Politics of Constitution-making and Referendum: The Case of Kenya and Zimbabwe

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The paper analyzes why Kenya successfully adopted a new constitution in 2010 while Zimbabwe remained stalled in its outreach programme. It identifies shared challenges in both nations, including a history of elite-driven constitutions and disputes over executive power and land. The author attributes Kenya's progress to the strategic alignment of leaders President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga, whereas Zimbabwe's process is hindered by a fragile power-sharing agreement between ZANU-PF and the MDC and the influence of 'securocrats' who favor the old order of impunity.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Kenya successfully passed a new constitution in a 2010 referendum with a 72.1% voter turnout and 66.9% of voters choosing 'yes', overcoming ethnic divisions that had previously fueled violence in 2007.
  • Both Kenya and Zimbabwe share a history of rejecting elite-driven constitutions: Zimbabwe voters rejected a proposal in February 2000 due to excessive executive powers and lack of devolution, and Kenyan voters rejected a 2005 proposal by President Mwai Kibaki for not being people-driven.
  • The constitutional debates in both countries focus on similar core issues: the rule of law, accountability, the restructuring of the political system, the devolution of power, the executive powers of the president, and the ownership of strategic resources, specifically land.
  • Zimbabwe's constitution-making process is stalled in the 'out-reach programme' stage nearly two years after the Global Political Agreement, as ZANU-PF and the MDC fear that reforms may undermine their respective power or trigger state crackdowns.
  • Kenya's progress is attributed to a more stable political arrangement and the cooperation of President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga, who both supported the 'yes' campaign to advance their own political legacies and ambitions.

Cite the original document

APA
South African Institute of International Affairs (2010). The Politics of Constitution-making and Referendum: The Case of Kenya and Zimbabwe. https://saiia.org.za/research/the-politics-of-constitution-making-and-referendum-the-case-of-kenya-and-zimbabwe/
Chicago
South African Institute of International Affairs. The Politics of Constitution-making and Referendum: The Case of Kenya and Zimbabwe. 2010. https://saiia.org.za/research/the-politics-of-constitution-making-and-referendum-the-case-of-kenya-and-zimbabwe/.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=South African Institute of International Affairs |title=The Politics of Constitution-making and Referendum: The Case of Kenya and Zimbabwe |date=26 August 2010 |url=https://saiia.org.za/research/the-politics-of-constitution-making-and-referendum-the-case-of-kenya-and-zimbabwe/ |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{southafricaninstituteofinternationalaffairs2010politics, author = {{South African Institute of International Affairs}}, title = {{The Politics of Constitution-making and Referendum: The Case of Kenya and Zimbabwe}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2010}, month = aug, url = {https://saiia.org.za/research/the-politics-of-constitution-making-and-referendum-the-case-of-kenya-and-zimbabwe/}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated