| dc.description.abstract | Constitutional lawyers seem to have left to political science the question: What is so re-
pugnant about power itself, as to justify unending restraint efforts? We should briefly re-
vert to this issue, as a basis for an argument to be formulated from the African perspecti-
ve of power, and of its control through adopted Western concepts of parliamentarism.
Preston King typifies political power as »the ultimate self-conscious focus of the com-
munity's coherence«.1 It follows that this power exists as a fait accompli and has a vital
role in the community. Whether it must be controlled depends on whether it has a mis-
chief potential.2 King observes that political leaders, in the exercise of power, will con-
ceive and pursue particular objects, following which they will invite conformity with po-
licy decisions already taken. »Conformity ... is sometimes reached by threat of force,
. . . promises of reward; somethimes by lies, sometimes by frank avowal of truth . . .«3
As Cruise O'Brien remarks, »the person who is applying power, even in the very mild
and well accepted form ... is at least in danger of arrogance and other forms of distor-
tion«.4
This consideration, which appears to be the basis of the constitutional lawyer's concern,
is amply validated by the actuality of arrogance and détournement de pouvoir that must
become manifest from this article, which attempts to derive fresh insights5 from a Judi-
cial Commission of Inquiry Report recently published in Nairobi, Kenya | |
