The idea of negotiated democracy, which recently reached its peak in Garissa County, seems to have eventually run into tragic headwinds.
The concept, which gained much currency mainly in the Somali community, was widely conceived as a means of ensuring unity among the various clans residing in the county.
It was also highly speculated as way of checking on ethnic polarization and curbing negative political competition that could potentially lead to clan disenfranchisement and even conflicts.
At the very first blush, the idea wore a novel face, but it never prevented serious divisions, with many allegations of favoritism by clan elders being raised by locals and aspirants alike.
When this idea of negotiated democracy first came to the public limelight in Garissa and Mandera counties, a number of the regional politicians agreed to abide by the clan precepts and the popular verdict of the highly ranked clan elders.
Although nothing much was raised in the past one week, Garissa is rapidly experiencing the vagaries of this negotiated democracy.
Several political aspirants for the different seats in the county are now pointing accusing fingers and even refusing to abide by the popular demands of the elders.
The question that now lingers in the minds on keen followers of the regional politics is, has the concept failed even before it officially starts?