Peter Wanyama billed himself as the outsider out to drain the swamp in the in fiercely fought Law Society of Kenya elections.
Admitted to the bar in 2007, Wanyama branded himself as among the most experienced lawyers and litigators in the race, hence knew not only all the dark corners but also the opportunities that needed a little scratching beneath the surface to unravel for the members.
Tough talking, bombastic even, Wanyama was always breathing fire during debates with his four opponents, vowing to wage frantic wars against the Executive and the Judiciary in pursuit of what was right for lawyers.
But his message did not seem to cut through sufficiently as LSK vice president Faith Odhiambo trounced him with a margin of close to 1,000 votes.
Out of nearly 20,000 advocates registered as members of the law society, around 15,000 were eligible to vote but only half turned up on polling day on February 29.
The Star sat down with Wanyama at his Ngong’ Road law chambers to take stock of his campaign, the election and what the future holds for him.
You had an outsider message in this race but it did not seem to cut through to carry you over the finish line. Why?
It is not true that my message did not cut through because I’m a first-timer in LSK politics yet look at the votes I got. I ran against career LSK politicians who have done nothing else but to run for elections and I had them breathless in the race.
I’m deeply appreciative of the lawyers who came out and voted for our message in this campaign, trusting us for the very first time and believing that we could deliver a new approach to LSK leadership and affairs with no excuses.
However, I did not make it and I was quick to concede to our now president Faith Odhiambo despite another female opponent sending her supporters to me asking that I don’t rush to concede because Supreme Court polling station had issues. I’m a democrat and, more than that, I’m a professional and this was a professional election. We must not allow and entertain the bad manners we see in national politics.
Among the reasons I think we did not make it is because of numerous technicalities for which i will be pushing reforms. For example, there is a need for online voting so that lawyers who are not able to be in the long queues can quickly vote and participate in this important professional event. I lost many votes here because my voters would come and see long lines and go back to their errands. There was also a lot of propaganda that I was a state candidate and yet those who were state-backed are well known and it was not me.
Q: You actually said in you concession message that rumours linking you to Kenya Kwanza cost you the election.
Yes, and it was a lie. In fact, I have reached out to those who propagated that lie and we have laughed it off. They have apologised to me personally. The anger against me was that I acted for IEBC in the 2022 presidential election because of my expertise in electoral law, though I voted for Raila in that election. Same as 2017 when I voted for Raila because I believed his vision and that he would win, and when the legal fight came up I acted for IEBC. There is Cab rank rule that allows advocates to defend their clients without being associated with their causes. Also, the IEBC was buying my expertise. But this generated some anger and gave some quarters leeway to give me the tag of being a Kenya Kwanza guy.
But I must also say that it is true that the government wanted to approach me to be their candidate but they backed off when they did their research and found that Peter Wanyama is unpredictable. They also know that I’m massively pro-devolution and I took quite some work from the Council of Governors in negotiating devolution laws between 2013 and 2017 and state mandarins know I’m one hell of a principled man.
Q: Talk about your relationship with young lawyers. There was a huge perception you are condescending and bragging to them. I’m particularly talking about your comment about living in a bedsitter in Rongai and eating Ugali with eggs. Could it also explain the loss?
I got tremendous support from young lawyers because I was the only one speaking their language. I was the one speaking on their welfare and practically giving solutions, ranging from their jobs, remunerations and changing the legal practice landscape among others. But as always, my opponents took clips and cut them to fit their narratives against me. I never disrespected anyone.
It is true I spoke about Rongai because I have lived there when I was starting out. I have lived ion slums in this city when I came from Mount Elgon in 2005 and having no relative to hold me. I dropped out of school, struggled to pay school fees, and got displaced due to the clashes in 1992 and so I know what it means to start humble. So, no one should lecture me on humility and respecting small beginnings.
Q: You have alluded to LSK reforms. For the next two years, what specifically will you be up to?
I will be here to support the newly elected council led by our president. But I will also be putting across my ideas and be available to them should they need my help or an idea on how to solve some of the issues we are having. That said, major reforms must be undertaken at LSK in terms of structures, management and elections.
We need to address the question of campaign financing. Look, there was so much money in this race but I resisted temptations to open my purse. There is need to do something on this including amending the law to rein in so much spending because this is a professional campaign. The rules should require that candidates declare the funding they get.
Also, I think the position of president or vice president should be reserved for lawyers who have 25 years of experience or more as a way of encouraging seniors to take part in this critical process. This will also ensure maturity in how things are done.
I also think there is a need for the structure representation at the LSK council to be changed. Instead of electing many representatives, we should have elected branch chairpersons sit in the national council.
I will also be critiquing them in a bid to better fulfil their pledges.
Q: Will you run again in 2026 and what would you do differently?
I will run again if members ask me to. It is up to them. What I would do differently would be to professionalise my campaign. I did not have structures and even a campaign manager unlike my opponents. I would flesh out the structures well and craft my messaging carefully. Also, I found so much resistance from branches like Lower Eastern, Mount Kenya among others. I will do better outreach.
BY GORDON OSEN