“IF YOU VOTE ME IN I’LL ENSURE THERE ARE SOFAS IN THE DINING HALL…” bla bla bla and we do expect more such comments as campaigns for the 2020/2021 SRC elections heighten. But do you know the jurisdiction of the SRC aspirants… just how much they can and are able to do… to what extent for instance can the SRC chair question administrative issues…?
We have in the past heard aspirants promise heaven and earth as they campaign; presenting brilliant manifestos only to vote them in then get grand disappointments thereafter.
The students’ constitution has mandated the SRC members to perform given general duties and they cannot go beyond their mandate. The following are the grounds that one should clearly understand and that should form the basis of the aspirants’ manifestos:
- Promote social, sporting and cultural activities in the College.
- Organize the committee of student representation.
- Make suitable rules for the students.
- Consider students’ complains.
- Represent students’ petitions
- Outline duties of each member
- Suspend services of an undisciplined member of the council.
These are not the only responsibilities of members of the council, but these should are the considerations that every member should make before making a choice. There are pertinent questions that should guide a voter before he/she endorses a nominee in the election.
Does the nominee look capable of understanding the above roles and play his part or is he just a puppet to some ethnic grounded ideology…
Is she/he available in times when there’s need to resolve crises in the institution or is he/she just vying to get an opportunity to go on an outing during the joint leadership conference normally held after elections?
I urge the Kagumo family to vote wisely and independently without succumbing to crowd influences.
This is my take, what’s your take in this?
James Kariuki ECR year 2.