Yet, it will be imprudent if, in applauding the success of forcing the formerly recalcitrant government to cut a deal on the review, Kenyans lose sight of the fact that the ultimate prize really is the construction of a Constitution which addresses the fears and concerns that brought about the crisis of governance the country is labouring under, and guarantee that the laws will not be abused in future by the ruling elite and violated to serve narrow interests.

The first step towards achieving this, of course, is for those groups and organisations identified as being fairly representative of the broad categories of citizens to choose prospective commissioners with absolute care and sobriety. Other than the essential characteristics of moral probity and high sense of civic duty, the commissioners must have exhibited clear traits of nationalism and broad knowledge.

This is not the time for the organisations to start rewarding those who they think are owed a favour because maybe they suffered for playing too visible a role in the campaign to win the right to change the Constitution. Being an activist does not necessarily make one the best candidate to lead the exercise of reviewing a Constitution which must, in the final analysis, protect and promote the interests of even those initially (or still) opposed to the review.

It is both practical and realistic to define interests that must be borne in mind, it is more important to remember that it is one Kenya we wish to have, whichever way we want to govern it.

The Attorney-General should shortly be receiving proposed names for commissioners to lead the review. Let them represent the Kenya we wish to build, not the one that we have come from. Let more youthful minds work with the steadying influence of age and acquired wisdom to design and push through in the new Constitution the dynamic vision of a country whose people are proud of what they can do for themselves and the region.

Comments\Views about this article