As debate on a proposed new constitution heated up, a plain clothes policeman was caught on camera reloading his rifle on the sidelines of a campaign rally in western Kenya that had degenerated into riots. "Put the live [ammunition] in," the officer was heard saying in footage captured by KTN television. "Where's the live?" another questioned.

It later emerged that four people, including two schoolboys, were shot dead during the clashes in Kisumu, proof that the debate over whether Kenyans should adopt the draft charter was turning increasingly ugly.

After weeks of highly charged, divisive arguments between those supporting the new constitution and those against, Kenyans will finally vote in the referendum on Monday. But few are talking about the merits of the charter, which would replace the current one drawn up around independence in 1963.

Instead, following campaigns marked by tribalism, belligerent rhetoric, sporadic violence and the deaths of at least eight people, the vote is being widely viewed as a referendum on the government and a battle for power between the political elite.

The contest is expected to be tight, and which ever side wins the country will bare divisions, with the process leaving a stain on a nation many hoped would take strides forward after historic 2002 elections.

Then, an opposition alliance led by Mwai Kibaki, who won the presidency, swept to a victory that ended the 39-year rule of the notoriously corrupt Kenya African National Union party. The polls also marked the end of Daniel arap Moi's autocratic 24-year rule as he stepped down after serving two elected terms.

The peaceful transition was hailed as success for Africa, and euphoria greeted Mr Kibaki's coalition, which had pledged reforms and zero-tolerance towards the systemic corruption that crippled eastern Africa's largest economy. And, importantly after decades of poor governance, promises of a new constitution within 100 days.

But three years later, the constitution campaign has shown that while some actors may have changed, the nature of politics in the nation of 32m people is still tainted by patronage, corruption and greed. It is also an example of the slow pace of progress in an emerging democracy with a history of oppressive rule.

"The constitution process was supposed to bring us together but it's divided us further," says Maina Kiai, chairman of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights. "This tells us that maybe our expectations were too high . . . What we are seeing is the fruits of Moiism, the policies of divide and rule, the policies of patronage."

The most obvious split has been within Mr Kibaki's shaky coalition, with at least six ministers joining ranks with the opposition to campaign for a No vote, while the president and his supporters promote the Yes vote.

Despite the massive challenges facing Kenya, the cabinet has not met for more than two months. Campaigning has also been marred by accusations of the Yes team using state resources to garner votes.

As for the draft itself, opponents say it would do little to curb the all-powerful presidency or alter the system of government. It is based in part on a version drawn up by pro-Kibaki MPs, and an earlier draft approved at a national constitutional conference. The result has caused critics to accuse the government of reneging on promises to create a powerful prime minister's office, reduce presidential powers and decentralise government.

The new draft does cater for a prime minister, but one who will "be accountable to the president" and leader of government business in parliament, rather than head of government. There are also complaints the proposed devolution of power to districts does not go far enough.

"The debate is camouflaging the question about how the state should be restructured. The politicians are instrumentalising ethnicity for their own ends - it's the elite trying to control resources," says Musambayi Katumanga, a political scientist. "As long as there is no leadership it doesn't matter what constitution you have."

For many ordinary Kenyans, whose main concern is better services, it has been another example of politicians pursuing their own agendas at the expense of the country's needs. But they have the experience of 2002 to cling to.

"We have still taken steps forward. We can actually vote out somebody like Moi, there's more democratic space," says Lati Muli.