mzalendo :: Eye On Kenyan Parliament

• Is Gender Balance Really Technically Impossible to Achieve?

  Posted: August 28, 2011, 2:44 am by admin

  
  
  

  By Mzalendo Contributor – Moreen Majiwa.

  “Technically impossible to achieve,” are the words used by the presidential press service to
  describe the implementation of the constitutional provisions on gender balance. The statement
  reads “With regard to the requirement for one third representation in parliament by either gender,
  Cabinet decided to set up a taskforce (includes Mutula Kilonzo, James Orengo, Charity Ngilu, Otieno
  Kajawang, Beth Mugo, Naomi Shaban, Kiraitu Murungi, Amason Kingi, Dalmas Otieno) to
  prepare a Constitutional Amendment Bill to deal with this important requirement that is technically
  impossible to achieve under the current stipulation.”

  I’m assuming, and correct me if I am wrong, that the expression ‘under the current stipulation’
  refers to the constitutional requirement that ‘not more than two-thirds of the members of elective
  public bodies be of the same gender’ Article 81 (b). Which in real terms translates to requiring
  that out of 290 MPs at least 96 be women. Or maybe the phrase is in reference to Article 27 (8)
  which obligates the state to take ‘legislative and other measures to implement the principle that
  not more than two-thirds of the members of elective or appointive bodies shall be of the same
  gender? It’s difficult to discern the exact meaning.

  Whatever the case,  the Cabinet’s solution to implementation of the gender balance provision does
  not seem to involve finding solutions that would make it possible to implement the constitution
  as is. Its seems the Cabinet would rather take steps to remove or change the requirement that
  at least a third of the MPs in the next election be women through a constitutional amendment.
  (Constitutionally parliament can change the constitution over a period of ninety days if a two third
  majority support the amendment and after the amendment bill is publicised and public discussion
  occurs). I wonder why that is?

  As a concerned Kenyan and a woman who potentially stands to be adversely by the removal
  or change of the gender balance requirement I would like an explanation on what is meant by
  phrase ‘technically impossible’. Does technically impossible mean that there are an insufficient
  number of qualified women who are willing to run for elective positions in the next general
  election? Or, that the electorate will not vote for the women candidates? Or that parliament will
  not effect legislation or take measures to ensure that gender balance requirement is met?

• Just in time legislation?

  Posted: August 26, 2011, 2:16 am by admin

  
  
  

  By Mzalendo Contributor – Moreen Majiwa (@mmajiwa)

  It probably will not come to this i.e. parliament missing the constitutional deadline, 27th August,
  for the enactment of 12 bills. Apart from proper planning that would have allowed the bills to
  be passed in timely fashion, it would seem that the August House is making the best of a bad
  situation and taking measures to ensure that all the bills passed on time.

  Parliament will be sitting for longer hours. MPs have voted to skip certain steps in the legislative
  process thus allowing the bills to be fast-tracked. Some bills deemed as non-urgent have
  been removed from the implementation schedule. The bills that have been dropped are the
  Independent Policing Oversight Authority Bill, The National Police Service Commission Bill and
  the Foreign National Management Service Bill you can of course the judge of the importance of
  these bills particularly the ones involving police reform.

  Then of course there is the resolve to have the bills passed on time is illustrated by the statement
  made by MP Abdikadir Mohammed, the Head of the CIOC, who said ‘It may not be the National
  Assembly’s fault that the bills arrived late; but it will be the National Assembly’s fault if the bills are
  not passed within the deadlines. An extension of the deadlines will be an admission of failure on
  the part of parliament,”  though some would posit that the failure has already occurred.

  But just in case the bills are not passed in time it would be useful to know what the options are.
  The first option and most obvious option involves an extension invoking Article 261 (1) Parliament
  can extend the deadlines for up to a year. However this would required the vote of at least two
  thirds of the MPs plus the Speaker of the National Assembly would have to certify existence
  of exceptional circumstances justify the extension. Of course there is no definition of what
  qualifies as exceptional circumstances, so it’s hard to predict what would qualify as exceptional
  circumstances in this instance.

  Then there is the more controversial second option, a member of the public, civil society; actually
  anyone could under Article 261 (5) petition the High Court over the missed deadlines. The Court
  would then ‘make a declaratory order on the matter; and transmit an order directing Parliament
  and the AG to take steps to ensure that the required legislation is enacted, within the period
  specified in the order, and to report the progress to the Chief Justice’. And if Parliament failed to
  act within the time give the Chief Justice would then advise the President to dissolve Parliament.

  So it seems that the choice is between which is the lesser of two evils i.e. a rushed legislative
  process that sees the requisite bills passed before the deadline or an extension (of course the
  citizenry could petition the High Court but dissolution seems unlikely). From the political speak,
  however, it appears choice has been made the bills will be passed on time.

  Of course there are several pitfalls in rushing the bills through parliament, there is the chance
  that the bills will not be properly scrutinized, certain provisions could be sneaked in the rushed
  legislative process that could have detrimental consequences, there certainly will be little to no
  public participation in a rushed legislative process. A rushed legislative process allows for the
  type of political slight of hand whose ramifications of which will be revealed only once the process
  is over. Public participation will be reduced to a reactionary one once the bills have already
  become law.

  Whatever the case lets hope this situation is not a precedent to how constitutional bills will be passed in the future especially as we have another slew of bills whose deadline is 18 months
  after promulgation.

• On leadership

  Posted: August 21, 2011, 10:51 pm by admin

  
  
  

  By Mzalendo Contributor – Moreen Majiwa (@mmajiwa)

  Many people aspire to hold leadership positions and with the promulgation of the
  constitution there is no shortage of positions that a qualified Kenyan can vie for. In
  fact one can hardly throw a stone without hitting an ongoing recruitment process for
  constitutionally created positions; whether its for the Attorney General, the Auditor
  General and Deputy, the Judicial Vetting Board, the Independent Electoral Boundaries
  Commission or any of the other 11 independent bodies to be established under the
  new constitution.  To add to the appointive positions, whether premature or not, there
  are ongoing campaigns for the myriad of elective positions in the next general election
  president, Member of Parliament, senator, governor etc.

  So while our some of our current leaders seem to embroiled one corruption scandal
  after the other, bicker over devolution issues, who will control what funds in the devolved
  system, whether or not to pay their constitutionally sanctioned taxes, threaten chiefs
  who dare to give reports of famine/drought related deaths. All the while simultaneously
  careening speedily towards missing the deadline for the passage urgent bills.

  Almost one year since the promulgation of the constitution, less then a year till the next
  general election and in light of the ongoing establishment of constitutional bodies now
  seems as good a time as any to review the qualities we expect of our leaders whether
  appointed or elected.

  I think that all Kenyans expect that state officers acknowledge that the authority
  assigned them is a public trust that vests in the State officer the responsibility to serve
  the people, rather than the power to rule. That the authority is to be exercised in a
  manner that is consistent with the purposes and objects of the constitution, and in a
  manner that demonstrates respect for the people and brings honour to the nation and
  dignity to the office; and promotes public confidence in the integrity of the office. We
  also expect they abide by leadership and integrity principles of personal integrity,
  competence and suitability objectivity and impartiality in decision making, not
  influenced by nepotism, favouritism, other improper motives or corrupt practices;
  selfless service based solely on the public interest, and accountability to the public
  for decisions and actions; and commitment in service to the people. And no I didn’t
  make this up this and a longer list is contained in article 73 of the constitution.

  While the electorate are partly to blame for the state of affairs where leadership is
  concerned we voted for them, two things are true, this is a new dispensation and things
  are definitely changing, if not among the leaders then certainly among the electorate.

• Attention Kenyan taxpayers, your MPs keep fooling you.

  Posted: August 18, 2011, 11:57 pm by admin

  
  
  

  By Mzalendo Contributor – Moreen Majiwa (@mmajiwa)

  It would seem, if newspaper reports are to be believed, that the MPs who refuse to pay taxes have reached an agreement with Treasury on how to go about paying their taxes. The agreement could see the MPs, who had previously refused to pay taxes, pay taxes on their full salaries and then get compensated by the treasury for paying the said taxes.

  According to the papers ‘a deal was agreed at two separate meetings at the Treasury on Tuesday and Wednesday attended by top treasury officials and two representatives of parliament’s Public Accounts Committee, representing MPs who refuse to pay as demanded by the new constitution. In the deal the Treasury will give MPs an ex-gratia to compensate them for paying tax on all their income’

  Who will foot the bill for this deal?  he taxpayer that’s who! So in effect the Kenyan tax payer will be paying taxes that will be used to compensate their elected representative for the taxes he or she has paid on their salary, which by the way is also paid by the Kenyan taxpayer?!

  And as if it is not enough for the Treasury and MPs to strike an agreement that effectively indemnifies members for paying taxes in accordance with the constitution. The agreement is also reported to include the implementation of the recommendations of the Akiwumi Tribunal on Parliamentary Terms that would see the salaries of MPs increased to Kshs 1.1 million each.

  That some members of the parliament refuse to pay taxes despite clear constitutional provisions that state that they should do so and that the very same members of parliament continually attempt to negotiate their way out of paying the taxes seems to me like a slap in the face of both democracy and rule of law. What happened to democratic principles like representative government, and rule by the people? What does it mean for our democracy when 222 people (less the members that have paid their taxes, or who agree to pay) show blatant disregard for the wishes of the majority? And what does it mean for the rule of law when the people we elect to make and uphold law, are the very same ones to openly defy it?

• 12 Constitutional Bills to pass in 2 weeks, how did we get here?

  Posted: August 14, 2011, 2:48 am by admin

  
  
  

  By Mzalendo Contributor – Moreen Majiwa (@mmajiwa)

  How did we get to this point?  The point where Parliament has just shy of two weeks to pass 12 constitutional bills! When the constitution was promulgated in August last year it was evident that its implementation would require the enactment of a multiplicity of complex legislation.

  It seems, to me at least, that all provisions were made to ensure that transition from the old dispensation to the new dispensation was a smooth as possible. The new constitution staggered the deadlines for the enactment of all the required legislation according to urgency. The constitution also set out clear time lines for enactment of said laws. It also broadly outlined the manner in which the transition was to be managed and new laws passed in the transitional and consequential clauses in the 5^th and 6^th Schedule. Two new bodies, a parliamentary select committee, the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee, and an independent commission, the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution, were formed to oversee the transition.

  Yet here we are, so far only the Vetting of Judges and Magistrates Bill, the Judicial Service Bill, Independent Electoral Boundaries Commission Bill, The Salaries and Remuneration Commission Bill, and The Supreme Court Bill have been passed. However still pending is the enactment of legislation of on:

  1. Citizenship (Article 18)
  2. Kenya National Human Rights and Equality Commission (Article 59)
  3. Ethics and Anti-corruption commission
  4. Elections (Article 82)
  5. Electoral disputes (Article 87)
  6. Political Parties (Article 92)
  7. Urban areas and cities (Article 183)
  8. Contingencies Fund (Article 208)
  9. Loan guarantees by national government (Article 213)
  10. Revenue Allocation Commission
  11. Commission on Administration of Justice
  12. Ratification of Treaties

  The passing of a bill of does not happen overnight. Before a bill becomes law has to presented before parliament, go through a first reading, followed by a second reading, a committee stage and third reading. Each stage has a purpose the rigor of each stage has implications for quality of the bill. A glance at the bill tracker on parliament’s webpage, updated as recently 8^th August, shows that some of this legislation has not been even been presented, and the few bills that have been presented are somewhere between the first reading and the second reading (as a side note is it really necessary for all the bills to be separate pieces of legislation?)

  Seriously, what are the chances of parliament meeting the constitutional deadlines for the enactment of the requisite laws? And even if parliament does meet the constitutional deadlines what are the implications of the trying to pass this amount of legislation in two weeks on the quality of the laws? And what are the implications on the constitutional requirement for public participation in the making of laws (Article 118)?

• IEBC Selection panel

  Posted: August 12, 2011, 12:10 pm by admin

  
  
  

  By Mzalendo Contributor – Moreen Majiwa (@mmajiwa)

  On Monday this week the country’s new independent electoral and boundaries commission selection 7 member panel was sworn in. In case you missed it the panel is made up of Ekuru Aukot (Chairman), Prof. Marion Mutugi (Vice Chair) Justice Isaac Lenaola, Mwanyengela Ngali, Ms. Rosa Buyu, Ms. Irene Keino and Ms Sophie Moturi.

  So what next? According to the Independent Electoral Boundaries Commission Act 2011 advert inviting qualified Kenyans to apply for the positions, and publishing of the names of the all the applicants within the next seven days. The selection panel will then consider the applications, shortlist and interview the selected applicants. The Selection Panel will select three persons for the position of chairperson, and thirteen for positions as commissioners. The panel will then forward the names to the President and Prime Minister, who will then consult, and nominate one of the persons as the chairperson, and eight as a members of the commission. The President will then forward his list of nominees to the National Assembly for vetting and approval.

  A parliamentary committee will within 14 days of receiving the names consider the nominees and make recommendations to Parliament with regard to the nominees. The National Assembly will within 14 days of its next seating consider the nominations and make a decision on whether to reject or approve the nominees. If the nominees are approved within seven days of the approval the Speaker will forward the names to the President for appointment. If the any of the nominees is rejected the Speaker will inform the President, who will within 14 days of the rejection, submit a new nominee from the panels list to the national assembly. If any of the subsequent nominees are rejected by parliament, the selection panel can put forward a name from among the shortlisted candidates.

  In theory the process is pretty clear and straightforward, and should be carried out expeditiously. However in reality it’s likely the establishment of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) will be filled with the usual political skulduggery.  Constituting the Selection Panel so late in the day, represents the first hurdle in the panels work, and means constitutional deadline for the establishment of the IEBC (one year after the constitution’s promulgation (see sixth schedule, section 29 (1) of the new constitution) is unlikely to be met but who knows…in any event we’ll be watching.

• Drought And Famine, Could The Government Respond as Quickly if the Same Questions were Asked of Them?

  Posted: August 7, 2011, 11:32 pm by admin

  
  
  

  By Mzalendo Contributor – Moreen Majiwa (@mmajiwa)

  I was reviewing the Hansard hoping to find some debate on the 12 bills that still need to be passed before the one-year anniversary of the promulgation of the constitution 27^th August 2011. When I stumbled upon these questions raised by MP for Wajir West, Mohammed Sirat, regarding the intervention by the Kenya Red Cross in the ongoing drought and crisis:

  1. a. To what extent is the Kenya Red Cross Society supplementing the Government efforts in drought mitigation and the distribution of relief food to persons affected by drought and famine in the country and who is the society accountable to?
  2. b. What percentage of the national and international emergency relief appeal has been realized so far and how much has been utilized in the country and could the Minister table a detailed proof of collection and expenditure?
  3. c. Could the Minister confirm that the organization is putting up Five Star hotels in Nairobi, Nyeri and Eldoret and has acquired more than 3,000 acres of land in Mlango in Tana River while Kenyans are dying of hunger and, if so, clarify whether this is part of the organization’s core mandate?

  The questions struck me as absurd on several levels, because most of the information asked for by the MP is readily available on the Kenya Red Cross website, or from the offices of the Kenya Red Cross including information on the hotels, the proceeds of which sustain the activities of the Kenya Red Cross. The questions also made me wonder if the MP really understood what the Kenya Red Cross is, what it does, and its relationship (or lack there of) to the government?

  It is worth noting the Assistant Minister of Special Programmes was able to answer immediately, with facts and figures, all the questions asked. Further several MPs in the house commended the work of the Kenya Red Cross in the ongoing crisis and work that the organization had done in their constituencies.

  To me it seemed that MP’s vitriol was directed towards the wrong institution. The intervention of Kenya Red Cross and other humanitarian organizations in the drought speaks more to the gaps in the government’s ability to plan and respond effectively to the drought and famine.

  In a similar way that the Kenya Red Cross is accountable to its donors both local and international and has made available information on their relief efforts. The government is/should be accountable to its citizens and this made me think could the government readily provide answers to same questions if asked of them?

  1. What is the Government doing in effort to mitigate the drought and famine situation in the country?
  2. What percentage of the national budget has been allocated to drought and famine relief? How much has been utilized and could the government table a detailed proof of allocation and expenditure?
  3. Could the Minister confirm that the organization what is happening with the billions shillings that is unaccounted for while Kenyans are dying of hunger?

• Bio Safety Act /GMOs, Have The Promises Been Kept?

  Posted: August 3, 2011, 9:11 pm by admin

  
  
  

  By Moreen Majiwa (@mmajiwa)

  The issue of whether or not to import GMO’s into the country has been ongoing for over a decade.  Despite the initial resistance to the Bio Saftey Bill it was passed almost unanimously during its third reading. The passage of the Bio-Safety Act was the official enactment of a law to that would both allow and govern the importation of GMOs. Several MPs supported the bill with the promise that GMOs would be properly policed. Below are excerpts from the debate on the Bio-Safety Act and the names of the MPs who supported the Bill and those that did not.

  Have the promises on regulation of GMOs made during debate on the Bio Safety bill been kept?  You decide.

  MPs who supported the Bill

  Dr. Kilemi Mwiria (The Assistant Minister for Higher Education, Science and Technology)

  ‘This is a Bill on safety to safeguard Kenyans against the unintended use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In other words, it is to guard against the very same fears that a lot of us are expressing with regard to issues of biotechnology. It is also to guard us against a situation which is already occurring in that we already have GMOs with us.’

  Robert Monda: “we are putting in place safety and regulatory mechanism so that we can through an Act regulate any GMOs. We want to allay the fears that have been expressed by hon. Members – I think it is the name that has fuelled the fears. These are genetically modified organisms! That is simple and straightforward English: It is not science. We want to be very clear that we do not create unnecessary fear in the public; that GMOs are coming in with complications, health problems or lack of food. We are not introducing GMOs now. They are already there!”

  William Ruto: “There are very clear guidelines on the safe use of GMOs that are provide in the Bill. The framework established under the Bill are full-proof mechanism that no GMO will be introduced into this country unless it has been subjected to a thorough research and scientific analysis to ensure that it is safe in not only in terms of health for humans beings but also safe for the environment.”

  Jakoyo Midiwo: “It is very surprising that there is lot of opposition to this bill.”

  Dr. Wilber Otichilo: “GMOs are part of science and technology. This Bill is going to guard this country against anybody bringing in GMOs or any other crops that we deem unfit for this country.”

  Sally Kosgey: “Sir, the new law does not seek to introduce any GMOs or products of GMOs without strict supervision and quarantine. The new law is, indeed, for the protection of Kenyans from careless escapes or presentation of GMOs or products of GMOs, in strict accordance with the Cartagena Protocol”

  Per the Hansard MPs who spoke in support of the bill – David Koech, Elizabeth Ongoro, Danson Mungatana, Rachel Shebesh, Noah Wekesa

  MPs Opposed to the Bill

  Silas Ruteere: “I am not convinced because I know contrary to what has been advocated for the countries that use GMOs like maize or sorghum…grow then for animals. WE want to introduce GMOS but the mechanisms for the issues to do with warehouses, proper control and lack of control for contamination of our seeds have not been provided for in the bill.”

  John Mututho: “I am prepared to table a document which gives a summary of the world research on food productivity based on GMOs, showing clearly that there has never been any significant change except for the maize variety MO810, which increased up to a level of 10% and not beyond that .”

  Aden Duale: “the fundamental question I want to ask and which I want everybody to hear is; if today you are the policy-maker in this country, could you allow a large scale-farmer to plant GMOs? If you are a policy-maker in this country, you need to ask yourself; if you were a consumer, will you eat such food?”

  Franklin Bett: “We must not mix these seeds with other seeds. I want to say that we must allow risk assessment to be properly done before we introduce GMO products. In this country we seem to be in a hurry to introduce them.”

Blah blah blah

Fish cakes

Alas a fish cake.

Yet more fish cakes

Guess what ... yeah ... fish cakes.

The end of the fish cakes