Genesis of the gender rule crisis and how to resolve row

The drafters of the Constitution had proposed the creation of special seats to help put more women in Parliament and spare the current House the problem it is grappling with.

Ms Atsango Chesoni, who was the vice-chairperson of the committee of experts and now the told the Sunday Nation the idea they had to fulfil the principle that not more than two-thirds of elected leaders are from one gender was rejected by the Parliamentary Select Committee.

To get more women in Parliament, where they have been traditionally under-represented, she said, they had created the 47 Woman Representative seats and provided for the nomination to the House of additional MPs.

This would have been done by the electoral commission and from lists similar to those used to nominate the 12 MPs by parties as has been the custom.

Other marginalised groups such as the disabled, ethnic minorities and the youth would have been allocated 14 special seats.

Ms Chesoni said the committee was deliberate to ensure there is gender balance in the House and provided that elective positions also ought to fulfil the rule.

“If you lock out half the population, you’re locking out half the ideas,” she said.

Mbita MP Millie Odhiambo was a member of the committee when they met at the Great Rift Valley Lodge in Naivasha during those crucial weeks early 2010.

“I remember that day very well,” Ms Odhiambo told a packed room at the Serena Hotel last Friday, where the matter was discussed.

“The media was shocked because everyday they came and said, ‘Chapter One has passed’, the next day, ‘Chapter Two has passed’,  and they would wonder what has happened, up to Chapter Seven because we were dealing with women,” she added.

“They said, ‘Toeni wamama’. That was the first time we had a constitutional crisis,” she added.

Ms Chesoni and Ms Odhiambo tell of the genesis of the issue that has become this week’s talking point, with women MPs bristling at suggestions that even the 47 seats reserved for them should be taken away.

SHELVE DEADLINE

National Assembly Speaker Justin Muturi and Justice and Legal Affairs Committee chairman Samuel Chepkong’a have been on the receiving end because of their perceived stance.

Mr Chepkong’a is the author of the Bill to amend the Constitution and shelve the five-year deadline on the implementation of the gender rule while Mr Muturi has suggested the scrapping of the 47 Woman Representative seats and the 12 for party nominees and their replacement with 100 affirmative action seats.

The urgency with which MPs hope to dispense with this matter was evident on April 30, when they approved without debate a motion for the reduction of its maturation period from 14 days to one.

This enabled the Bill to be handed over to the committee for scrutiny, which would also involve public participation that there must be between its First and Second Readings.

Parliament is in a fix because the advisory by the Supreme Court was that the principle has to be fulfilled by August 27.

If the House does not pass the laws required, anybody can go to court and sue to have it dissolved.

Women MPs and the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution and Devolution Cabinet Secretary Anne Waiguru have demanded the withdrawal of that Bill.

Mr Chepkong’a has refused to do so, citing the inherent rights MPs and committees have to draft Bills and adding the Bill was approved by the committee he heads and is, therefore, not his personal initiative.

His deputy in the committee, Priscilla Nyokabi, disagrees, saying Mr Chepkong’a picked an option that was not even among those proposed by the technical working group involving 10 government and non-governmental organisations.

The Kenya Women Parliamentarians Association has whittled down the options to two.

The first option would be to have a form of election of women or men to Parliament after the General Election to enable it fulfil the requirement that not more than two-thirds of its members are of the same gender.

The second would be to have two Woman Representatives per county so that the total would be 94, with this number being complemented by the women MPs elected in the 290 constituencies.

Both would end up increasing the size of Parliament where in a worst case scenario no women are elected in the 290 constituencies, there would be 444 MPs in the National Assembly and 74 in the Senate.

According to the Institute of Economic Affairs, Kenya would at most spend a maximum Sh1.5 billion more on Parliament a year in a worst case scenario.

Based on the recurrent estimates, the Institute of Economic Affairs concluded in a report launched on Friday that each additional MP in the National Assembly would cost Sh21.1 million a year and Sh31.3 million in the Senate.

“The annual per capita cost to Kenyans is affordable,” it concluded.

NOT TOO EXPENSIVE

Women have been emphatic that the cost should not be a concern because the country endorsed the Constitution and continues to fund it.

They argue that just like devolution, with all its expenses, having more women in Parliament should not be taken as too expensive.

Women parliamentarians association chairman Cecily Mbarire summed it up when she put it plainly; “We are merely providing and implementing what is already in the Constitution. Surely when Kenyans voted for that Constitution, they understood what they were voting for.”

“To begin to say, ‘Oh you know we have changed our minds, oh that House is too large…’ Obviously you knew what you were voting for. When you said Yes, you said Yes to the Constitution as it is,” she added.

Priscilla Nyokabi (Nyeri County, TNA), said the increase in the size of Parliament ought to be accepted the same way constituencies were increased from 210 to 290.

“The country has paid heavily for governors and county governments and devolution. The women reps, even if they come in, are not even two per cent of the national government,” said Ms Nyokabi.

She argued that Kenya loses lots of money through corruption and the increase of women representatives shouldn’t be seen as a huge increase in the cost of government.

“Chepkong’a, and the Speaker cannot be the ones leading the fight against the implementation of the Constitution. Chepkong’a’s Bill cannot postpone what was given to Kenyans by the Constitution,” she added.

They said a campaign for their Bill would involve reaching out to President Uhuru Kenyatta, Deputy President William Ruto and Cord leader Raila Odinga, who have great influence on MPs as party leaders.

They reckon that if the three were on their side, then they would have won the battle because all they would have to do is marshall their troops in both Houses to pass the amendments.

A referendum wouldn’t, thus, be necessary.