Withdraw gender Bill to allow consultation

The debate over a new Bill that seeks to postpone the implementation of the gender rule in public offices requires sober and realistic analysis of issues instead of jingoistic and emotional outbursts.

This is because the matter is delicate and has serious constitutional implications. According to the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution, Parliament has up to August to enact a law that promotes one-third gender rule in all public offices.

However, a Bill tabled in Parliament is making proposals that go against the Constitution. Instead of adhering to the timelines for implementing constitutional imperatives, the Bill proposes that the one-third gender principle be implemented progressively, which is a smart way of throwing out deadlines and promoting the status quo.

NO STRAIGHT ANSWER

Clearly, there is no straight answer to cure the historical, cultural, and economic biases that have worked against women and denied them a place in high places, but there are options of going round the matter and achieving the desired goal.

The first step is to withdraw the Bill from the House and subject it to further public consultation with the aim of reaching a consensus.

Besides women leaders, the Constitutional Implementation Commission has declared the Bill unconstitutional and asked that it be shelved. That advice must be taken seriously.

The hardline stance taken by the chairman of the National Assembly’s Justice and Legal Affairs Committee, Mr Samuel Chepkong’a, who insists that debate on the Bill must continue, is misplaced.

Public participation is a central pillar of the Constitution and Mr Chepkong’a understands that. There is no reason to force the Bill through the House when it is clear that it has fatal defects and assaults the Constitution in a fundamental way.