|
Post by einstein on Jun 23, 2011 20:51:53 GMT 3
Well, well, well, now this is getting serious. Just before we could even finish patting ourselves on the back as a nation for a good job, before we could even finish celebrating the enhanced opportunities for our women folk in matters representation in the next government, all courtesy of our brand new constitution, it turns out our women cannot even handle or rather are still not ready to take advantage of this golden opportunity. Instead, we are staring right in the eyes of a constitutional crisis come elections next year! Holy Moly, the women are asking for even more law to favour them to occupy the posts! They are looking for another boost through legislation! Are our women really expecting someone to take them by the hands and lead them to their constitutionally guaranteed seats? Are they expecting affirmative action within affirmative action? Where is the fighting spirit on the part of women? Please Jukwaaists, let's help our women out of this 'crisis'. Say something before we face a constitutional crisis next year! Kenyan women face 'huge task' over representationKenyan women have a huge task ahead if they are to achieve the basic one-third representation in the next government, nominated MP Sofia Abdi Noor said June 23, 2011. FILEKenyan women have a huge task ahead if they are to achieve the basic one-third representation in the next government. Speaking Thursday at a breakfast meeting with the Kenya Parliamentary Journalist Association at Nairobi’s Stanley Hotel, women representatives said it will be “difficult” for the women to raise at least 116 seats in the next Parliament. They said that even though the campaign to ensure that at least one-third of Parliament is women-Kenya being a patriarchal society—the odds against them were so high to the extent that they need a boost through legislation. Ms Sofia Abdi Noor (nominated, ODM), Ms Tiyah Galgalo, a commissioner with the Interim Independent Electoral Commission, Ms Rosemary Orlale of the Kenya Editors Guild and city councillor Racheal Kamweru joined Ms Agnes Mugane in saying that the time has come for women to claim their position in the politics. The women leaders said the country was staring at a constitutional crisis, if say, in the next polls, men occupy more than two-thirds of the elective positions.The Constitution says that not more than two-thirds of the elective or appointive posts should be dominated by either gender.Electoral violence, poverty and lack of political base plus the relegation of women to home-making are also some of the challenges that they have to overcome to beat the constitutional threshold. “Our fear is that we may not have women coming forward to contest these special seats,” said Ms Galgalo, alluding to an apathy among women when it comes to discussing issues to do with the law under the Constitution. The lack of money to mount political campaigns is also a key challenge for them to run as independent candidates. “I’d love to be the mayor of Nairobi. I know I can be the mayor, but you know what happens? People are pulled aside, say to Mombasa to ‘strategise’ before coming to vote. Which woman can afford that for 100 councillors?. It all boils down to economic power,” said Ms Kamweru. Ms Mugane, a programmes officer of the Association of Local Government Association of Kenya, said that if there’s no law to back Constitution, then the women’s representation will be at 15.1 per cent in the National Assembly and at 26 per cent in the Senate. There are 47 women special seats, at least four nominated women MPs, which brings the total of those to sit in the national assembly to 51. For the Senate, there will be 16 women, and one young woman and another woman from the disabled group, bringing the total to 18 slots. The women said that unless there’s a law to favour women to occupy the posts, they may not have a “voice” in politics. “We know there are very few Martha Karua’s, the ones who whether they are alone or in a group, their voice will still be heard. But most of us need a critical mass to be heard,” said Ms Mugane. She said that women “were their own enemies”, because the ones in position of influence were not keen to mentor the aspiring ones. Ms Mugane said the public had complained that women MPs were “unreachable” to the rest of the women and to prove her point, none of the 22 women MPs serving in Kenya’s Parliament, save for Ms Sofia Abdi, had shown up for the meeting. “Many women currently in positions of leadership in local authorities have not gone to school and they’re likely to be locked out if education is one of the criteria for candidates in the county polls,” said Ms Mugane. Male politicians were also on the receiving end for misinforming the public, saying that women had no point campaigning in the elective posts because they had 47 special seats reserved for them in the National Assembly and 16 seats in the Senate. This propaganda, the women said, was rampant in the pastoral areas where the reach of the media and civil society is remote. “I was in Sengeilu in Ijara and asked people there if they knew the gains brought by the Constitution. They said they know about ‘Yes’ and ‘No’. There’s no radio, no TV, no newspaper and thus the few people who know about the Constitution misinterpret it. The male politicians tell off women, because they have special seats,” said Ms Sofia Abdi Noor. www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Kenyan+women+face+huge+task+over+representation/-/1064/1187712/-/14w66bpz/-/index.html
|
|
|
Post by gachquota on Jun 23, 2011 20:59:05 GMT 3
Women need to knuckle down n fight no more yabure.Enaff is enaff.
|
|
|
Post by einstein on Jun 24, 2011 15:39:32 GMT 3
As usual, all are mum including the women themselves when it comes to this issue. I will always wonder why!?
Okay, let there be no competition as far as women are concerned in next year's election. We should not even allow competition amongst women themselves. All we need to do is simply handpick enough women to comply with the one-third requirement, and put them in those positions as our representatives in government.
This way, at least we shall have averted the looming constitutional crisis. Problem solved and debate closed!!
|
|
|
Post by madgf on Jun 24, 2011 16:05:05 GMT 3
In the public domain Kenyan women do all the work. These NGOs, farmers.. women. Give them funds to campaign I say. I'm sure personal security is the reason why women aren't as profilic in parading their faces around in public. They get attacked. Perhaps do something to ensure this don't happen.
|
|
|
Post by abdulmote on Jun 24, 2011 18:15:52 GMT 3
I agree; that the new Constitutional requirement for women to occupy a third of the elective seats is going to be a very steep uphill task and the reasons are very clear and simple for all to see;
As a man who was born of a woman, married to woman and has a bright hard working daughter as one of my children, I must admit that I find women’s quality as human beings only as awesome! My own mother brought up a family of eight children, single handedly and to full maturity as adults, despite the presence and economic participation of my father. My mother cared for us from day one. She fed us, washed us, worried about our individual health and emotional concerns, schooled us and all the while loved us, thereby committing a chunk of her lifetime nurturing her children and without even ever contemplating running away and abandoning us! Now that is an impossible challenge for any man you can think of and I dare you mention one!
My wife on the other hand...well, let me just state that she courageously and enthusiastically took over where my mother left and without a huge fuss about it. Besides that, I cannot envisage or imagine how my life would have been quality wise, was I never married to the women who gave me so much, I cannot imagine levelling that generosity in return. In short I believe, women are the backbone of mankind and the world would never have been what it is today without the same.
Having said that, when it comes to fulfilling such a requirement as given in our Constitution, there so many obstacles against such a noble desire that to achieve them will require more than just the Constitutional clauses as mentioned and especially on the elective positions.
Fundamentally and in making a short observation on the same; The process of fulfilling any elective post is essentially carried out through what I would simply describe as Political Competition. The key word here is ‘competition’. It is a process where candidates are freely and generally allowed to participate without discriminative exclusion based on gender. This principle in itself cannot guarantee that the winners of a given percentage will necessarily be women, in pursuit of the Constitutional requirement.
Having said that, even if such a requirement was to enjoy a legislative requirement, where it is made as a must that a woman is the only acceptable candidate for a given seat, then a question of ‘forcing’ the electorate to accept a woman as their only elected representative comes to the fore. Such a requirement necessarily removes the option of free choice, where the ‘political competition’ may not be accommodated. The fundamental principle of any election therefore, being seen to be free and fair ultimately fails! The whole process then becomes an imposition rather than an election, a process which is not acceptable under the natural rules of democracy.
Next is the issue of Choice. Even if all of these obstacles can be overcome, you then have the question of which constituency ‘must’ accommodate some of the women candidates towards their constitutional quota, irrespective of what the electorate may prefer! Volunteers will be needed here ladies and gentlemen. Someone tell me how we can arrive at that.
-unedited.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jun 24, 2011 19:27:16 GMT 3
Einstein, relax man. I thought this was a non-issue because I assumed the one-third rule only applies to appointed office not elected posts. Appointees are determined by the appointing authority while elected officials are subjected to that chance game called elections. As Abdulmote rightfully points out, how can you enforce that & still have fair elections?
When it comes to elective office, women are a sleeping giant. They have 52% of the nation's population & a whopping 60% of the registered electorate according to the NCWK. Whoever who could rally that vote would go far without necessarily relying on affirmative action.
|
|
|
Post by tnk on Jun 24, 2011 20:04:55 GMT 3
Einstein, relax man. I thought this was a non-issue because I assumed the one-third rule only applies to appointed office not elected posts. Appointees are determined by the appointing authority while elected officials are subjected to that chance game called elections. As Abdulmote rightfully points out, how can you enforce that & still have fair elections? et tu b6k? assume? == 81. The electoral system shall comply with the following principles–– (a) freedom of citizens to exercise their political rights under Article 38; (b) not more than two-thirds of the members of elective public bodies shall be of the same gender == its the responsibility of each political party to ensure that no more than 2/3 of candidates for elective posts are of the same gender and then leave all else to chance. generally speaking these conditions are not difficult to fulfil if the political parties pay close attention. for instance national assembly comprises 290 elected mps, 47 elected women county reps, 12 nominated, plus speaker for a total of 350 1/3 of this is 117 (adongo dont start with that 0.7 person thing ;D ) today its the women representation that is of concern but am sure in a few years that will change so already 47 (county reps) + 4 (nomination) are guaranteed so only 66 women from the 290 constituency reps are required to be in compliance with the law in todays parliament out of 210 there are 16 elected women members of parliament. these are exceptional women who have stood their own against many formidable opponents of either gender. incidentally although the task force is still working out the nuances, so we have the 47 elected women county reps to the national assembly but we also have the senate with 47 elected county reps. i foresee some power play in the future over seniority + 12 nominated women to the senate does anyone see the possibility of a constituency with woman senator, woman mp, woman county rep, etc etc, its possible, remote but nevertheless possible. 2012 will be interesting
|
|
|
Post by abdulmote on Jun 24, 2011 20:21:59 GMT 3
Also see the Constituion on Membership of The National Assembly; Ch 8, 97 (1) (b): 47 women, each elected by the registered voters of single member Constituencies.
How?
As you can see, there is a lot of hard work to be done!
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jun 24, 2011 20:26:33 GMT 3
Einstein, relax man. I thought this was a non-issue because I assumed the one-third rule only applies to appointed office not elected posts. Appointees are determined by the appointing authority while elected officials are subjected to that chance game called elections. As Abdulmote rightfully points out, how can you enforce that & still have fair elections? et tu b6k? assume? == 81. The electoral system shall comply with the following principles–– (a) freedom of citizens to exercise their political rights under Article 38; (b) not more than two-thirds of the members of elective public bodies shall be of the same gender == Yes TNK. Assume. & you know what they say about assumptions. I read that tome of a constitution of ours as a layman. By the time you're done with the whole thing, you find you've forgotten specifics, but because you agree with the general document, a tick is in order. Why we didn't copy & paste the brief US version, cliff notes by constitutional standards, beats me. Even China has a shorter constitution than KE. But, I digress. As Abdulmote asked above, just how did the COE's expect that requirement to be met in a free for all, anything goes contest which is what elections are. You can only nominate so many MP's & you sure as hell cannot demand constituencies to vote for women without disenfranchising vox populi. Sounds like a suicide pass to me. If the ladies are demanding a law above the law that you've pasted above then we definitely have a Houston on our hands. One-third is unattainable in parliament.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Jun 24, 2011 20:31:22 GMT 3
Also see the Constituion on Membership of The National Assembly; Ch 8, 97 (1) (b): 47 women, each elected by the registered voters of single member Constituencies. How? As you can see, there is a lot of hard work to be done! This is why I value Jukwaa. The indigestible is broken down into bite size pieces.
|
|
|
Post by escale on Jun 24, 2011 20:55:44 GMT 3
In the public domain Kenyan women do all the work. These NGOs, farmers.. women. Give them funds to campaign I say. I'm sure personal security is the reason why women aren't as profilic in parading their faces around in public. They get attacked. Perhaps do something to ensure this don't happen. madgfIf that is the case, wouldn't it have been more sensible to set up some mechanism for supporting women (be it for campaigns, security, etc) who are interested in elective positions. Methinks this one-third-law for elective positions is impractical if elections are meant to be fair and democratic - I use the latter term loosely here to mean 'the representative is whoever got the most votes among all who vied for a post'. And what exactly does non-compliance with the one-third-rule imply? Is it that if elections are held and the cut-off is not met then we go for another round of elections or do we then nominate as many women as is required to make up the numbers? Hmmm, some in depth reading of the constitution and if there are any remedies is obviously called for here.
|
|
|
Post by tnk on Jun 24, 2011 21:14:23 GMT 3
As Abdulmote asked above, just how did the COE's expect that requirement to be met in a free for all, anything goes contest which is what elections are. You can only nominate so many MP's & you sure as hell cannot demand constituencies to vote for women without disenfranchising vox populi. Sounds like a suicide pass to me. If the ladies are demanding a law above the law that you've pasted above then we definitely have a Houston on our hands. One-third is unattainable in parliament. b6k, abdulmote you guys are right the number appears unattainable if we break out the numbers 290 elected MPs, 47 women elected county reps/MPs?? plus 12 nominated + 2 ex-officio brings a total of 351. 1/3 of this is 117. 47 are guaranteed for women so that leaves 70 to be directly elected compare this with the current parliament of 210 + 12 nominated + 2 ex-oficio we have 16 women elected + 6 nominated for a total of 22 (one who always wants to strip ) . The requirement would have been 75. clearly 53 more elected women from the last hotly contested and volatile GE would have been quite a challenge nevertheless that is the law, so considering that FIDA has already gone to court to challenge supreme court composition, looking ahead we should just prepare the template for the challenge in court that national assembly will not comply with 2/3 1/3 representation
|
|
|
Post by tnk on Jun 24, 2011 21:21:26 GMT 3
Also see the Constituion on Membership of The National Assembly; Ch 8, 97 (1) (b): 47 women, each elected by the registered voters of single member Constituencies. How? As you can see, there is a lot of hard work to be done! i understand this to mean that parties will nominate only women candidates for this specific group of county reps who are not part of the 290
|
|
|
Post by tnk on Jun 24, 2011 21:32:46 GMT 3
on a side note
under the current remuneration package
about 225 members of parliament earn approx 1m each per month
225m per month and approx 1.8bn a year
they also have some grants or loans for car and housing i think 3m and 5m so lets say an additional 10m per MP which is 2bn
they have also worked out some pension scheme but wont factor it in here
generally we set aside 10bn for the five years to cater for our MPs
the number now goes up 4.2bn per year in salaries, 3bn for the cars/houses
for the five years it will be 24bn
and this does not take into account the senate.
unless that package is revised, those amounts will be unsustainable
|
|
|
Post by einstein on Jun 26, 2011 1:01:32 GMT 3
Okay, I'm back after my brief rant and tantrum.
Thanks to all who picked up the debate and led it to where we are now.
From the above discussions, we all agree that unless something drastic is done women have a seemingly insurmountable task ahead if we have to comply with the constitution. The next step after identifying and isolating a problem is to come up with possible solutions, by way of brainstorming, to the same. And that is the stage we find ourselves in.
In my view women should do the following if they hope to surmount this very steep hill as Abdulmote terms it.
First, as B6K said, women have to recognise that they own the very asset that they need if they have to push their agenda through and that is the votes. They have more votes than men country wide. For the first time in the next elections, women should intentionally be egocentric with their votes. These are the times when women can show egotism without being branded egotistic. It is not only in their own interest and welfare to vote in as many women as possible but also in the interest of the whole nation i.e. compliance with the supreme law of the land. Heck, even if it turns out after elections that we have more women than men in parliament so be it!
Secondly, the various women groups in the country have a lot of work to do, starting today rather than tomorrow, to ensure that the women throughout the country achieve at least the one-third minimum requirement in elective and appointive posts. They have to mount an awareness campaign amongst the women traversing all the constituencies in the whole republic. In this aspect, I understand the frustration of Ms. Mugane with the current women parliamentarians who are just complacent with the little women have achieved so far in the area of women representation in parliament. These women parliamentarians should be playing a leading role in mobilising women votes for fellow aspiring women candidates besides mentoring the same!
Women groups like FIDA (should not just be representing women interests in courts but also outside courts), various civil society groups (many women are members), Maendeleo Ya Wanawake (are they still in town?) etc. should be mounting a massive awareness campaign across the country preaching the gospel about this solemn constitutional requirement amongst women! Surely, we have enough enlightened women in various Kenyan cities who can drive and spearhead a blitz campaign in the country to prioritise this issue. This campaign should be started like today and not tomorrow.
Thirdly and more importantly, for the aforementioned groups of women to carry out that urgent campaign they will need some if not massive financial and human resources. This is where the government and our keen development partners like the US, the EU, Canada, Australia etc. come in. In fact the government through Treasury (Uhuru) should have factored this in the budget for the next financial year. It is the government’s responsibility to ensure that the women fulfil their constitutional quota in the upcoming elections. But as you know, Uhuru’s thinking is focused elsewhere viz. Den Haag. He would rather allocate more money to The Hague in the name of hospitality (a mass murderer to be treated like Muthamaki of the Kenyan republic) than channel it toward the election of women.
Our development partners who have been keen on empowering the youth to become leaders should unlock their wallets even more since there are many aspiring potential women ready to take up the leadership mantle but lack the financial clout. Thus these development partners should divert more resources toward empowering women than men if this goal is to be achieved in the next elections.
That is all that occurred to me for now. I will brainstorm further on this. But all in all, I think there is no need for a law above the law, to quote B6K, to favour women. It is all about women now rolling up their sleeves (not skirts please madam Murugi!!!) to get this onus task dispensed with.
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 7, 2015 22:48:34 GMT 3
The 1963 Lancaster/Independence constitution was a pretty hot document, just like the 2010 one. Then came the ammendments, until the institutionalisation of the one-party state, and the reversal to the colonial authoritarianism. Now, as everything hot and sexy stalls in the 2010 constitution ---vetting of judges, anti-corruption fight, chapter six integrity clause, bill human rights (ammended for security/terrorism), progressive LGBT clauses .... it is obvious retardation is in full gear. www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Muturi-roots-for-100-special-MPs/-/1064/2708504/-/3p1be5z/-/index.html NB: I saw Nigeria today borrowing money to pay salaries! Muturi should check the public wage bill first. ---AAh, he already okayed it with Rotich!
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on May 9, 2015 12:08:27 GMT 3
As B6k said sometime back I am still at a loss why women or even men for that matter would need affirmative action to get elected. Women are 52% of the population and yet do not vote for women candidates. Perhaps they do not trust the women candidates they seem to get. Now when the nomination process is carried out and women are still entitled to a third of the nominated places, what we get is nothing more than a bunch of activists who serve other interests that are not necessarily beneficial to women.
Now if Raila sincerely believes in the flaws of the constitution that he wants his Okoa Kenya initiative to resolve, then this gender representation of elective posts needs removing and if it is there, he can be assured of my vote. We have a rotten constitution that needs rewriting and this time we should keep the Committee of Experts in NOTHING and activists away from the process.
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 17, 2015 23:40:45 GMT 3
I recall we debated this provision extensively. Its dumb, and should simply be scrapped rather than be replaced with anything. One-man one-vote!
|
|
|
Post by podp on May 18, 2015 12:52:46 GMT 3
I recall we debated this provision extensively. Its dumb, and should simply be scrapped rather than be replaced with anything. One-man one-vote! such thinking takes us to pre 2010 constitution days as this....Ainabkoi Member of Parliament and chairman of the parliamentary Justice and Legal Affairs committee Samwel Chepkonga last week introduced a constitutional amendment bill that seeks to suspend the clause on the one-third gender rule in elective representation. Read more at: www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000161354/one-third-gender-rule-calls-for-more-women-participation/but having had the privilege of seeing the pace at which countries who have a sizable number of women in decision making e.g. Botswana, Namibia, Rwanda in Africa and Denmark, Sweden, Finland in Europe I am persuaded we need to increase the number of women in position of authority i.e. Parliament, Senate, Cabinet Secretaries, Principal Secretaries, Managing Directors etc. in Kenya
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 18, 2015 13:46:04 GMT 3
I recall we debated this provision extensively. Its dumb, and should simply be scrapped rather than be replaced with anything. One-man one-vote! such thinking takes us to pre 2010 constitution days as this....Ainabkoi Member of Parliament and chairman of the parliamentary Justice and Legal Affairs committee Samwel Chepkonga last week introduced a constitutional amendment bill that seeks to suspend the clause on the one-third gender rule in elective representation. Read more at: www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000161354/one-third-gender-rule-calls-for-more-women-participation/but having had the privilege of seeing the pace at which countries who have a sizable number of women in decision making e.g. Botswana, Namibia, Rwanda in Africa and Denmark, Sweden, Finland in Europe I am persuaded we need to increase the number of women in position of authority i.e. Parliament, Senate, Cabinet Secretaries, Principal Secretaries, Managing Directors etc. in Kenya Of course it does. That's where the intellectual assessment of wishful provisions belong, and where this was passed raw. I don't have the energy to reopen the debate of then, but the difficulties of implementing the affirmative clause in an electoral process were adequately discussed and then ignored. Even if everyone were to decide to vote for at least one woman for every 3 electoral offices as that law seems to demand of a voter, still meeting the one third law could not be assured. So it is one thing to desire that women should have more decision positions, and quite another to say that the desire will be implemented by a process that is technically incapable of such implementation.
|
|
|
Post by omundustrong on May 19, 2015 9:29:54 GMT 3
The framers of the constitution are not dead fortunately,at least most of them,They should be called and asked what they had in mind when they put some of the clauses in the constitution,by shedding some light on this we can then see how best to legislate and operationalise the constitution.My take,create seats "in air" (kwa hewa) that are deemed for women representation even if not occupied that meets the shotfall after elections.How these hewa seats will operate is that when it comes to voting,the assumption will be that these seats have voted for pro-gender issues that favour how the women elected members have voted!So that for instance if we elect only 22MPs have hewa seats tthat fills the shortfall.For all intends and purposes,these seats will be deemed as if occupied.Crazy, but food for thought!In the meantime call out Ekuru Aukot,Nzamba Gitonga,Yash Pal Ghai and pick their brains!As we talk,we dont know when the next elections should be held!
|
|
|
Post by podp on May 19, 2015 10:00:25 GMT 3
The framers of the constitution are not dead fortunately,at least most of them,They should be called and asked what they had in mind when they put some of the clauses in the constitution,by shedding some light on this we can then see how best to legislate and operationalise the constitution. My take,create seats "in air" (kwa hewa) that are deemed for women representation even if not occupied that meets the shotfall after elections.How these hewa seats will operate is that when it comes to voting,the assumption will be that these seats have voted for pro-gender issues that favour how the women elected members have voted!So that for instance if we elect only 22MPs have hewa seats tthat fills the shortfall.For all intends and purposes,these seats will be deemed as if occupied.Crazy, but food for thought!In the meantime call out Ekuru Aukot,Nzamba Gitonga,Yash Pal Ghai and pick their brains!As we talk,we dont know when the next elections should be held! another take is....I propose the amendment of the Elections Act to effect the following suggestion for Parliament, the Senate, and the county assemblies: The one-third threshold of women MPs in the current National Assembly is 117 seats of the chamber’s 349 MPs. To ensure that the threshold is achieved, a minimum of 66 women will have to be elected from the 290 constituencies. The guaranteed seats are the 47 women elected from the counties and the four of the 12 nominated MPs. The 290 constituencies should be numbered in alphabetical order and divided by 66 to get 4.39, which can be rounded off to four. This factor of four can be applied to the numbered constituencies and those in multiples of 4 (No.4, No.8, No.12, No.16, etc) reserved to be contested only by women. This will result in 73 women MPs elected from the constituencies. Add these to the 47 women representatives from the counties and the four nominated women MPs and you will have 124 women MPs — higher than the threshold of 117. www.nation.co.ke/oped/Letters/Gender-Rule-Constitution-Parliament-MPs/-/440806/2721226/-/yk6dgiz/-/index.html
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on May 19, 2015 20:19:25 GMT 3
I don't have the energy to reopen the debate of then, but the difficulties of implementing the affirmative clause in an electoral process were adequately discussed and then ignored. Even if everyone were to decide to vote for at least one woman for every 3 electoral offices as that law seems to demand of a voter, still meeting the one third law could not be assured. So it is one thing to desire that women should have more decision positions, and quite another to say that the desire will be implemented by a process that is technically incapable of such implementation. That is a very well-put point, and it is deep too. But the problem of the historical and institutionalised marginalisation of women in public space, remains, just like, I suppose, it does for the blacks in the USA too. If we agree this is a problem to be addressed, and there is a constitutional consensus, then the problem remains, ( the electoral process is the wrong mechanism,) so a right mechanism must be identified and implemented. In your unmatchable words amigo '' a process technically competent'' must be facilitated. Good. I do not believe in discovering the wheel twice. It is called affirmative action, or positive discrimination. And, outside the ''impossible electoral mechanism'', there remains a whale of opportunities to practice affirmative action. Now, to improve on Scandinavia: All heads of parastals, female. All high state positions outside elected ones, 50/50. And if the head is a man, the deputy must be a woman. So half the cabinet -being non elected, will be female. Now, any objections!? (NB: I have followed the arguments against affirmative action in the USA, so, like Mank, I may not be bothered to re-read rehashments or variations thereof!)
|
|
|
Post by mank on May 20, 2015 8:14:24 GMT 3
I don't have the energy to reopen the debate of then, but the difficulties of implementing the affirmative clause in an electoral process were adequately discussed and then ignored. Even if everyone were to decide to vote for at least one woman for every 3 electoral offices as that law seems to demand of a voter, still meeting the one third law could not be assured. So it is one thing to desire that women should have more decision positions, and quite another to say that the desire will be implemented by a process that is technically incapable of such implementation. That is a very well-put point, and it is deep too. But the problem of the historical and institutionalised marginalisation of women in public space, remains, just like, I suppose, it does for the blacks in the USA too. If we agree this is a problem to be addressed, and there is a constitutional consensus, then the problem remains, ( the electoral process is the wrong mechanism,) so a right mechanism must be identified and implemented. In your unmatchable words amigo '' a process technically competent'' must be facilitated. Good. I do not believe in discovering the wheel twice. It is called affirmative action, or positive discrimination. And, outside the ''impossible electoral mechanism'', there remains a whale of opportunities to practice affirmative action. Now, to improve on Scandinavia: All heads of parastals, female. All high state positions outside elected ones, 50/50. And if the head is a man, the deputy must be a woman. So half the cabinet -being non elected, will be female. Now, any objections!? (NB: I have followed the arguments against affirmative action in the USA, so, like Mank, I may not be bothered to re-read rehashments or variations thereof!) But Amigo, mwananchi has taken the position that political offices will be filled by the ballot (one vote for each qualified voter) - we can find that put very strongly in the constitution. So if this affirmative action is also a value, then mwananchi has to decide which of the two values is to be sacrificed so the other can be attained ... either a little more concentrated decision-making than the constitution stipulates, or sisters will just have to outrun their brothers to get there. It is that simple, because the two cannot go hand in hand. We should discuss the merits of the affirmative action separately, to avoid noise over the current issue - it is not necessarily unanimous that there are grounds for affirmative action ...but for now.
|
|
|
Post by podp on May 20, 2015 8:18:20 GMT 3
That is a very well-put point, and it is deep too. But the problem of the historical and institutionalised marginalisation of women in public space, remains, just like, I suppose, it does for the blacks in the USA too. If we agree this is a problem to be addressed, and there is a constitutional consensus, then the problem remains, ( the electoral process is the wrong mechanism,) so a right mechanism must be identified and implemented. In your unmatchable words amigo '' a process technically competent'' must be facilitated. But Amigo, mwananchi has taken the position that political offices will be filled by the ballot (one vote for each qualified voter) - we can find that put very strongly in the constitution. So if this affirmative action is also a value, then mwananchi has to decide which of the two values is to be sacrificed so the other can be attained. It is that simple, because the two cannot go hand in hand. We should discuss the merits of the affirmative action separately, to avoid noise over the current issue - it is not necessarily unanimous that there are grounds for affirmative action ...but for now. both red high lights To achieve affirmative action in the new wards, electoral regulations would be in place to ensure voters elect a man and a woman to take of care of the constitutional requirement on gender equality. "The benefits of encouraging equal participation of women and the building of cultural change and perceptions on women's leadership should be pursued at all cost, especially at the local level of governance," the report commissioned by the National Assembly's Budget and Appropriations Committee added. Read more at: standardmedia.co.ke/article/2000162831/sack-60-000-civil-servants-says-auditsince current mPigs do not have a good history of following up on obvious public good it will be necessary for none state actors, mainly the NGO and other 'evil' society members to push for the requirements of 2010 Constitution. Okoa Kenya can also add fuel to the fire and Pesa Mashinani too can assist in breaking the camels back.
|
|