WHY I WILL VOTE "NO" TO THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION

I will vote NO. I invite you to also Vote NO. Please note that my “NO” is based on a careful reading of the Proposed Constitution, since it stands to affect ME at a personal level. I have therefore NOT regurgitated anyone’s views or objections and I have not plagiarized anyone’s work.

Talking of plagiarism, the ignominious and despicable cut-and-paste job of text lifting chunks of the Republic of South Africa Constitution, pasting them onto the Proposed Constitution, and disguising the outcome as “homegrown” is a weak, pitiable, and spineless excuse to approve of the so-called “Proposed Constitution” in the name of, or the incessant mantra of “reform”.

The “Committee of Experts” even unashamedly text lifted the very same sub-headings from the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and pasted them unaltered in the Proposed Constitution. Case in point?

Numerous provisions to be frank, but I will illustrate this by usage of a few provisions for the moment, (for lack of space): Article 28 (including the sub-heading thereof) is a word-for-word text lift of Section 10 the S.A. Constitution.

Article 33 of the Proposed Constitution, including the sub-heading thereof is a word-for-word text lift of Section 16 of the S.A. Constitution.

Article 41, and the alphabetical subprovisions of Article 203 of the Proposed Constitution are text lifted from Section 23 and 214 respectively of the Constitution of Republic of South Africa.

You can readily access the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa on the net and proceed to compare it with the so-called Proposed Constitution the Government is pushing for adoption. A comprehensive schedule which I have prepared of the provisions subject of this cut-and-paste is available and I need not post here.

In the result, I respectfully do not see the need for us to pretend that Kenyans’ views were “collected and collated” by the “Committee of Experts” for inclusion in the Proposed Constitution.

Now, I concede that cut-and-paste jobs have their limited application, and possible justifications, but I cannot pardon pretensions of “expert” work being ostensibly applied to render a Constitution through cut-and-paste work.

Cut-and-paste a Constitution? Even a college Professor will not grade your term paper if it turns out that you plagiarized the content!

If this is what I am being asked to endorse to govern me, my children and my grand and great grand children, via the Referendum, my intellectual abhorrence for this cut-and-paste job dictates that I will vote NO.

Even a 4th form leaver could easily accomplish the same feat of constituting the provisions I have pointed out were copied-and-pasted, given a pair of scissors, glue, and a pen; discounting the use of Office/Desktop facilities to cut and paste Word documents.

Having said that, I have elsewhere shared the piece below, just to demonstrate that you will be worse off if you vote in such a bad “Proposed Constitution” for these reasons:

Kenya will open itself for re-colonization. Foreign laws (Treaties and Conventions) will become Kenyan laws immediately a few people from the Attorney General’s office ratify a Treaty/Convention. This is found in Article 2(6) of the Proposed Constitution.

Let us face it, the American Constitution in Article 2 Section 2 of that Constitution of USA forbids the President of the US from ratifying a treaty without the approval of 2/3 members of Congress. (You can easily access the American Constitution on the Web and read that provision just for purposes of verification)

In Britain, the foreign Treaty/Convention must be laid in its Parliament for 21 days and MPs debate on it thereafter. Such a Treaty/Convention still does NOT become law until a Bill is published, debated, and passed. If you care about your country Kenya, guard it from being taken over by foreigners through dubious Treaties/Conventions.

Are these 2 countries (USA and Britain) not aware of the danger of foreign treaties being automatically made local laws upon ratification? They are, and that is why they prohibit it in their legal system!

The current position in Kenya is that any foreign law (Treaty/Convention) has to follow the British pattern, i.e. a Bill must be published to “domesticate” such a Treaty, debated, and passed. You are better off without the likes of Joe Biden storming into Kenya and treating you like useless Africans, but that is what you are inviting by Article 2(6) in the Proposed Constitution.

Vote No. If you are a man, this Proposed Constitution will make you regret being born a man. Article 21(3) DOES NOT recognize the needs of men. Have a look at it. It provides for everyone except the able bodied man. You have to be insane not to see that. Yet when you look at Article 27(3), men and women are supposed to be equal in every respect.

Article 45(3) even makes it worse because once you divorce, your wife or in the case of a woman, your spouse will automatically take off with 50% of the property!

The current position is that once there is a divorce, where there is a property dispute the Court looks at the evidence of each spouse and gives them their proven percentage of contribution. No one is entitled to an automatic half of the marriage property. It is clear there will be no equity under the Proposed Constitution. It is also clear that gold diggers will marry and take off with half of the property they have been gold digging for. Vote No.

Even worse off, this same provision (Article 45(3)) states that in marriage the man and woman are equal. In an age of rising Feminism, the man will be slapped – very likely – with a duty roster to hit the kitchen (e.g. Man: Mon, Tue, Wed. Woman: Thur Fri, Sat. Sun mtu kivyake.) and do house chores as this is the law. Is this the family life we want? This is not an invention. It is happening. Vote No.

Even in elections, the man is portrayed as unfairly advantaged and is pushed against the wall. Article 100 makes provision for special treatment of women as though they are in the same class with disabled people. Yet Article 27(4) prohibits such discrimination.

You as the man will be discriminated against solely because of your gender: being a man. Till you die.

Don’t fool yourself. The process will be forced down your throat because the Kenya National Human Rights and Equality Commission is tasked with the work of “gender mainstreaming” under Article 59(2)(b).

Gender mainstreaming is an expression your cucu will NOT understand. But it simply means feminism practiced in everyday life. It means you as the man will have to agree to “affirmative action”.

In case you doubt, Article 59(2)(d) and (e) gives the Kenya National Human Rights and Equality Commission power to storm into your house and investigate whether your mboch (househelp) is being “treated with dignity” as provided in Article 28. You can be compelled to buy them a mattress or “stop treating them with indignity”, whatever that means. So welcome to the police state.

Meaning that you stand disadvantaged till you die. You have no hope of changing that oppression because Article 257 of the Proposed Constitution is simply framed with the intention of making it impossible to change the Constitution.

This is not just for men. If you are a woman then it means your father, your brother, your uncle, your cousin, your man or boyfriend are discriminated against. And do not think Feminism is calculated to benefit the common woman. It is for the elite. It is they who will select each other to fill out posts created at the expense of democracy. Vote No.

Abortion is murder and it is legalized under Article 26(4). Look at politicians lying to you that there is no clause saying abortion is permitted. Read that Article again. They take you for a fool. Do you take yourself as a fool? Whose agenda is it to introduce abortion? Remember, nothing has changed among the nations in competing for resources. The same way the Europeans partitioned Africa in order to exploit its resources, the same it is now to use subtle means of domination. You are too many. Your population needs control.

Abortion as permitted under Article 26(4) and 43(1)(a) under the pretext of “reproductive health care rights” is population control, pure and simple.

And if this is not enough reason to make you vote no, think about the land issues. You are not being told by the Government and its politicians what will be the minimum acreage of land you will be permitted to hold should this Proposed Constitution pass. See Article 68(c)(i). You are not being told what system of taxing your freehold will be implemented under Article 67(2)(g).

It is also clear that the 16 laws that must be passed between September 2010 and September 2011 under Schedule 5 cannot be available to all MPs to read, understand, and deliberate upon. It means that someone is busy writing these laws and your local MP will be required to pass them without much thought. This is treasonable. Dangerous.

Why the hurry to pass laws we do not know or are not given a chance to peruse now?

If your local MP fails to pass these laws within 1 year, Article 261(7) says that Parliament MUST be dissolved and a new Parliament must be compelled to pass these laws. Also, if it fails to pass these laws, then it also must be dissolved until they are passed.

This is suspicious. Mpende msipende, there are laws you MUST pass. Whose Kenya are we talking about here? Is this why the U.S. V.P. Joe Biden spent 2 days of his “busy” life to lecture Kenyans on why they should pass these laws? Vote No.

You must vote no because the brand of devolution that this Proposed Constitution pretends to serve you is useless. What is a devolved Government supposed to be doing? Licensing dogs? Giving you burial permits? (See Schedule 4 Part 2, Paragraph 6).

You have NO equality among the Counties. Yet we are being told this is a “good” Constitution.

At the moment, the President must convene the National Assembly in Parliament within Parliament Buildings. Yet this Proposed Constitution creates a monster President who has power to summon the first sitting of a newly elected Parliament wherever he chooses, including his own backyard. This is what Article 126(2) states. This is a despot. A demagogue.

This monstrous President now has the express power to make Executive Orders under Article 135. There is NOTHING that stops him from making an Executive Order that is retrospective in nature. Compare this with Article 58(2)(a) that expressly prohibits the retroactive operation of State of Emergency laws like the Anti-Terrorism Bill, intended to be passed under Article 58(6) with draconian implications of no-compensation to victims of the System under Article 58(7).

Incidentally, Article 58(7) is a text lift of Article 43 of the 2003 Suppression of Terrorism Bill.

Back to Article 135, there is NOTHING that demands the Executive Orders be tabled before Parliament for oversight, nor is the citizenry accorded the opportunity to know when they are made, why, or what they contain. This means that the President can still maintain and justify dictatorial actions. For the “Committee of Experts” that was busy cutting and pasting the South African Constitution, the equivalent provision in South Africa states that an Executive Order must be countersigned and it is easily accessible.

This President will also have the powers of DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL like a dictator, under Article 49(1)(g). Despotic Governments use the tool of detention without trial in order to silence dissenters. The same politicians at the forefront of propounding support for the Proposed Constitution vehemently vilified Moi for “DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL”, yet they now support the same thing in Article 49(1)(g).

So Moi who was not legally empowered by the current Constitution to detain people without trial was a dictator and the Powers that Will Be under the Proposed Constitution are angels with the instrument of Detention without Trial under Article 49(1)(g)?

You are better off without such a provision because the current Constitution DOES NOT provide for detention without trial.

Combine this with a police force that is now prohibited from having ANY form of business under Article 77(1), and you can imagine what trumped up charges you can face from such police officers.

Even more dangerous, your freedom of expression is endangered because under Article 33(2)(d)(i) you can be arrested for “vilifying others”. What????? Yes. So this is a police state that you are being asked to create.

A State where some people have NO rights at all. Muslim women can be treated like dung. They can be mistreated and mishandled, abused and chastised without claiming any “right” unless they stop being Muslims because Article 24(4) exempts them from the Bill of Rights.

Also, children can be married to Muslim men because Article 45(2) only states adult persons can marry another person but it does not state both must be adults. Surprise, surprise I have NOT heard any feminist organizations that portray themselves as championing the “rights of women” object to this oppression.

This is a Kenya of inequality that we are creating.

The poor who cannot pay land taxes will likely loose their land under Article 66(1). No one should fool us that you cannot loose land because Article 40 (3) clearly gives the Government power to take your land. You will also be forced to share the proceeds of your investment in property with people that never helped you invest in the first place, under Article 66(2). This is Communism and neo-Socialism.

We are being invited to hold land along tribal lines under Article 63(1). And who will be the people that are classified as bona fide “Community”? Let us be real. “Community” is a sanitized word for “Tribe”.

Am better off with the present Constitution. I will VOTE NO.

These few reasons demonstrate the extent of how we are being fooled to enter into the New World Order that pretends to accord citizens “rights” but takes them away. Find out what the “New World Order” means. You are staring at the blue print in the Proposed Constitution.

Britain DOES NOT have a written Constitution. We have one already. What is wrong with what we have? What is wrong with us, that we are so easily fooled in the name of lofty sounding illiberal terms such as “reforms”, to chain ourselves into incepting a police state in Kenya? Vote No.

sheriasafi of JUKWAA