Anti-reformists In Cabinet Against Gender Parity

MONDAY, 22 AUGUST 2011 15:31 BY JANE GODIA

The Cabinet's decision to renege on the issue of the not more than two thirds principle of the same gender taking elective and public positions is a continuation of the use-and-dump mentality perfected by the political class.

Cabinet, made up of politicians who serve after five year terms, is now treating the new constitution like their personal property. They used the women, who are the majority of voters, to pass the Constitution through the referendum on August 4, 2010. By deciding that the two third principle cannot work especially with relation to women’s representation, this Cabinet and Government is sending women the message that they can and will use women and dump them when they are not considered useful.

There are those who argue that women should not speak out on this issue as they might antagonise the government and lose most of the gains that they have entrenched in the Constitution. My understanding is that the Constitution is the law of the land. Why is this Cabinet changing it now to suit their whims?

Within this Cabinet are many people who were against the gains made by women,including the current Gender minister herself. She has mandate to convince the Cabinet that these gains are not be eroded in a Cabinet sitting. Yet she did not— at least in the absence of any information to the contrary!

The anti-reformists sitting in the Cabinet have found new impetus to regain the ground after they lost to Kenyans — and especially women—during the referendum. If countries like South Sudan, Rwanda, Tanzania, South Africa and Mozambique have implemented the affirmative action and it has worked, what makes it difficult for Kenya, considered more developed and with more educated women than some of these countries?

The Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) set a bar of 30 percent many years ago; they have now gone past this mark and are now calling for 50-50 balance between men and women. The SADC has a set up a barometre that it uses to measure how its member states are implementing affirmative action and the States are taken to task where they falter. The African Union has also stipulated in its mandate that its member states achieve the 50-50 gender parity. The African Union, to which Kenya is a member, calls for gender equality and empowerment in all its member countries.

The East African Community, of which Kenya is a member, also has a gender policy that member states are expected to follow.

These international treaties such as the AU gender policy are recognised by the Constitution of Kenya. If the Cabinet at a single sitting can decide that a section of the Constitution cannot work, how many more can Kenyans expect them to break? By the time they go through all the chapters of this new law, will they not have decided to go against many tenets in the Constitution?

By making such decisions, the Cabinet reinforces the perception that impunity is alive and well even though the constitution is supposed to reduce if not totally eradicate this. This Cabinet is behaving like the colonial government that believed that women should never be in possession of identity cards or vote.

The Cabinet must learn that any journey starts with a single step. Instead of outrightly dismissing the affirmative action in the political space they should have allowed the country to try it and then from the outcome determine whether it worked or failed. The Cabinet needs to rethink its decision. Kenyans must hold the political leadership to account if they do not want to see the gains made reduced to a mere shell. To be part of political leadership and decision making is the women’s constitutional right, give it to them.

The writer comments on topical issues.