Details of male MPs suggesting which positions should be given to gender bill

Related image

A proposed bill has generated a fierce war between the male counterparts and female counterparts of the Kenyan National Assembly.

Male MPs have hatched a new plot of amending the Constitution to block elective positions from being subjected to comply with the two-thirds gender principle.

Hours after the National Assembly failed to vote for the Gender Bill, some male lawmakers have proposed to amend Article 81 of the Constitution, which requires that “not more than two-thirds of members of elective public bodies shall be of the same gender”.

Related image

Drafters of the 2010 Constitution did not want a situation where one gender is overly represented in Parliament.

As such, they stipulated that the National Assembly and the Senate should not have more than two-thirds of their members of the same gender.

“Not more than two-thirds of the members of elective public bodies shall be of the same gender,” says Article 81 (b) of the Constitution.

Related image

Now the proponents to amend the constitution want only appointive positions subjected to the two-thirds-gender principle.

They argue that elective bodies have been abused to reward mistresses of senior politicians or slay queens rather than be based on merit.

The net effect of the proposed amendment would be that women might be locked out of nominations to the Senate, National Assembly and county assemblies to bridge the gender gap.

Ainabkoi MP William Chepkut said it was necessary to amend Section 81 so elective positions are exempted from the gender rule. Only appointive positions should be subjected to the gender principle.

Image result for images of MP William Chepkut
Ainabkoi-MP-William-Chepkut.

“This is the way to go to avoid charades that dominate the nomination process. We need integrity in the whole process,”

Yesterday, Turkana South MP James Lomenen, who is leading the onslaught to do away with the gender rule in the legislature, said the bill flopped because it was impractical.

“The bill was an attempt to disenfranchise Kenyans by imposing leaders on them through the back door. The Constitution envisages a situation where Kenyans must be accorded an opportunity to decide their representatives,” the vocal MP said.

Related image
High Court Judge Justice John Mativo

In a verdict issued in March 2017, High Court judge John Mativo said that if the gender principle had not been implemented by June that year, anyone could write to the Chief Justice to advise the president to dissolve Parliament.

Uasin Gishu Woman Representative Gladys Shollei is now pushing for the dissolution of the National Assembly by February next year should the postponed Gender Bill flop again.

The legislator argues that there will be no need to have a National Assembly in place if it can’t support implementation of constitutional requirements.

Do you support amendment of the constitution or its dissolution?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *