Forget the two thirds rule, lets split this 50-50!

A while back I wrote a blog post on an issue that is proving to be thorny. In case you missed it, read it here  http://joymdivo.blogspot.com/2011/06/one-third-two-thirds-what-is-difference.html.  The Constitution of Kenya 2010 in Article 81 introduced an interesting concept in this East African nation:  Gender Parity by Law.  This meant that society did not have the luxury of time in deciding to accept women as capable leaders.  They did not have the option of giving women a chance and seeing them prove themselves so that they can get another chance.  They were told, that from August 27th 2010 henceforth, no appointive or elective office shall be occupied by more than two thirds of the same gender.

When it comes to appointed posts, achieving this is easy since the appointing authority just has to remember their mathematics class on fractions and division.  However, elective posts are more tricky since they depend on the adult suffrage to make this decision, and not all of them are good mathematicians.  Therefore there is need a formula to ensure that even when the public do their math, it adds up to the principle of not more than two thirds of one gender being elected.  The members of the 10th parliament were so keen on consolidating their position that while they provided for mechanism to ensure this is achieved in the Senate and in the County Assemblies, they left the National Assembly open.

Chapter 8 of the Constitution establishes our Bi-Cameral House.  Article 97 sets out that we shall elect 290 MPs, 47 Women, 12 Special interest nominees and the Speaker.  This week a meeting between the Commissions responsible for implementing the Constitution as well as the Parliamentary Committee agreed on a "formula"  that we proceed as put in the constitution, and if we fail to make the numbers, then parties should be allowed to nominate more women to make up the difference.  The net result is that we have potential to have a lower House of more than 500 members.  This plan was rejected by Members of Parliament in their Speaker's Kamukunji, but the stalemate remains, what do we do about this?

My suggestion to get out of this quagmire is simply this.  The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission to scrap ALL constituencies.  If we will have Wards each with a Representative in the County Assembly, the bread and butter issues of the Citizens will be dealt with closer to home in the County Assembly.  Therefore the role of the Constituency is not as central as it was before.  Since Governors and Senators will be seeking mandate from the whole County, so too should Members of Parliament.  Each County therefore should produce one Male and one Female Member of Parliament, and we still retain the 12 special interest seats.  That way, not only is the Constitutional Provision preserved, we will have a House with a total of 107 members.  Not only can we better afford 107 members, as compared to 350 members the playing field will be levelled for all persons seeking elective posts, since they will have Countywide support.

Given the vast powers that the National Assembly will have, it is vital for the people going there to have the widest base possible as is with the Senators.  Each Party only has to nominate one man and one woman to go on the ballot, and each stand equal chance of being elected.  It is time for the Members of the 10th Parliament to wake up and smell the coffee.  We did not get rid of dictatorship by the President to swap it with dictatorship by Parliament.  We are not interested if some of them "lose" their seats since they are not theirs to keep, but ours to give to whom we please.  Time has come for them to put Kenya ahead of their own selfish interests and make the right decision for Kenya.  Let us go 50-50, one man one woman.  And save us some money in the process, we need to pay the teachers, and doctors, and nurses, and lecturers and civil servants.....

"You Lazy Intellectual African Scum!" ::::: "You called my lord?"

If you have not already done so, start by reading this:  http://mindofmalaka.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/you-lazy-intellectual-african-scum/.  Are you done?  Now, let us talk honestly.

I am grateful for this perspective, and I do contend, we cannot just call African Intellectuals lazy.  They do their thinking best, and it is up to government to fill in the gaps.  The shilling plummets, and it is because Banks are speculating.  People are dying of hunger and it becomes there is a famine, no mention of the new bumper harvests prior.  They blame the weather, violence, famine, disease, many excuses to help us explain why we are failing miserably.  However, one thing I want to point out, is that thinking in and of itself, clever papers does not translate to anything.  Many of the innovators who are credited with "discovering" or "creating" anything usually faced stiff opposition or despondency from their governments.  In fact, for most of them, it was after their passing that the full extent of their contributions were discovered and felt.

Move over to people like Henry Ford.  He had not the mind, but he had the business sense to put the mind to use.  A famous story is told of how top scholars of that day confronted him about his mass production of vehicles whilst knowing nothing of how the car runs.  The countered he was dabbling in something dangerous.  He replied he knew all he needed to know.  The panel shot questions at him "how does the combustion engine work" "what of the braking system" "can you explain about the process of ignition"  With each question, Mr. Ford would pick up his telephone and ask someone the same question and relay the answer to the panel, he could answer none of the questions asked, without help.  Exasperated, the panelists felt they had made their point, and as they rose to storm out. As they shuffled their papers and feet, Mr. Ford calmly pointed out, that he did not need to KNOW anything, as long as he had hired the people who DO know, to do the job, he was fine.  As they say, the rest is history.  Cars now are commonly mass produced everywhere, and he made his money.

What am I saying?  African Innovators and Intellectuals need each other, it is a symbiotic relationship, mutually beneficial.  Intellectual thinks, and the Innovator builds.  Add another group here called Investors.  If we use the money we already have in circulation, and help those with the ideas to find people with the skills to convert the ideas from blue print to reality, then we will have hit the jack pot.  What Government participation was involved in the innovation that is M-Pesa?  Time has come for us to stop hiding behind our excuses and own up.  Look at our education system, book smarts is given preference, nay, pre-eminence over the arts, talent and "blue collar skills".  The people who may not excel in book smarts but can do magic when given a screw driver and some wires, those are the guys we should be building up, with as much gusto as the guys who make up the formulae.

As a Kenyan intellectual, I stand guilty as charged in http://mindofmalaka.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/you-lazy-intellectual-african-scum/. I want my intellectual property protected.  I want for every thought, every contribution, I want the monetary value clearly spelled out, otherwise I am reluctant to get involved.  Sometimes I even hold off sharing a simple solution staring at me simply because I think my idea will be "stolen" and someone else will reap the whilrwind.  Infact I not only want it, I usually demand it, and very uncompromisingly so.  Our society now is very "Haki Yetu" oriented.  Haki Yetu means "Our Right!"and is usually accompanied by varying degrees of toddler temper tantrums displays, depending on the group chanting it in the street.

Time has come for us to put common good ahead of private gain.  We must protect our intellectual property, I agree, but can we move from only using the big money ideas to help our own families, and move to doing what we can wherever we can.  As we are doing this, then the one big money maker will land and sort out our money issues.  What happened to Job Satisfaction? Bragging Rights? Distinction and Recognition?

It seems, African Intellectuals, much like American Gangster Rappers, have fallen into the trap of "Get Rich or Die Trying"  Problem is quite literally, many are dying, as we are busy trying.

Is it "Cat out of the Bag" or is it "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof?" - Part II

Well, after a few days of considering what I feel on this issue, I think I have it nailed.  Someone asked me what on earth I meant by "Cat out of the bag" and "Cat on a hot tin roof".  Its simple really.  Cat out of the bag means finally we have a chance to see exactly what direction the Chief Justice's agenda for the new Judiciary is.  Some of us skeptical of him heard so much high praise about how revolutionary and wonderful he would be for the Judiciary and so looked forward to some real change.  Maybe it was therefore easier for him to simply start by something easier, like dresscode.  Nothing much to decide about that.  So now the cat is out of the bag, it will be very liberal and relaxed under our new CJ, so I guess my spaghetti strap tops and peep toes will find a place in his new dress code, I am sure.

Cat on a hot tin roof, is simply reactionary.  The fact that so much hullabaloo was raise concerning the stud prior to his confirmation in office, and after he assumed office, the "young lawyers" kept asking him to clarify that position so he felt compelled by the pressure of it all to react one way or another.  Seeing as he is the purest cleanest Judicial Officer now, it would seem, he could not preach water and drink wine, so instead chose to simply clarify, stud are fine, and so are dreadlocks.

I have given this much thought and have had endless debates with friends and colleagues about this.  What I pen down today is what we would call "A considered opinion".  Our Chief Justice is quoted as saying that if he had to remove the stud, he would rather lose the position of CJ.  Now that he is well and truly in charge, he has to live up to that assertion, as well as live up to the expectation of changing things in the Judiciary.  So his cat is out of the bag, and he is dancing on a hot tin roof.

I must say I am disappointed.  I do not have much faith in the CJ and his magical ability to change the Judiciary in the manner most of us imagine, but I have a lot of faith in the fact that in his position he has the ability to change the course of history as far as Kenya is concerned.  The fact that his first major directive was to hire Advocates to defend the JSC in a matter that is clear (see earlier post on one-third, two-thirds what's the difference) may be put down as inexperience, learning the ropes as it were, since I don't see the ruling of the Court going the JSC way on this one.  However, for him to take to Facebook to issue a statement of the magnitude of this particular one, I think was very misdirected.  Who is his intended audience?  The Advocates who practise before the Court on a daily basis?  The Judicial Officers who will effectively implement the directive?  How were they to find the directive on Facebook?  Then what on earth does he mean it is on his behalf and the Supreme Court?  Which Supreme Court? His Deputy and himself? Then now, does that mean the Judiciary has become "Us" and "Them"? The Supreme Court is some form of higher power court that does not really belong with the rank and file of the Subordinate Courts, High Court and Court of Appeal?

One definitely cannot have his cake and eat it too.  You cannot be the law enforcer, when no law seems applicable to you.  One thing about being a Judicial Officer is that sometimes, you must preach water even if you drink wine, because water must be preached over wine.  That is how you apply the law, not because you agree with all of it, but because it is what it is.  The Court cannot be run on the basis of "what-I-believe-in" or "I-don't-see-what-the-problem-with-that-is"  It is like a building.  The architect can design anything he wants, however he wants, but when it comes to construction, it only works if it is built from the foundation up.  Brick upon brick, so is the law, precept upon precept, precedent upon precedent.  Any attempt to alter this order, can see the whole thing come tumbling down.

So now that the cat is out of the bag, let the dance on the hot tin roof begin!