A few weeks ago I attended a workshop on the proposed new constitution that was sponsored by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. The forum was free and open to the publc. The workshop focused on 6 thematic areas of the new constitution – Representation, Women’s Issues, Devolution, Land and Natural Resources, Media, Executive Powers and Youth. The aim of the workshop was to look at the Wako draft in light of what the different stakeholder (I hate this word but you can’t avoid it) groups involved in Bomas wanted and in light of the current constitution. What follows are some notes I took at the workshop.
The final presentation was by Kepta Ombati of Youth Agenda. His presentation definitely had the most resonance with the audience and he was constantly interrupted by appaluse and cheers. According to Kepta, the youth/young people should vote against draft because they stand to lose nothing (since they have hardly been represented in the process up to this point), but stand to gain everything by reopening the process. In his view, young people should consider the collapse of Bomas a blessing, because we were barely represented at all.
His main beef with the Kilifi/Wako draft:
– It doesn’t define who are young people/the youth – can be anyone.
– The “youth” are not guaranteed slots in the national assembly (via affirmative action) which is hardly communserate with the current demographics i.e. 89.4% of Kenyans are below 45 (!!!!)
– Bomas draft had at least 5% guaranteed representation at the local level, Kilifi has no similar provision.
He also pointed out how ill-represented young people are in the current government. According to Kepta, we are being governed mostly by people who represent only 3% of as far as age-group i.e. mostly above 60 and pointedly asked Ntimama, who was in attendance, to go into retirement and make way for the next generation (to wild applause from the audience). He wondered who is representing those in the Nameless and Wahu category. He also noted that only 40 parliamentarians are under 45.
Given the current stats, he wondered whether we can trust the current legislators to operationalize the Constitution in a way that touches on the concerns of the majority of Kenyans i.e. people under 45. He also wondered why should young people (i.e. under 45) should pay taxes w/o representation and called for the Kenyan version of the Boston Tea Party.
The following is the cribbed-from-FES comparision of the three constitutions on the youth.
Bomas Draft
– Recognised the special status of youth, provided for equal treatment and endeavoured to ensure their participation in national affairs (ss. 30, 39)
– Protection of participation rights, through affirmative action, especially in elections and representation (ss. 101, 102, 219)
– Specifically protected even at the district level (s. 102).
Current Constitution
– Generally not youth-friendly. Does not define youth or deal with youth concerns in a specific way. Places age barriers to access to youth leadership at the presidential level.
– No protection of participation rights. Voting age in 18 at minimum. Presidential minimum is 35 years; Parliamentary is 21 and civic is 18.
– No special recognition at local level
Wako/Kilifi Draft
– Recognises the special status of youth. provides for equal treatment and endeavours to ensure their participation in national affairs.
– Special recognition of youth concerns and rights (s. 40)
– Protection of participation rights, through affirmative action, especially in elections and representation (ss. 101, 116)
– Although not specifically provided for, could be part of the special interests to whom affirmative action applies.