Public participation forums have to be attractive, inclusive

The National Assembly. As per the Constitution, citizens must be involved in the House business. PHOTO | FILE | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • Article 118 demands that it facilitates public participation and involvement in its legislative work and any other business carried out there.
  • From the recent happenings, it is clear that the input of the ordinary citizen is yet to make its way to the heart of Parliament.
  • The Senate appears more interested in taking its business closer to the voters.

The drafters of Kenya’s Constitution must be praised for having the right frame of mind to put one critical requirement in the powerful rule book: Public participation.

Parliament has rightly been at the centre of the quest to involve the public in its business and the Constitution makes it compulsory for lawmakers to open their doors to contributions on various matters before them.

Article 118 demands that it facilitates public participation and involvement in its legislative work and any other business carried out there.

Both Houses have tried to breathe life to this clause, occasionally organising public sessions to discuss bills before they are put to the vote on the Floor. The county assemblies are trying to emulate them.

ENFORCEMENT

Many positive things have been said about how important this noble idea is in the making of crucial decisions by those in power.

It must be praised for enabling the mwananchi to make known their thoughts on critical pieces of legislation before they are passed.

But before we get ahead of ourselves, have these forums made any significant difference?

Are they being done the right way? Do they have the goodwill of lawmakers or only done to satisfy the supreme law?

When members of the public present their contributions, who follows up to check if their say is considered and if they truly inform the House’s decisions?

Not much is said about these questions, yet they form the most critical part of the forums.

From the recent happenings, it is clear that the input of the ordinary citizen is yet to make its way to the heart of Parliament.

The uproar over the budget allocated to the Judiciary was a perfect indication that this constitutional clause is yet to be properly appreciated.

BUDGET CUT

The Judiciary forms a critical part of Kenya’s system of governance but, recently, its budget was significantly slashed by unapologetic MPs, citing failure by the justice sector to absorb funds allocated to it.

The Judiciary has already had its say on that.

None other than Chief Justice David Maraga was livid about the MPs’ decision to deny this arm of government more funds for development.

His main response was that the Judiciary shouldn’t be blamed for failure to absorb the money, saying the National Treasury often released it late.

They had their say, but what is the common mwananchi’s take in this, and did Parliament seek their input before slashing the allocation?

It appears that that did not happen, yet, as per the Constitution, citizens must be involved in the House business.

Kenyans are yearning for more courts to be built for quicker delivery of justice.

SENATORS' WILL

From the outcry, it was clear that most people wanted more money for the Judiciary; so, what informed the MPs’ decision? Were there open forums for contributions?

The Senate appears more interested in taking its business closer to the voters.

It plans countrywide sittings that would be a replica of its sessions in Nairobi. The first of these out-of-city sessions will be in Eldoret, the Uasin Gishu County headquarters, next month.

That would be impressive, considering that the House is mostly tasked with protecting devolution, which is being rolled out in the counties.

Although it will be quite costly to shuttle the senators around the country, it is a legislative model that should be emulated — with prudent spending.

ACCESSIBILITY

But for the public participation forums to have a serious impact, they must be better structured and more accessible to those whose contributions matter most. Parliament seems not to be friendly to those targeted.

Always scheduling the sessions in Nairobi is widely unattractive.

Asking those unable to present themselves in Nairobi to send emails is not inclusive enough as not all are technologically savvy.

The writers of the Constitution must have wanted those who will be affected most by the laws to have a say on their making.

Forcing laws onto the people, as used to happen, must have informed the participation clause.

The best gift MPs could give the voters is to ensure the laws and decisions they make are informed by the views of most, if not all, people.

These public forums should not just satisfy the provisions in the Constitution, as it seems to be happening, but the deliberations must form the final output of either House.

Mr Kiplangat is Nation Media Group’s Regional Editor, North Rift. [email protected].