The northern region is just Kenya’s Buffer Zone

 

On Thursday 22^nd of October 2020, While lying in my bed, browsing through Facebook, I came across posts of my friends in Central Kenya, which were full of hope and celebration. Their optimism is fueled by a recent shift in tea and coffee policies and actions sweeping the cartels that have taken the industry to its knees over the past three decades. Farmers were granted another chance to elect their representatives, and the results are still being felt. They are receiving their returns as predicted, and with BBI as voted by the National Assembly, there are increasing expectations of more representation in the national assembly means more voice, more CDF money, more money from parastatals like KERA and KURA, more money from the UWEZO fund, and so on. Again, more equal funds could be approved, implying that their area may receive an increasing amount of money. BBI stands for optimism, hope, and more hope in already developing countries with mainstream strategies for their economic prosperity.

This may not be the case for a region that has been neglected before the 2010 dispensation by governments since independence, whose primary economic livelihood was nearly wiped out by Kenyatta and Moi regimes through property destruction and killing of animals, and whose people were massacred by Kenyatta and Moi regimes, for instance, MalkaMari massacre, and Wagala massacre. In one case, my paternal uncle recalls the Kenyan government calling him "haramia," and he recounts how he had to deny recognizing his brother, who was killed and his body lying on the road and whose flesh was eaten by wild animals.

 The marginalization began soon after independence when the Kenyatta government passed Sessional Paper 10 in 1965, which mandated that government development and investments be directed to crop-growing regions rather than livestock-raising areas. The latter was deemed uneconomical and did not necessitate any advancement or assistance.

The region remained Kenya's buffer zone or is under colonial power being colonized by Kenya; they have little concept of democracy or service delivery; all they know is that men in boats with guns are the government; their word is the word of government as compared to the words of colonial representatives; you cannot question their words; and the elected leaders are just collaborators of the regions who are being colonized by Kenya. They, like all other collaborators of colonial powers, are interested in amassing wealth and protecting the interests of their masters, since they can vote to marginalize their region at any time; the late Senator Yussuf Hajj was the Chair of BBI, a committee that drafted amendments to the Kenyan constitution in 2010, which would have denied and chopped down equitable resources reaching the North in all aspects.

The 2010 constitution brought a break sorry it was a blessing in disguise the government didn't see it coming but it sent hope NFDs counties, through equitable representation it got some more seats at the national level while not compared with other regions and more funds through a devolved system.

The system afforded more hope because, by equitable sharing, the counties received funds at least from the possible distribution of all counties rather than from ministries such as road and agriculture, and the very wealthy parastatals. The share received by NFDs has become a point of contention, although the five counties only received around Ksh 50 billion from the 2.5 trillion and above budget each year. The tone used was oh "We are giving you more than you deserved" Oh their children or Nairobi they are the richest people”

After 7 years of devolution, communities could hope for economic development. Then comes the nightmare, THE BUILDING BRIDGES INITIATIVE, which was the product of a handshake between two persons, and its consequences are 2020 constitutional amendments, one of which aim has turned out to be to clip the NFDs, by introducing veto principles under the equitable share, especially section 50 of the proposed amendments to Article 203 of the Constitution by inserting the following new paragraphs immediately after paragraph (k)— “(l) the need to eradicate corrupt practices and wastage of public resources; …..and (n) the need to ensure that the average amount of money allocated per person to a county with the highest allocation does not exceed three times the average amount per person allocated to a county with the lowest allocation”

With the 7-year history of how the national government, especially the executive branch, has dealt with the devolved system, paragraph (l) is counterproductive to devolution in general, as it may be used irrationally or strategically to destroy or subdue various political voices from counties. The paragraph does not illustrate the "how" and only makes a broad assertion about the need; it does not specify who has the need or who can ensure that it is met, leaving it vague and damaging to the benefits and expectations of devolution.

A paragraph (n) has been added to realize the objectives of the Senate committee formula on revenue division; the paragraph would have the same effect as the 2019 proposal, which was rejected by the Senate. North Eastern counties now get at least six times more per person than the lowest-allocated counties, such as Kiambu and Nairobi. The redistribution is attributed to past injustices and marginalization the area has seen, and the constitution provided that economic inequalities and other criteria that favored the region were taken into account to redress the injustice. The paragraph reduces the advantage since it has supremacy over all other constitutional principles set out in Article 203. Which to some extent is bringing back the aspects of one man one shilling on devolved funds though devolved funds are just a drop in the ocean compared to the rest of 85% of the national budget. The few billions going to marginalized counties have come into sharp discussion yet 85% remaining at the national level is consumed by entities that might not have any projects in northern Kenya.

Furthermore, the amendment suggests an extra 70 constituencies, of which only two are allocated to the large northern area counties, namely Mandera and Turkana. According to KNBS, the consideration of additional distribution is solely based on population results for 2019. Several counties in the northern areas took the figures to court because they thought they were not accurate measurements of the region's population. The findings suggest that an area with an average household size of 6 and fertility rates of 5.2 has not risen in population since 2009, which contradicts any of the values population growth.

The allocation of additional seats does not take justice or inclusion ideals into account; furthermore, it does not adheres to any of the constitutional values and principles outlined in Article 10. As mentioned in the paper, the said distribution also contradicts its own principles.18A responsibilities of the citizens, Paragraph (2) Every citizen has a responsibility to— (a) cultivate national unity on the basis of respecting Kenya’s ethnic, intellectual, economic and cultural diversity; (c) practice ethical conduct and combat corruption; and (h) promote the unity and dignity of Africa and her people. The proposed seats distribution would not assist people in promoting the aforementioned obligations because one category would undoubtedly feel unwanted and unwelcome.

To conclude, the 2020 Constitutional Amendment offers nothing for the northern region besides pits Kenya against itself and set off a time bomb due to the inequalities caused by its implementation. The proposed amendment has fallen short of Kenyans' aspirations of unifying the country, promoting equality and inclusion, and ensuring electoral justice and fairness.

Ahmed Maalim