Those fighting devolution against Kenyans’ dream

THE STANDARD

Recent events point to a well-calculated move to stifle efforts aimed at successfully implementing the devolved system of government. It seems enemies of devolution are growing in number and completely shutting their ears to what Kenyans spoke loudly about on August 4, 2010, and March 4, this year.

When the over 10 million voters trooped to the ballot boxes on the historic General Election, they were clear on where power in the counties should rest.

Kenyans voted in 47 governors, giving them the mandate to take charge of county resources and development, which the majority felt had been concentrated at the centre in Nairobi for far too long.

At the core of the clamour for a new Constitution was the thirst for equitable share of the national cake and devolution of political power. Skewed distribution of resources has contributed to underdevelopment of certain regions, and devolution is meant to correct this anomaly.

Devolution informs the huge expectations Kenyans have in the new constitutional dispensation. For the hungry, devolution will help put food on the table. For the thirsty, devolution should ease the flow of clean water. For the power-starved, devolution brings responsibility and decision-making ability closer home.

But as the old gives way to the new order, there are those still stuck in the unfortunate romance of the past. For instance, we feel the tussle over control of county resources and functions between the governors and the senators, is uncalled for. The Senate Bill aimed at clipping the governors’ powers is ill-advised.

The Senate seeks to establish county management boards, to play an oversight role on the regional governments.

The senate was established to protect the county governments and indeed senators should be above the fray. They should be overseeing successful transfer of political power and resources from the national government to the county governments. The power disputes between senators and governors is not only derailing devolution, but also going against the aspirations of Kenyans.

And as if that is not bad enough, the office of the Attorney General is drafting a Bill seeking to establish an Inter-Governmental Relations Committee to replace the Transition Authority.

The Kinuthia Wamwangi-led TA, which is overseeing transition to the devolved system of government, is supposed to complete its work in March 2016. So, why the hurry to replace it just when county governments are trying to settle down?

The proposed Inter-Governmental Relations Committee is apparently meant to give the national government leverage in county matters, further frustrating devolution.

The State Law (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2013, proposes deletion of Section 37 (1) of the Transition to Devolved Government Act 2012, which defines the functions and timeframe of the TA. By dissolving TA, which is an independent body, at this point in time, implementation of devolution will be greatly jeopardised.

Currently, the law gives the Transition Authority three years to define roles of the county governments and distinguish them from those of the national government.

TA is also preparing an inventory of all assets under the county governments, a critical exercise for running of the new administrative units.   

Understandably, transfer of power to counties has stripped off the national government the prerogative on many matters, including resource distribution. But that is what Kenyans wanted as envisioned in the 2010 Constitution. The Jubilee government should indeed not be seen to frustrate devolution. The way it handles transfer of power and functions to the governors will determine the amount of goodwill it will enjoy among the majority of Kenyans. Ultimately, adherence to the Constitution should ensure a smooth transition. This way, Kenyans’ dream of an equitable society will be half won as drafters of the Constitution envisaged.