Social justice requires structural change

The President performed yet another of the important national rituals as provided in the constitution; addressing the country on the state of the nation.

In its tradition, at least from an African perceptive, inviting a leader to account is often about ‘de-fanging’ the leaders and eroding their tendency towards totalitarianism.

But then, while statisticians will revert to us on the various figures of success presented by the President, there is something fundamentally wrong in the way the President gives account of various development programmes initiated by the Jubilee government. It is difficult to ascertain whether these are political programmes or sustainable efforts and interventions towards improvement of human living conditions.

Of course one cannot rule out the reality that these initiatives, whether infrastructure projects or welfare reforms, have influenced practical changes in the lives of our people. As Kenyans would like to say, they have put food on the table.

Despite their distinctive character, these bold experiments have had one thing in common: all failed to reverse structural relationships that cause and perpetuate inequality even as the President keeps listing them as his government’s gift to Kenyans. Throughout history, social welfare efforts to improve humanity’s lot have not met the threshold of social transformation.

When Kenyans were demanding for constitutional reforms, the dominant concern was what most people prefer to call ‘basic needs’. In many places there is no piped water, and women have to walk long distances each day to collect water in buckets.

In many communities there is no form of health facility, not so much as a clinic – or there is a building with no nurse (a doctor within reach is a mere dream) and no drugs.

The youth, who are encouraged to hustle, lack even precarious employment, and in cities there is inadequate housing – either in a physical sense, or in the sense that they lack security of tenure because they are squatters, or because they have not received title deeds for land to which they are entitled. When they get a little food, then they wait until sunset to use ‘flying toilets’.

There is no doubt that some of the interventions listed as ‘gifts from the Jubilee’ government have responded or touched on some of these concerns. But the problem is that these programmes including the admirable initiative by the First Lady on Beyond Zero Campaign, tend to respond as welfare initiatives and ‘gifts’.

While gifts are not bad, none of these social welfare programmes suggest any viable end point nor are aligned to the ideals in the Constitution of Kenya- they are all but a bed for the night, minimalist and potentially diversionary logic in prism of welfare reform that we should guard against.

There is need for the executive to reframe its approach and engage as envisaged in the Constitution of Kenya. The questions of ‘basic needs’ are what constitute article 43 of the Constitutions of Kenya, which details Social and Economic rights.

Taken together with the need to guarantee every Kenyan of their dignity, affirmative programmes such as Cash Transfers, Affirmative Action Policy in Public Procurement, Uwezo (Ability) Fund, Youth Enterprise Development Fund, and Women Enterprise Fund must be centred on human rights.

Under such circumstances, the State of the Nation address would among others detail steps taken in realising obligations are stated in Article 21 (1) of Constitution of Kenya that : “...It is a fundamental duty of the State and every State organ to observe, respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights and fundamental freedoms in the Bill of Rights”.

In that context then, the President’s challenge to the country governments who he rightly criticised for their dismal performance in delivering various elements of socio-economic rights like right to water, clean environment and extension service support to farmers can be read as denial of human rights. But the President’s review of county governments does not require the governors to also go out and start their own welfare programmes and ‘county first lady’ initiatives.

Rather, it requires a framework through which county governments can realise economic and social rights of all persons guaranteed under Article 43 of the Constitution. Such framework should provide a criterion for county governments to adhere to Article 204 of the Constitution with regard to the use to which equalisation funds are to be put—the grants by national government.

In essence, it is time to move beyond the now common welfare reform typical of Jubilee administration.

The fiasco that is most of Jubilee’s welfare programmes attest that there is no real possibility of enjoying rights, whether civil and political or social, economic and cultural, without resources such as education, physical security, health, employment, property, participation, and due process - all of which poverty negates.

Our laws, development initiatives and politics must bring about structural changes that shall guarantee equity and social justice.