'Wangu wa Makeri' myth comes back to haunt Kenyan men

Men folk in for a rude shock in the general elections

Updated: Thursday, July 14, 2011 Story by: MEEME JOSHUA

A myth is told in the Kikuyu community of Wangu wa Makeri. Wangu is said to have been an iron lady who sat on men's backs as the headman(woman) of Weithaga location in Muranga. Men in the village schemed to overthrow her leadership by impregnating her. Based on this myth, men have been wary and worried of women leadership and domination. However, let me state from the onset that women have equal, if not better leadership qualities than men. Over time cultural beliefs and practices like marriage and Female Genital Mutilation have been men tactics of subduing women. But now, the Constitution gives the woman a new lease of life; but not without a fight from this domineering patriarchal society.

Women renaissance will come with dawn after the next general elections. For the chauvinistic males who think women are less human beings, this is indeed a sad turn of events. This is so because it is all systems go with early campaign mood engulfing the country. Even as men wallow in the hangovers of old order, the Constitution is clear that equity and equality shall form the basis of a democratic society. Men need a 'panel beating' in their thinking.

While men have hit the road campaigning, women are still swallowed in their domestic chores only to come and announce their intentions of seeking elective posts when men are already far much ahead. Our women have resigned to fate due to men intimidation. Few know anything else beyond their domestic chores. Their husbands are demigods and when they cough, the woman answers. However, getting out of this forced inertia, the law provides to a kick-start and goad women egos. The Constitution envisaged this scenario based on history and therefore there was need to put a gate-valve to check male dominance in leadership.

Article 27(8) states that “ ... not more than two-thirds of members of elective or appointive bodies shall be of the same gender.” For appointive it easy but not so for elective posts where ravenous men scramble for the positions. Article 27(6) observes that “the state shall take legislative and other measures including affirmative action programmes and policies designed to redress any disadvantage suffered by individuals or groups because of past discrimination.” In an heavily male Parliament, women have been disadvantaged and therefore deserve benefits of affirmative action.

But critics argue that this section will infringe on their personal right to vie for elective posts. This argument though, is hollow for a number of reasons. First, this section is found under Bill of Rights which overrides other clauses like provisions on Article 99 on elections of Members of Parliament. Second, enjoying individual rights must not infringe on rights of other people. This does not mean because one has a right of expression, should go out shouting obscenities.

Article 24(1) states “A right or fundamental freedom in the Bill of Rights, shall not be limited except by law to the extent that the limitation is reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom ... (d) the need to ensure that enjoyment of rights and fundamental freedoms by any individual does not prejudice the rights and freedoms of others.” This is to mean that enjoyment of ones rights must come with responsibility and respect of the rights of the majority. Men must enjoy their right to vie for elective posts but ( with a rider) must be sensitive to the rights of women based on past discrimination.

Having cited these sections of the Law, it is therefore premature for men to burn their energies campaigning without knowing which constituencies will be designated for women contestants ONLY.

By calculation the Constitution expects at least 116 Mps and 23 senators elected to the National Assembly and Senate respectively, be women. Interim Independent Electoral Commission chair Issack Hassan, cautions that failure to achieve this constitutional requirement would result to “unlawful” government as stipulated in Article 3(2).

The formula to achieve this is to divide 290 constituencies into groups of four – and through casting lots, one of the constituencies must be exclusive for women contestants. Simply put, men will barred by law from contesting in these constituencies.

Men have however, gone full throttle in campaigns oblivious of the danger that lies ahead. My brother, hold your horses. May be the constituency you are eying will be the one selected for woman representative. It is wise to wait-and-see.

joshmemento@yahoo.com