Review of status ofPublic Participation,and County InformationDissemination FrameworksA Case Study of Isiolo KisumuMakueni and Turkana Counties
A Case Study of Isiolo Kisumu Makueni and Turkana CountiesReview of status ofPublic Participation,and County InformationDissemination FrameworksA Case Study of Isiolo KisumuMakueni and Turkana Countiesi
Review of status of Public Participation, andCounty Information Dissemination FrameworksWritten by:Chrispine Oduor, Rose Wanjiru and Festus L KisamwaPublished byWith funding from Institute of Economic Affairs, 2015All rights reserved5th Floor ACK Garden House1st Ngong AvenueP.O. Box 53989-00200 Nairobi, KenyaTel: 254-20-2721262, 254-20-2717402Fax: 254-20-2716231Cell: 254-724-256510, 254-733-272126Email: email@example.comWebsite: www.ieakenya.or.keISBN No: 978-9966-092-35-9Design and layoutSunburst Communications Ltd.Tel: 254-20-312328Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
A Case Study of Isiolo Kisumu Makueni and Turkana CountiesForewordPublic participation is a principle that has been given prominence in the Constitutionof Kenya 2010. Participation should imbue all public affairs and be promoted byboth Non-State Actors and the State acting in public interest. The Constitutionsets key requirements for the legislature at both levels of government to provideframeworks for public participation in governance processes. This emphasis forcitizen participation underscores the fact that the election of representatives doesnot negate the need for people to continuously be involved in governance processes.This publication by IEA-Kenya reviews the status of public participation andexisting county public participation and information dissemination frameworks infour counties namely: Isiolo, Kisumu, Makueni and Turkana. The study examinesthe constitutional and legislative provisions on public participation, frameworks putin place by respective county governments that facilitate participation in governance,citizen and civil society involvement in county governance and informationdissemination frameworks put in place by the four counties.The IEA-Kenya hopes that lessons drawn from the four counties and the policyrecommendations will provide valuable information to county governments on waysof enhancing information dissemination and public participation in governanceprocesses.Kwame OwinoChief Executive OfficerInstitute of Economic Affairs (IEA-Kenya)iii
Review of status of Public Participation, andCounty Information Dissemination FrameworksAcknowledgementsThe Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA-Kenya) would like to express its gratitudeto all those who contributed to the completion of this report. We sincerely thankMr. Chrispine Oduor of IEA-Kenya for compiling the final report and Mr. LambiKisamwa and Ms. Rose Wanjiru (Independent consultants) for undertaking thebaseline study on the counties of Kisumu and Turkana, and the counties of Makueniand Isiolo respectively. Further appreciation goes to Ms Veronica Nguti of IEAKenya her for support throughout the development of the study and to the IEAKenya support staff for administration support.The IEA appreciates individual Officers from the County Governments of Isiolo,Kisumu, Makueni and Turkana for taking time out of their busy schedules to providethe all important information that made the compilation of this report possible.The IEA also expresses gratitude for input made by representatives of Uraia Trustpartner County based CSOs in the four counties for their invaluable contribution.These include: Mr. Job Muisyo (Center for Human Rights and Civic EducationMwingi County), Mr. Shabo Ibrahim (Pastoralist Women for Health and EducationIsiolo County) and Mr Collins Owuor (Transform Empowerment for Action-KisumuCounty). Gratitude also goes to representatives of other County based CSOs in thefour counties.Last but not least, IEA-Kenya thankfully acknowledges Uraia Trust and the DanishInternational Development Agency (DANIDA) for providing us with the financialsupport that enabled us to successfully undertake this study.iv
A Case Study of Isiolo Kisumu Makueni and Turkana CountiesTable of ContentsAcronyms and Abbreviationsiv1.0 Executive Summary1.1 Background1.2 Objectives of The Study1.3 Study Methodology1.4 Organization of The Report122332.0 Overview of Public Participation, Conceptual, Constitutional andLegislative Frameworks2.1 Conceptual Framework2.2 Constitutional Provisions On Public Participation In Kenya2.3 Legislative Framework For Public Participation In Kenya2.3.1 County Government Act 20122.3.2 Urban Areas and Cities Act 20112.3.3 Public Finance Management Act 20125679911113.0 County Findings3.1 Kisumu County3.1.1 Framework For Public Participation3.1.2 Presence of County Public Participation Act3.1.3 Established County offices3.1.4 Framework For Information Dissemination3.1.3 Gaps In Information Dissemination Framework and Recommendations3.1. 4 County Based Civil Society Organizations Participation In Governance3.2 Turkana County3.2.1 Framework For Public Participation3.2.2 Public Participation in County Affairs3.2.3 Established County offices3.2.4 Presence of Public Participation Act3.2.5 The County Budget and Economic Forum3.2.6 County Based Civil Society Organizations Participation In Governance3.3 Isiolo County3.3.1 Isiolo County Public Participation Frameworks3.3.2 Information Dissemination Mechanisms3.3.3 Local Civil Society Engagement In Governance3.4 Makueni County3.4.1 County Public Participation Regulatory and Institutional Frameworks3.4.2 Public Participation3.4.3 Information Dissemination Mechanisms3.4.4 County Based Civil Society Organizations Participation In Governance3.4.5 Lessons and Challenges of Public 52727292931334.0 Conclusion and Policy Recommendations35References39v
Review of status of Public Participation, andCounty Information Dissemination FrameworksAcronyms and MCPPFPWDPWHESCECTEAMTITISAWPPFviBudget Review and Outlook PaperCounty Budget and Economic ForumCounty Executive CommitteeCounty Fiscal Strategy PaperCentre for Human Rights and Civic EducationCommission for the Implementation of the ConstitutionCounty Integrated Development PlanCatholic Justice and Peace CommissionConstitution of KenyaCivil Society OrganizationDanish International Development AgencyFocus Group DiscussionFriends of Lake TurkanaGovernment of KenyaInternational Association for Public ParticipationInformation Communications TechnologyInstitute of Economic Affairs- KenyaMember of County AssemblyMerti Integrated Development ProgramNon State ActorPublic Finance ManagementPublic Finance Management ActParticipatory Integrated Community Development ApproachProject Management CommitteePublic Participation FacilitatorPerson with DisabilityPastoralist Women for Health and EducationSub-County Civic Education CoordinatorTransform Empowerment for Action InitiativeTransparency International - KenyaInstitute of Social AccountabilityWard Public Participation Facilitator
A Case Study of Isiolo Kisumu Makueni and Turkana Counties1.0Executive Summary1
Review of status of Public Participation, andCounty Information Dissemination Frameworks1.1BackgroundMeaningful citizen participation in governance is a key ingredient for public reformsthat were instituted by the Constitution of Kenya (CoK) 2010. Article 1 (1) of theConstitution vests all sovereign power to the people of Kenya. This power can beexpressed through direct participation or indirectly through elected representatives. Inaddition, various pieces of legislations anchoring devolution highlight the principlesof citizen participation. Together, these constitutional and legislative provisionsavail various platforms for citizen participation in devolved governance. Citizenparticipation is one of the national values and is also one of the principles of publicservice as articulated in the Constitution in Articles 10 (2,a) and Article 232 (1).This study on Public Participation in County Governance and County InformationDissemination Frameworks, case study of Isiolo, Kisumu, Makueni and Turkanacounties was undertaken in the project Fostering Social Accountability in DevolvedGovernance implemented by the Institute of Economic Affairs Kenya. The projectwas part of a wider project implemented by Uraia Trust titled Rooting Democracy inKenya through an Informed Citizenry. The study was undertaken between November2014 and May 2015.In particular, the study reviewed provisions in the Constitution and existing legislationon public participation. The study identified frameworks, including processes andplatforms put in place by the aforementioned county governments with the objectiveof facilitating public participation in governance processes. The study further assessedcitizen participation and engagement in governance. Finally, the study identified theavailable information dissemination frameworks in the target counties. The findingsin the study informed recommendations to county governments for strengtheningcitizen participation in governance.1.2Objectives of the studyThe main objective of the study was to review the status of public participation andexisting county public participation and information dissemination frameworks infour counties namely: Isiolo, Kisumu, Makueni and Turkana. The study included:a) A review of the provisions in the Constitution and existing laws anchoringdevolution on public participation;b) Identification of frameworks (Including processes and platforms) putin place by respective county governments that aim at facilitating publicparticipation in governance;2
A Case Study of Isiolo Kisumu Makueni and Turkana Countiesc) Determining the level of civil society and citizen engagement in governanceprocesses;d) Identification of information dissemination frameworks put in place bytarget counties; ande) Providing recommendations for policy considerations.1.3Study MethodologyThe study used both primary and secondary methods to collect data. Primary sourcesof data included Key Informant Interviews to identify information disseminationframeworks in the target counties. Key informants included public officials andcivil society representatives from the target counties. The interviews also sought toestablish whether there exist Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in the target countiesworking around governance and participation in county governance processes andwhether there are organized CSO networks in the counties through which citizenscould participate in governance processes.Secondary data included a review of the Constitution and legal framework put inplace by the Government of Kenya (GoK) to facilitate effective public participationand information dissemination framework at both levels of government (Nationaland County). It also included a review of several documents developed by the countygovernments. Among these were Bills, Acts and policies. Some of these included:Public Participation Acts or Bills, County Planning Bills and Policies, CountyMonitoring and Evaluation Bills and Policies; and County Public CommunicationBills and Policies.1.4Organization of the reportThe report is organised in four sections. Section one provides the executive summary.This includes the background to the study and highlights on the objectives of the study.Section two of the report provides an overview of public participation. The sectionhighlights the conceptual framework of public participation, the constitutional andlegislative framework on public participation in devolved governance. The sectionexamines provisions in specific legislations anchoring devolution namely: the CountyGovernment Act 2012, the Urban Areas and Cities Act 2011 and the Public FinanceManagement Act 2012.The findings of the study on specific counties are covered in section three of thereport. In this section, the report examines framework for public participation thathave been put in place by the four county governments aforementioned. The sectioninforms on whether the county governments have enacted legislation on public3
Review of status of Public Participation, andCounty Information Dissemination Frameworksparticipation, whether they have established county offices that facilitate publicparticipation, existing frameworks for information dissemination, gaps in informationdissemination framework and recommendations. The section also examines some ofthe activities undertaken by county based civil society organizations implementinggovernance projects in the counties. The section also provides lessons and challengesof public participation in the counties.Chapter four which is the final chapter of the study provides the conclusionand policy recommendations for consideration by county governments towardsenhancing public participation in county governance and recommendations that aimat enhancing the dissemination of information by county governments in general tothe public.4
A Case Study of Isiolo Kisumu Makueni and Turkana Counties2.0Overview of publicparticipation, conceptual,constitutional and legislative5
Review of status of Public Participation, andCounty Information Dissemination Frameworks2.1Conceptual FrameworkPublic participation is a political principle or practice, and may also be recognized asa right. Generally public participation seeks and facilitates the involvement of thosepotentially affected by or interested in a decision. The principle of public participationholds that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in thedecision-making process. Public participation implies that the public’s contributionwill influence the decision.Creighton (2005) defines public participation as a process by which public concerns,needs and values are incorporated into government and corporate decision making.The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) defines it as a processby which agencies or institutions consult with interested and affected individuals,organisations and government agencies before making a decision.Public participation is one of the foundational principles of democracy1. Democracyis premised on the idea that all citizens are equally entitled to have a say in decisionsaffecting their lives and citizens’ participating in government decision making isfundamental to the functioning of a democratic system of governance. Participationis not limited to citizens’ political activities such as voting, campaigning, and lobbyingby special interest groups. It also includes involvement in administrative processessuch as policy and law making, and planning.Through public participation, the public determines its development objectives andit is the role the leaders including representatives and bureaucratic staff to get thepeople there. The public ends (goals and objectives) should be chosen democraticallyeven though the means (or strategies) for achieving these may be chosen by the Stateand public officials.Public participation has many benefits some of which are: citizen empowerment; thegeneration of new, diverse and innovative ideas and actions; enhancement of citizengovernment relations; appropriate prioritization of projects; improved delivery ofpublic services and; governments responsiveness. A public participation exercise thatdoes not lead in the public affecting or influencing the outcome of the process canbe frustrating and futile.The core values espoused by IAP2 state that those participating must of necessitybe assured that their views will be considered in decision making. It is also expectedthat once the decisions are made, the public should get clear feedback on how much1Democracy is a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directlyby the people or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.6
A Case Study of Isiolo Kisumu Makueni and Turkana Countiestheir contributions affected decisions. In essence, participation gives “voice” to thevoiceless and “agency” to attend to the needs of the marginalized, in this way thepublic’s needs come first through positive development.For purposes of this report, public participation is defined as an open, accountableprocess through which individuals and groups within selected communities canexchange views and influence decision-making. It is further defined as a democraticprocess of engaging people in deciding, planning and playing an active role in thedevelopment and operation of services that impact on their lives.2.2 Constitutional Provisions on Public Participation inKenyaPublic participation is a principle that has been given prominence in the Constitutionof Kenya 2010. The people’s sovereign power can be expressed through directparticipation or indirectly through elected representatives. Article 10 (2) of theConstitution provides that public participation is a national value and principle ofgovernance. The principle of public participation is echoed across the Constitution.The public is expected to participate and be involved in the legislative and otherbusiness of Parliament and its committees2. One of the objects of devolution is togive powers of self-governance to the people and enhance the participation of thepeople in the exercise of the powers of the State and in making decisions affectingthem3.Participation should imbue all public affairs and be promoted by both State andNon-State Actors (NSAs) acting in public interest. The Constitution particularly setskey requirement for Parliament and the County Assemblies to provide frameworksfor public participation in legislative processes.4 This emphasis for the people’srepresentatives to ensure public participation underscores the fact that the electionof representatives does not negate the need for people to continuously be involvedin governance processes. This could be established through administrative and/orlegislative frameworks/guidelines. Parliament and County Assemblies are required toenact legislation on participation and also develop procedural guidelines for peopleto exercise this right.5The Fourth Schedule of the Constitution gives County Governments the powerto ensure and coordinate the participation of communities in governance at the2345Constitution of Kenya, Article 118Constitution of Kenya, Article 174 (c)Constitution of Kenya, 2010, Articles 118, 119 and 196Article 119 (2) Parliament shall make provision for the procedure for the exercise of this right7
Review of status of Public Participation, andCounty Information Dissemination Frameworkslocal level and assisting communities to develop the administrative capacity for theeffective exercise of the functions and powers and participation in governance at thelocal level.Conversely, devolution may lead to the translation of national governmentbureaucracies, poor utilization of resources, rent seeking and lack of accountabilityto the sub-national units. With the foregoing therefore, policies to support new,flexible approaches to ensuring a greater degree or active participation by citizens’are necessary and captured in the Constitution and legislative framework.The Constitution provides that the marginalized and minorities have the right to fullyparticipate in the integrated social and economic life of Kenya as a whole and in thecounties in particular. County governments should enact legislation that promotethe interests and rights of minorities and marginalised communities in countydevelopment. Additionally, there should be a commitment to affirmative action andequal opportunity if participation in governance and development is to be realized byall individuals and groups of people regardless of bias factors such as ethnicity, race,colour, religion, sex, age, genetic information, or disability.From the constitutional, legislative, regulatory and practical perspectives, citize
of citizen participation. Together, these constitutional and legislative provisions avail various platforms for citizen participation in devolved governance. Citizen participation is one of the national values and is also one of the principles of public service as articulated in the Constitution in Articles 10 (2,a) and Article 232 (1).
1 EOC Review Unit EOC Review Unit Table of Contents LEFT RIGHT Table of Contents 1 REVIEW Intro 2 REVIEW Intro 3 REVIEW Success Starters 4 REVIEW Success Starters 5 REVIEW Success Starters 6 REVIEW Outline 7 REVIEW Outline 8 REVIEW Outline 9 Step 3: Vocab 10 Step 4: Branch Breakdown 11 Step 6 Choice 12 Step 5: Checks and Balances 13 Step 8: Vocab 14 Step 7: Constitution 15
the public–private partnership law review the real estate law review the real estate m&a and private equity review the renewable energy law review the restructuring review the securities litigation review the shareholder rights and activism review the shipping law review the sports law review the tax disputes and litigation review
Jul 23, 2015 · Review Status Summary Internal Review Concluded June 11. th Team received and responded to 40 comments CDISC SRC Review Received and addressed 100 comments Approval to post for public review on July 21 Public Review Happening now! Anyone welcome to review and comment Comment period closes . 08/24/2015. 7
ITSD Project Status ReportITSD Project Status Report Project Update . Tasks Planned for Next Period (Enter Period Beginning and Ending Dates) 1/8/2020 2 . ITSD Project Status ReportITSD Project Status Report Open Issues . ID Status . Descrip
RightFax - Deciphering the Resulting Status Codes in RightFax . Summary: RightFax shows a status message for each fax in Faxutil and Webutil. To learn more about why a fax transmission may have failed, the fax history includes status codes that offer concise information. . 318 Dial tone after dialing Error: Phoneline Problem 324 Silence, no .File Size: 475KBPage Count: 9Explore furtherDeciphering the Resulting Status Codes in RightFax .rightfax.atechnologies.comDeciphering the Resulting Status Codes in RightFax .atechnologies.comSolved: Rightfax 9.3 failed faxes Experts Exchangewww.experts-exchange.comSupport RightFax Resource Centerrightfax.atechnologies.comSolved: RightFax Receive failure (Phase B). Experts Exchangewww.experts-exchange.comRecommended to you b
Status Change Status Change Type. Indicates the type of status change (Start or End) for mid-pay period accession and separations. Status Change Day. Indicates the day in the two-week pay period when the status starts or ends. Status Oath of Office. Identifies an em
the product regulation and liability review the shipping law review the acquisition and leveraged finance review the privacy, data protection and cybersecurity law review the public-private partnership law review the transport finance law review the securities litigation review the lending and secured finance review the international trade law .
Systems Audit report, Digital Dashboard: Status Review of ICT Projects and Initiatives. 1 . . is fundamental to a project achieving agreed objectives, benefits or outputs. 2 . This audit provides a status review of selected public sector ICT projects and initiatives.