Majimbo Debate

The majimbo system seems to be very popular with residents of certain parts of the country. The thinking seems to be that with this system all their problems will be solved. They'll have more money available to them as all most of the money will be going back to the mashinani (grassroots), at least thats what they've been told by their political leaders. Some maybe even the majority, especially in the Coast and Rift Valley provinces interpret it to mean that all 'outsiders(people from other parts of the country who've settled in this places)'will have to return to where they or their ancestors came from. The thinking being that once this folks go, their lives will be much better, never mind that our current constitution guarantees Kenyans to settle and own property in any part of the country. This is in fact one of the most basic rights contained in any modern state to its citizens.

Majimbo in its most favourable interpretation means a federal system of government. This is a form practiced in several states including very successfully by economical powerhouses USA and Germany. The federal republic of Germany probably has one of the most successful devolved systems of Govt. around. Anyone who's ever been there will know. It goes down to the regions, the cities and within the cities themselves. What one doesn't know though is that like in any other place there are rich regions like Bavaria and some poorer ones, especially in the former East Germany. Now in the German system, what is collected in Bavaria is not exclusively just forked back into Bavaria, but there's a sort of mechanism that goes to balance the money redistributed to the Mashinani (Länderfinanzausgleich), so that certain regions don't lag behind others. That means the people of Bavaria pay more than what they actually get from the federal system. In addition, till today, the citizens of Germany are still taxed towards bringing the states of the former East Germany to the same level as the former West German ones (solidarzuschlag). Translated into the Kenyan system, what does equitable distribution of resources mean? Will the people of Nyanza agree towards some of their hard earned monies being used in building the North Eastern Province, for example? Will the people of Rift Valley agree to their resources/money being used to shore up Western Province or central Province and vis versa as the case maybe.

A situation where province A generates 20% more income than province B and gets back the same money back will lead over time to a situation where the inequalities in the 2 provinces will be much greater than is presently the case. Our ultimate goal as a nation is to achieve as much equality in distribution of infrastructure, services and standard of life as possible. What ODM doesn't tell you is that in a true federal system the rich must drag along the poor. That in itself contains an inbuilt inherent unfairness, where some pay more than they receive. These however must bear the sacrifice for the greater good. It is important to note that even in a mature devolved system like Germany's people still grumble here and there, albeit quietly about this arrangements. The danger in the ethnisised Kenyan environment is a state of perpetual war as different regions (tribes) fight over resource allocations and eventually contemplate secession when it ends up that they are only propping other places up. Secession means all out War. A federal system of government requires a certain level of maturity in the electorate that frankly I don't believe we have achieved yet. As we seen before and after the general election, our electorate is easily swayed by demagogues. As much as we may try to ourselves that our electorate is more informed, I still don't believe they are well informed enough tom make the choices that were on offer during the last election.

A federal system does not exist without a strong centre. Left on their own, the states or provinces might develop into a situation best described by this parable in the bible. A man goes on a long journey and entrusts his workers with talents. To one he gives 5, to the next 2 and to the last 1. When the man comes back, he find that the first worker invested wisely and earned 5 more talents. The second one likewise invested wisely and gained 2 more. The last however buried his in the ground and when the master came back he had only his one to show. Basically, some states (jimbos or provinces) will invest wisely and move greatly forward, some will waste their money foolishly and thus lag even far behind. Who will carry the responsibility of bailing them out? Such misuse is already evident in the use of CDF funds, where some constituencies have invested wisely and improved on the lives of their residents, while in others the money has been misused through corruption and nepotism.

A further disadvantage of a federal system is creating a huge bureaucracy. A federal system of government involves the state having their own executives and legislative organs. In Germany some state parliaments have close to 200 members. Translated into the Kenyan context and the large salaries that our MPs earn, that would almost lead us into bankruptcy. Furthermore complicated laws have to be established as to the roles of the state and the federal government. Legislation takes longer to pass through the legislative bodies. Finally, at least in the US and Germany the parliament has two chambers, with the second chamber accommodating the states.

It is also not quite true that there doesn't exist a certain amount of devolution in our current centralized unitary system of government. The way our system works,the state collects its revenue through tax and customs and then allocates the funds to the various ministries. The ministries are then charged with the responsibility of distributing the funds to the various provinces. In addition to that since 1999 some funds have been allocated regularly to the local authorities through the LATF programme. In addition since the year 2003, a percentage of government revenue has been going back to the mashinani through the CDF scheme.

In conclusion, a fair amount of devolution can be achieved by by-passing the provinces and going directly to the constituencies as is currently being done. However there has to be a strong central organizing committee to make sure that the boards responsible for the funds in the constituency are professional and up to the task. The MP as the one who seeks a fresh mandate every five years and who in the end can be held accountable to the people spearheads the committee and guides its actions. Through this the people maintain leverage over the use of funds and who runs them. With time more funding and responsibility can be awarded to the CDF. They can then be charged with tasks of providing infrastructure, services (water, health, electricity, education ) etc.

Transparency within our present political structure can be achieved by making ministries completely accountable as to how the funds are allocated to the various provinces. The records should be readily available to the public. This would eliminate certain mundane and ill informed debates about how the least revenue is collected in central province and yet most of the government money is spent there. It would also form a more informed basis for the public to hold discussions. The government for its own sakes also needs to appreciate the need for keeping accurate statistics as to the amount of services, schools, health facilities and infrastructure available in every province or better yet constituency. This information also needs to be readily available, through the internet for example. This should be coupled by the plans currently under way of broadcasting parliament sessions live. There the general public can have access to the minister through their Members of parliament who can then question why province A gets so much money and why province B gets so little.

One area where there seems to be total lack of transparency and accountability is in the local government. In the city, town, municipal and county councils. As you can see they've gotten quite an amount of money through the LATF funds in addition to the revenue they collect themselves. How do they spend that money? Why is it that most don't have even a decent website in this day and age including the cities Nairobi, Mombasa and Kisumu? There really seems to be little change on the ground as far as these councils are concerned.

In closing retaining our current structure of government but increasing its transparency, with simple yet effective means as has been done in the CDF scheme is the better way to go. The Majimbo system carries with it quite a huge amount of historical baggage as well as increasing the overall level of bureaucracy. Our current light weight structure if improved upon will take us from A to B much faster, while holding the country together.