Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Creco-County-Model Policy Framework PDF
Creco-County-Model Policy Framework PDF
Commissioned by:
Constitution & Reform Education Consortium (CRECO)
[Muungano Wa Elimu Ya Katiba]
Matumbato Rd., Off Upperhill Rd,
Gate No. 39 Next To International Guest House
P.O. Box 2231 - 00200, City Square Nairobi Kenya
Tel: 020 2654724, Mobile 0722 209779
Copyright CRECO 2014
ISBN: 978-9966-043-03-0
Design, Layout & Printing by:
Myner Logistics
P.O. Box 9110- 00200 Nairobi
Tel: 020-2211890/1
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Acronyms..............................................................................................................iv
Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................v
Foreword ........................................................................................................................vi
1. POLICY CONTEXT................................................................................................ 1
1.1
Introduction................................................................................................1
1.2
The rationale of the Policy Proposal ..........................................................2
1.3
Expected Outcome.....................................................................................2
1.4
Scope and Application of the Policy...........................................................2
1.5
Historical Overview of Public Participation in Kenya...................................3
2. BACKGROUND & CONCEPTS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .....................................5
1.1. Basic Assumptions Underlying Public Participation............................................5
1.1.1. Defining Policy ....................................................................................5
1.1.2. Public Participation..............................................................................5
1.1.3. Who is the Public.................................................................................5
1.1.4. Participation as a Constitutional Right.................................................6
1.1.5. Participation of Persons with Disabilities.............................................6
1.1.6. Participation of Marginalised Communities........................................6
1.1.7. Mainstreaming Gender & Youth Issues in County Development .......6
1.1.8. Challenges...........................................................................................7
1.2. Literature Review................................................................................................7
1.2.2. Public Participation in International & Regional Agreements ...........7
1.2.3. National Legislations ..........................................................................9
b) The Tuscan Law............................................................................9
c) Scotland......................................................................................10
d) Canada.......................................................................................10
e) Georgia.......................................................................................10
f) South Africa................................................................................11
1.3. Constitutional and Legal Framework on Public Participation ..........................11
3. THE VALUE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ..............................................................16
3.1. Introduction .......................................................................................................16
3.2. Measurable Gains for a Public participation Policy.............................................17
3.3. Core Values of Public Participation.....................................................................17
3.4. Public Participation Principles............................................................................18
4. POLICY FRAMEWORK .......................................................................................20
4.1 Sectoral Analysis & Emerging Policy Issues...................................................... 20
4.2 Legislative Functions........................................................................................20
4.3 Service Delivery ...............................................................................................21
4.4 Environment.................................................................................................... 21
4.5 Budgeting.........................................................................................................21
4.6 Formulation of IDPs ........................................................................................22
5. POLICY PROPOSALS AND IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK...............................24
6. STRATEGIES FOR PARTICIPATION.......................................................................32
7. REFERENCES (To be done once the draft has been reviewed).............................39
iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CBOs
CDF
CEC
CIMES
CBMS
CSAP
DFRD
FBOs
IDPs
IEA
KHRC
LASDP
MCA
NGOs
NIMES
SFG
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Constitution and Reform Education Consortium (CRECO) gratefully acknowledges the
Centre for Enhancing Democracy and Good Governance (CEDGG) for allowing us to
use their original report titled A proposal for Policy Framework for Effective Public
Participation for Nakuru County Governance and Development as the foundation,
of this model public participation framework. Their lead consultant Mr. Milton Obote
who conducted a thorough research in consideration of both local and international
experiences with regard to public participation in governance and development
processes. We also acknowledge the CEDDG Staff who contributed to the development
of the original report. We also thank UNDP Amkeni Wakenya, for their financial support
in the preparation and production of theoriginal report through CEDGG.
CRECO also wishes to thank its members who went through the report and gave
their feedback and inputs in a plenary meeting organized for that purpose. We also
acknowledge Policy Options Kenya who edited the report factoring the inputs of CRECO
members and added value to make it what it is.
We would also like to sincerely thank all the staff members of CRECO Secretariat namely:
Zipporah Abaki, Joel Mungania, Renee Kamau, Boaz Mugoto, Martha Ndururi, Edna
Change, Moses Bakari and Regina Opondo.
Our sincere thanks also go to the Management Committee: Ms. Rhoda Musyoka
(Chairperson), Mr. Aminer Owino (Vice- Chairperson), Mr. Masese Kemunche
(Secretary), Ms. Lydiah Gaitirira (Treasurer), Ms. Pauline Mbodze (Vice Secretary), Ms.
Asenath Nyamu (Member) and Mr. Peter Gitonga (Member) for guiding the Secretariat
towards excellence.
Our thanks go to Drivers of Accountability Program (DAP) for their support towards
the review of this framework and Humanist Institute for Cooperation with Developing
Countries (HIVOS) Nairobi Office, for their support towards the re-print of this book.
Regina Opondo
Executive Secretary
CRECO Kenya
v
FOREWORD
Kenyans have deep and longstanding concerns about the ways in which resources have
been distributed throughout the country. Many regions and communities felt that they
had been excluded by a strong central regime. The antidote in the 2010 Constitution is,
on the one hand, devolution of power to lower levels of government and, on the other
hand, an attempt to open up institutions at all levels and increase the opportunities for
public participation, as well as greater checks by new bodies, such as the Controller of
Budget, the County Assemblies and the Senate.
It follows from this that public participation is in part about aligning the needs and
demands of the public more closely with the choices of government officials. This
suggests that public participation must occur at the formulation and approval stages
of the budget and planning, when priorities are being set. At this stage, public
participation will enhance decision making by bringing information about public needs
to the attention of policy makers as they prioritize their spending. This can lead to more
equitable distribution of resources.
At the same time, concerns about corruption and failure to account for resources
during the course of budget implementation suggest that public participation in Kenya
is also important during budget execution and when budget performance is evaluated.
The same can be said about other planning and development processes. The public
has an oversight role to play that complements the County Assembly and other
bodies. Information that the public holds about the effectiveness of public spending
at community level, can help inform the oversight process and improve budget
implementation. Therefore, public participation is essential at all stages of the budget
process and other planning and development processes.
Public participation is also about building the legitimacy and credibility of government.
By engaging robustly with citizens, County government officials can ensure support
for their programs and build confidence in the competence of the administration. This
in turn can encourage citizens to pay taxes, investors to commit funds, and donors
to top up existing sources of revenue. Therefore effective participation will require
transparency and an effective feedback loop in which citizen demands are responded
to and reasons are given for incorporating or not incorporating them. The success of a
vi
vii
1.2.
The Rationale of the Policy Proposal
The main purpose of this policy proposal is to provide for mechanisms by which the
public may participate in the affairs of the counties; openness, transparency and
accountability on the part of the county governments, political structures and its
administration by providing for citizens to exercise their right to public participation
1.3.
Expected Outcome
It will create awareness and sensitize both county officials and county
citizens on the importance of citizen participation.
It will enable County government fulfill the requisite conditions for
capacitating county citizens to participate in the management of
county, sub-county and local governance and development while
holding duty bearers accountable.
It will enable duty bearers like the county government as well as
relevant NSAs in the county to assess their capacity to deliver a
people centered management of county resources.
It will call upon duty bearers to adapt, develop and implement periodic,
if not continuous participatory capacity building methodologies in
order to involve, enlighten and empower county citizens.
It lays out the template for an effective county i n f o r m at i o n
management which predisposes county citizens toward effective
oversight role in county governance and development.
1.4.
Scope and Application of the Policy
The policy develops the principles and sets out the ways and means of how they
will be achieved. These principles will be applied on a case by case basis when the
county governments engages the public and other stakeholders in developing county
legislation, policy and strategy, and in implementing , monitoring and evaluating polices
and projects as well as when evaluating the quality of the delivery of services.
This policy will however not apply to public participation processes where national
(sectoral) legislation prescribes the norms and standards to be used for those processes.
Where these legislated norms and standards do not exist and where they are below
those set by this policy, the county government may apply this policy to effectively and
efficiently execute the legislated public participation.
1.5.
Historical Overview of Public Participation in Kenya
Participatory Development in Kenya like in many other countries was for decades
confined to community development projects which were mainly donor funded and
supervised (Wakwabubi and Shiverenje, 2003).
Kenya attempted to institutionalize decentralized planning and implementation of its
programmes as early as the 1960s through Sessional Papers. The most comprehensive
one was the District Focus for Rural Development (DFRD) Strategy which became
operational in 1983. However, the Strategy emphasized involvement of central
government field workers in planning and implementation of programmes and therefore
ignored indigenous knowledge and experiences. Chitere and Ireri (2004) notes this
is contrary to the conception of the participatory approach. Ideally in participation,
development workers such as civil servants have a role in facilitating the process through
assisting communities to identify and solve their own problems.
The DFRD Strategy also faced challenges in implementation because it lacked statutory
anchorage that could entrench the coordinating committees in the law. The operations
were carried out administratively rather than legally. This has been a characteristic
of decentralized policies in Kenya whereby some funds have been created by Acts of
Parliament and therefore have had legal backing. However, others have been created
through policy pronouncements and consequently have had no guarantee of continuity
(KHRC and SPAN, 2010).
The enactment of the Physical Planning Act in 1996 saw further evolution of participatory
development. The Statute did provide for community participation in the preparation
and implementation of physical and development plans. However, its major shortfall
is the lack of the critical element of community sensitization on their roles. Physical
planning is also centralized in major towns and thus communities residing in remote
areas remained marginalized in participatory planning (Okello, 2008).
Over the past one decade, the LASDAP and CDF have been the main vehicles of
community participation at the local level. The LASDAP was introduced in 2001 through
a ministerial circular whilst the CDF was established in 2003 through the CDF Act (2004).
The LASDAP were a three year rolling plans that are required to have a poverty focus
with priority areas in health, education and infrastructure (Kibua and Oyugi, 2006). The
LASDAP provided opportunities for the local authorities to constructively engage with
3
2.1.8. Challenges
Policy concerns emanating from the examination of the past and present devolved
structures are:
All of these efforts are piecemeal in nature. Though the law has provided
avenues for engaging, they result in random and uncoordinated engagements
with the public and county structures since they are derived from separate
legislative and policy mandates that are more often on ad hoc basis.
There is no integration and readily available and comprehensible information
on how effective, efficient and responsive the county government structures
are to the public.
The need to create awareness amongst duty bearers and citizens on what public
participation is and its importance.
The need to build the capacity of citizens to enhance their participation in the
management of local affairs and projects, and to hold duty bearers accountable.
Duty bearers also need continuous capacity enhancement on participatory
methodologies.
Poor information management on the part of the duty bearers.
Therefore, through this policy, the County Governments will introduce a coordinated,
managed and evaluated approach to achieving meaningful public participation and
consultation as provided for in the constitution and other enabling statutes.
2.2. Literature review OF SELECTED INTERNATIONAL BEST PRACTICES
2.2.1. Public Participation in International and Regional Agreements
International and regional agreements, as well as popular pressure to open up
governmental decision-making processes are spurring governments to take steps to
improve transparency, participation and accountability.
The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) promotes and seeks to
improve the practice of public participation in relation to individuals, governments,
institutions, and other entities that affect the public interest in nations throughout the
world. The international association for public participation core values includes;
1. Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a
decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process.
2. Public participation includes the promise that the publics contribution will
influence the decision.
7
contribution of the public to decision making process as well as ensuring the public
has effective access to information.
In 1990, the African leadership meeting in Arusha, Tanzania enacted the African Charter
for Popular Participation in Development and Transformation whose objective is to
recognise the role of peoples participation in development and define appropriate
approaches to the promotion of popular participation in policy formulation, planning,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation of development programmes. Article 11 of
the Charter affirms the empowerment of the people to effectively involve themselves
in creating the structures and in designing policies and programmes that serve the
interest of all as well as to effectively contribute to the development process and share
equitably in its benefit.
At the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, nations from around the world adopted Principles of
the Rio Declaration, where Principle 10 of the Declaration emphasises the importance
of public access to information, participation in decision making process and access
to judicial procedures and remedies. Agenda 21 of the Rio Plan of Action committed
governments to pursue broader public participation in decision making process and
policy formulation for sustainable development.
In 1988, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe adopted the Convention
on Access to Information, Public Participation in decision making and Access to Justice
in Environmental matters (De Villiers, 2001:122).
The Declaration of the International Conference on Public Participation held in Guateng,
South Africa (The Guateng Declaration of March 2012) stressed the importance of public
participation as an essential ingredient to good governance and human development,
whose ultimate objective is to improve the livelihood outcomes of people.
2.2.2 National Legislations:
a) The Tuscan Law
Under the recent amendments to the constitution of Italy, regions have considerable
power, including residual legislative power. One of the regions, Tuscany has enacted a
broad based legislative framework. The remarkable features of this legislation (Regional
Law 69 0f 27 Dec. 2007) include:
A right to participate
9
The creation of a single person authority for the guarantee and promotion of
participation
Training programmes to develop a civic and participatory culture
Groups within the community (provided they reach a certain percentage of the
community) may ask for financial assistance with participation
Priority given to participation exercises that involve the vulnerable or
disadvantaged, including the disabled, development on land that will have
significant potential impact on the landscape or environment; that facilitate
gender-balanced participation; that adopt innovative forms of communication
especially that permit the peorple to be involved in the final stages of the
process.
b) Scotland
The Scottish Parliament (2000) proclaimed that this parliament was elected on a
promise: that policy making would be more open, participatory and consultative. That
is what the people of Scotland expect of us. Our success in meeting the promise of
openness and accountability will be a litmus test of our achievement of the wider
aspiration of devolution (De Villiers, 2001:115).
This statement by the Scottish Parliament embodies the international trends and
developments with regard to the notion of public participation. It reiterates the renewed
commitment to and view of public participation as an essential ingredient to democracy.
Public participation in practice is regarded as contribution to empowerment and
education of the public as well as enhancing the stability and legitimacy of democracy.
c) Canada
In the Canadian democracy, public participation in government decision-making is now
a regular aspect of political life. It became a feature of public policy in Canada from the
1960s and 1970s with the consequence that today; decisions by government without
public participation are the exception rather than the rule. The Canadian Constitution
and general legislation do not provide for public participation, yet it now plays a
significant role in policy and law-making (De Villiers, 2001:117-118).
d) Georgia
Georgias new law on self-governance that came into force in 2005 obliges municipalities
to ensure that active participation of society, seek ways of co-operation with them and
10
11
The constitution has gone further to provide for instances where the voice and
endorsement of the public is a compulsory requirement. In Articles 91, 94, 118 and
119 citizens have a right to participate in a political movement of their choice, while
parliament is required to give the public an avenue to participate in legislation and
presenting petitions to public authorities.
The objects and principles of devolved government under Article 174 give powers of self
governance to the people and enhance their participation in the exercise of the powers
of the state in making decisions that affect them while recognizing the powers of the
communities to manage their own affairs and to further their own development.
County Assemblies are required to conduct their business in an open manner and hold
its sittings and those of its committees in public and facilitate public participation in the
legislative and other business of the assembly and its committees (Article 169). The
involvement of citizens in policy making and implementation is important to strengthen
and deepen democratic governance. It is through active public participation that
evidence based policy making and responsive service delivery can take place.
The national legislation contemplated in Article 184 (1) to provide for the governance
and management of urban areas and cities and to in particular provide for participation
by residents in the governance of urban areas and cities.
Article 201: provides for principles of public finance management that includes
publication participation in finance matters
Article 221 (5): the Budget and Appropriations Committee to seek public input when
reviewing budget estimates and the recommendations shall be taken into account
when the committee presents its report to the House
Article 232 (1) (d) & (f); Public Service values principles require involvement of the
people in the process of policy making; transparency and provision to the public of
timely and accurate information
The Fourth Schedule under Part 2 (14) stipulates that functions and powers of the
County are to ensure and coordinate the participation of communities and locations
and locations in governance at the local level. Counties are also to assist communities
to develop the administrative capacity for the effective exercise of the functions and
powers and participation in governance at the local level.
12
14
15
interest groups could be called upon on round table meetings or fora which could be
used to bring together the County governments, civil society and other stakeholders
to deliberate on actions and programmes. The stakeholder discussions should include
opportunities for multi-sectoral groups to come together to make input on broader
policy.
This framework advocates for a partnership approach between citizens and government.
It collapses administrative silos to within the ward committees and recognizes the
decisions made at the ward level.
3.2 Measurable Gains for a Public Participation Policy
Increased level of information in communities.
Informed priorities.
Effective and efficient service delivery.
Developed capacities of the community and human capital.
Effective Community Based Monitoring System (CBMS) as one tool that can
be modified and adopted by county governments to develop evidence based
strategic plans.
Equalization and redistribution of wealth and development.
Community integration and ownership.
3.3 Core Values of Public Participation
In order to actualise the above potential benefits the following values which cut across
all areas of public participation will provide a useful benchmark for legislation.
Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a
decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process.
Public participation includes the promise that the publics contribution will
influence the decision.
Public participation promotes sustainable decisions by recognizing and
communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision
makers.
Public participation seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those
potentially affected by or interested in a decision.
Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they
participate.
17
4.0
POLICY FRAMEWORK
Service Delivery
Service delivery is the special vehicle in delivering the economic and social rights as
envisaged in Article 43 of the constitution. The importance of service delivery, especially
to poor and marginalized communities means that great care must be taken to consult
these communities whenever new initiatives around service delivery are under taken or
problem with service delivery arise.
In respect of new service agreements or development projects it is strongly
recommended that consultation with the local communities affected occur through
a stakeholder committee comprising the ward committees of the affected areas, and
relevant stakeholder groups. Consultations must address all phases of the service
delivery or development project, including local planning, monitoring and evaluation.
4.4
Environment
The Constitution of Kenya makes specific mention of the need for participation in the
context of protection of the environment: where citizens are encouraged to participate
in the management, protection and conservation of the environment (Art. 69). This
reflects an international realisation of the value of participation in making environmental
protection effective something that is of value, properly viewed, from the perspectives
of both the people and the government. This Article has been incorporated by reference
into the right to a habitable environment provided for under Article 42 that entitles
every person to a clean and healthy environment
4.5
Budgeting
The Constitution provides that
there shall be openness and accountability, including public participation in
financial matters (Art. 201)
21
22
The interests of these special categories of the community have been properly canvassed
in the bill of rights.
Article 47 of the constitution offers an avenue where individuals have a right to
demand quality, sufficient and timely administrative services from public offices.
Article 220 (2) (a) of the Constitution states that:
National legislation shall prescribe the structure of development plans and budgets.
The constitution also requires an integrated development planning framework to
enhance linkage between policy, planning and budgeting.
Integrated development planning will govern the preparation of annual county budgets
and no public funds will be appropriated without a planning framework as stipulated in
Part XI of the County Government Act.
This planning at the county level shall be guided by the relevant legislation taking into
consideration of the principles of public participation as provided for in Section 87 of
the County Government Act.
23
25
26
27
Policy Principle 1: Citizens will have the right to obtain justification and explanations
for the use of public resources from those entrusted with the responsibility for their
management.
Policy principle 2: Public office-holders have a duty to provide justification regarding
their performance and take corrective action in instances where public resources have
not been used effectively.
Action Plan
1. Develop a citizen framework and mechanism for exerting accountability at the
local levels through citizen oversight committees or surveillance committees.
These committees may be formed under the Sub-County Citizens forum Ward
Citizens forums and village Forums to compel performance.
2. Enable citizens to engage in the assessment and reflection of the achievement
of the strategic goals as identified in the county Strategic Action Plan. This will
be coordinated through the Sub-County Citizens Forum and the Ward Citizens
Forum.
3. The Sub-County Citizens forum will provide for the establishment of citizen
oversight or surveillance mechanisms to oversee monitoring and evaluation on
behalf of the county.
4. The Ward Citizen Forums shall establish citizen monitoring committees to
oversee all ongoing projects in the ward. The committees shall generate
quarterly or bi-annual citizen monitoring reports to be tabled at the Ward
Citizen Forum.
5. Need for official recognition of social accountability mechanisms such as social
6.
7.
8.
9.
audits, community score cards and citizen report cards and public expenditure
tracking surveys.
Citizen oversight mechanisms should be given statutory powers to enforce
accountability from duty bearers.
The Sub-County and Ward Citizen forums and committees shall have the right
to access all information held by the county executive.
County and Sub-County Integrated Monitoring systems (CIMES) will be
established under the auspices of NIMES to undertake monitoring. CIMES shall
involve citizen oversight forums in its monitoring processes and reporting.
The county monitoring system will make use of Social audits, Citizen Report
Cards and Score Cards in evaluating performance at county level.
29
31
At the most basic level, public participation is about communication between county
officials/public officers on one hand and the community on the other. Communication
in turn is about the passing of information between the governor and the governed. This
is crucial to ensure that those who are outside the formal decision-making structures of
devolved units are able to make any kind of contribution to local governance. It is for this
reason that the enabling legislation requires county officials to inform the community.
Informed by the necessity of reciprocal information transmission, this identifies several
tools to enhance the exchange of information between the county executive and county
assemblies on one side and the community members on the other.
A proper communication channel enhances the quality of public participation. For this
to be effective, the following guidelines should be used employed in realising the public
participation principles:
i. Promote sharing of information through use of accessible channels of
communication. These should include county websites, transparency boards,
SMS, local newsletters, local or community radio, TV, barazas and any other
media.
ii. Provide timely information and sufficient notice of not less than 1 month for
forthcoming planning meetings.
iii. Provide information in formats accessible to a wide group of people including
persons with disabilities and translate to local language where necessary.
iv. Provide for strict time limits for processing of requests for information and
refusals to be accompanied by substantive written reasons.
v. A list of reasons for non-disclosure should be provided for in legislation and in
concordance with the Freedom of Information legislation and made public.
vi. Costs of accessing information should be reasonable as not to deter potential
information seekers. This should be specified and standardized across all
counties.
vii. Prescribe penalties for failure to disclose information within stipulated time
and in contravention of the legitimate reasons for non-disclosure. Relevant
office may pay a fine as determined by court of law.
32
6.0.1
i.
ii.
iii.
i)
Publicising Public Participation Principles
Building a culture of participatory governance at the county requires developing a new,
inclusive and constructive attitude towards local governance. This requires an open
attitude on the part of the county administration acknowledging the responsibilities
of constructive engagement in the interests of all citizens where county officials/
public officers understand that democratic local governance is a partnership with
the community and local communities need to understand that governance is often
constrained and must address the needs of all fairly.
One way of facilitating this is to educate people in the principles of public participation
and the starting point is for county governments to publicise the public participation
principles identified in 3.4 (above). Initiatives to be taken to educate the people in
the values of public participation over and above publicising the public participation
principles.
ii)
Citizen Participation Charter
The objective of a citizen participation charter is to outline the rights and duties of
citizens as regard participating in county governance. The charter should contain
basic information including:
Basic information about the county
What community participation is
How community participation works including
- Key issues the community must be informed about
- Key issues the community must be consulted about
- Key issues the community must be involved in
Information on how to make general queries and complaints
The public participation year planner
Copies of the charter should be made accessible at ward, sub-county and county levels
as well as at the county website.
The nature of the charter means that it will have to be updated on an annual basis.
33
iii)
Community Complaints Management System
This refers to the establishment of an institutional home and set of procedures to deal
with community complaints at each level.
The institutionalised system must contain basic requirements namely:
The thorough publicising of contact details, especially a telephone number for
the public to lodge complaints, on the website, in all county offices and key
documents like the citizens participation charter
A place or places in the county where the public can report complaints in
person, and orally if preferred, in their language
The development of standing rules of order that deal in detail with managing
community complaints
These must include clear protocols around who responds to what kind of complaint,
the time frame for this response, the development of techniques to allow the public
to track their complaints, and a basic threshold of information that must be given in
response to each kind of complaint.
Citizen Satisfaction Surveys
It is strongly recommended that counties employ the use of satisfaction surveys,
preferable professionally and independently conducted, to assess county performance
in areas such as service provision, and the responsiveness of officials and staff to the
public.
Strategy Two: Ward Committees
The constitution places great emphasis on separation of powers at the national and
county level. Article 175 (a) requires that county governments shall be based on
democratic principles and the separation of powers.
The county citizen engagement framework should seek to provide an engagement
platform that safeguard against elite capture of citizen forum committees.
Regulatory tools ought to be put in place to aid citizen engagement and accountability
at ward, sub-county and county levels.
The citizen forum committees should be representative in nature and inclusive of all
stakeholders comprising women, youth, marginalised and minority groups, private
34
sector, faith based organisations and community based associations having the best
interests of the communities they represent.
In constituting the community forum committees, the vetting should take into
consideration the integrity and leadership standing of the members.
The Forums will be located at:
County
Sub-County
Urban areas
Ward
Village
Strategy Three: Stakeholder Forums
It is vital for county governments to incorporate local stakeholders into their public
participation practice. In this respect, it is important that all locally recognised
community organisations be required to register with the county government and that
they are consulted on how to interact with the county administration on issues which
concern them or on which they wish to provide input to.
The county department in charge of public participation to establish a stakeholder
register which includes the following information:
The name of the stakeholder group
The sector they represent and their perceived role
Their constitution
35
36
37
CRECO MEMBERS
No.
1
2
3
Organization
Centre for Human Rights & Civic Education
- CHRCE
Centre for Law & Research International
CLARION
Community Based Development Services
COBADES
Citizens Coalition for Constitutional Culture
4Cs
Centre for Democracy & Good Governance
CEDGG
IlimuSheria (ILISHE) Trust
Email Address
Ms. Angela Musyoka
chrcemgi@yahoo.com
Mr. Morris Odhiambo
info@clarionkenya.org
Mr. Peter Gitonga
cobades@gmail.com
Telephone
Telephone:0734-15347/0724663685
0722-610567
0733 748214
Ms. AtsangoChesoni
admin@khrc.or.ke
020 3874998/3876065
10
Mobilization
Agency
for
Paralegal
Communities in Africa MAPACA
0735 116164
Mazingira Institute
020 4443226/4443219
4
6
7
11
12
13
Pastoralists
Community
Organization PACODEO
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Development
21
22
Kazi Riziki
23
38
020 3874962
051 2210845/0723-839896
041 - 2491172
0733-940969/0721-912401
0721 - 684258
069-2102114/0710-140590
020 - 2692071
0727 - 763425
0722 760235/0714-599291
020 4446065/4443830
020 3559212/2022026
064-31293/0722-844751
0723-820950
2378271/3860640
4762120/0734-768460
0788776674/0722781202
List of References
Creighton, J.L (20050, The Public Participation Handbook. San Francisco, USA:
Jossey-Bass
De Villiers, S, (2001), A Peoples Government: The Peoples Voice- A Review of
Public Participation in the Law and Policy Making Process in South Africa. Cape
Town Parliamentary Support Programme
De Vries M.S, (2007), Public Participation in Policy Processes: Towards a
Research Agenda; Radboud University, Netherlands.
Ghai J.C, Participation: A Legal Framework? Katiba Institute Working Paper
Khanya. 2002. Guidelines for Community Participation in Local Governance,
Department of Provincial Local Government, South Africa
Kotze, D.A, (1997), Development Administration and Management: A holistic
approach. Pretoria J;L Van Schaik Publishers
Meyer, I and Theron, F, (2000), Public Participation in Local Government, Good
Wood:NBD
The Constitution of Kenya, 2010
The County Government Act, 2012
The Inter-Governmental Relations Act, 2012
The Public Finance Management Act, 2012
The Urban Areas and Cities Act, No. 13 0f 2011
39