Make Kenyan Aspirations for Democracy a Reality; Open Society Institute Says APRM Implementation Critical

NAIROBI—Ordinary Kenyans have not felt a significant impact from the Africa Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) process, a new report found. The report, commissioned by the Open Society Initiative for East Africa (OSIEA) and OSI’s Africa Governance Monitoring and Advocacy Project (AfriMAP), calls on the government to deliver a Programme of Action that will increase democratic space for Kenyans.

Kenya’s APRM review focused heavily on the delivery of services, according to the report, but did not tackle the more challenging task of institutional reform that is vital for Kenya’s democratic transition.

“It is not enough to just ask Kenyans what they want from their government and then say we have completed the APRM Process,” said Binaifer Nowrojee, OSIEA Director. “The work is not done until the government responds to these concerns. That is what democracy is about.”

Set up by the African Union, the APRM process is intended to give citizens a greater voice on how the country is governed and thereby foster democratic participation in Africa. Kenya conducted its APRM process from February 2004 to March 2006.

The report, The APRM Process in Kenya: A Pathway to a New State, provides the leading independent analysis of Kenya’s experience. It is a valuable resource not only for Kenyans, but also for other African countries about to undergo the APRM review.

The report commends the Kenya government for being one of the first African countries to open itself to critical examination of its governance and human rights record. To date, the government has done well in complying with its reporting obligations to the APRM Forum. The report recognizes the strong support from the Minister of Planning and the wide consultation around the country that succeeded in giving ordinary Kenyans some voice to their demands for change.

The report also highlights some key concerns that emerged. The APRM national steering committee, set up in December 2005, is dominated by government representatives and was appointed in a non-consultative manner. Since then, key stake holders have found themselves left out of the preparation for the progress report. The disproportionate role played by state actors in conducting this process is resulting in weak engagement of the civil society sector.

OSIEA/AfriMAP call for the APRM report to be made more accessible, including through simplified language-appropriate versions for local communities; the creation of participatory tools such as citizens’ report cards to measure government performance; and the expansion of the process beyond the executive branch to include other state structures, such as parliament, and non-state organizations.

“Kenyans need to organize to push the government to deliver on its promises–we need to ensure that the APRM really does bring greater accountability to Africa,” said Ozias Tungwarara, AfriMAP Director.

African states have pledged a growing number of commitments to promote democratic principles and good governance since the African Union was formed in 2002. One of these mechanisms is the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) that contains the APRM for governments to conduct a self-assessment report through a participatory process. The APRM covers four areas: Political governance and democracy, economic governance and management, corporate governance, and socioeconomic governance.

###