By JANE WACHIRA
The “full-belly” thesis asserts that a man’s belly must be full before he can indulge in the luxury of worrying about his political freedoms. It intimates that economic rights to basic needs are more important than civil and political rights and thus realization of civil and political rights can wait until basic economic needs are secured.
Amartya Sen on the other hand, on the role of civil and political rights in promoting economic security avers that civil and political rights give people the opportunity to draw attention forcefully to general needs and to demand appropriate public action. Whether and how a government responds to needs and sufferings may well depend on how much pressure is put on it, and the exercise of political rights such as voting, criticizing and protesting can make a real difference.
When it comes to Kenya’s case I would disagree with Amartya Sen’s theory and concur with the Full belly thesis, that economic rights should take priority over civil and political rights. I am not hinting that we should curtail our civil and political liberties. What I am inadvertently suggesting is, could there be a way in which we can exercise our civil and political rights without infringing on our economic and social rights.
The country is scheduled to host its General Election next year, on August 8, 2017. Early this year the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) conducted a voter’s registration exercise. Originally, they planned to work on a Sh2 billion budget but treasury, however, offered them Sh500 million. Note that this amount was only to facilitate voter’s registration. In addition, the IEBC received a Sh560 million from the European Union.
For the forthcoming General Election, the IEBC requested Parliament and the Treasury for Sh45.4 billion. Justifying the budget, Ezra Chiloba, the Commission’s chief executive officer said Kenya’s elections are expensive because six elections are conducted on the same day.
The March 2013 elections have been termed as the most expensive elections so far. The exercise had been allocated Sh17.5 billion by the Treasury, the voting process alone cost taxpayers $286 million. Not to mention the high end technology that was applied, the BVR kits, which conveniently did not work on the material day. Preceding the 2013 elections were the controversial December 2007 elections that were followed by post election violence, whose economic implication is difficult to quantify.
Over the period of 2003 to 2008, the value of exports was on an upward trend, growing by about 8.6% in 2007.In 2008, growth in the value of exports significantly declined to 8.7% from 31.0% in 2006 mainly due to a decline in re-exports and the effects of the post election violence.
Tourism received 1.8 million international visitors by the end 2007 and its earnings totaled Kshs.65.4 billion. In 2008 Kenya was ranked 101 down from 98 in 2007.This was attributed mostly to negative publicity from post election violence. In addition to this approximately 120,000 jobs were lost in the tourism sector and has since crawled to recover.
Then there were the internally displaced persons whose homes were raided and burned, granaries and farms of crops torched and businesses looted. People fled their homes and left their means of livelihood behind. These amounted to utter frustration of their social and economic rights, which they had hoped would be upheld and protected through the exercise of their democratic right. Schools were closed down as well as businesses leading to millions of losses across the country.
It is a generally accepted view that the economy typically slows down ahead of elections; there is a slowdown in investment and economic activity all the while as government spending goes up. Nearing elections around send politicians on a looting spree, to enable them to sustain their election campaigns with expenditures includes; posters and banners, gifts, food and clothes in especially reflector jackets for motorists, renting crowds and dummy candidates to cut out rivals, commuting cost, fuel, temporary offices as well as part time and full time workers.
In the 2013 elections The National Alliance (TNA) received Sh59M from members and Sh20M from party officials. It made Sh114M from election fees, and Sh151M from well wishers. Its total income was Sh345M. The Orange Democratic Movement on the other hand had a total of Sh244 million mainly from party nomination fees and political parties’ fund. It reports spending Sh129M on campaigns, Sh54M on regional conferences, Sh39M on administrative expenses, and 14M on branch coordination among other expenses.
India, the world’s largest democracy also has its economy slowing down ahead of Lok Sabha elections. A study of key economic variables over the past 30 years shows that economic activity lost pace significantly every time there was a General Election.
Government spending went up in an average election year, which tended to fuel inflation rather than spur growth, suggesting that the extra public expenditure ahead of polls was largely wasteful.
The slowdown in investment and economic activity, however, was more pronounced especially because the government failed to take policy decisions in the past couple of years regarding corruption charges. The consumption of steel, for instance, slowed every time India had an election in the past two decades. The average growth in steel consumption in an election year is 6.45 percentage points lower compared with a non-election year. New project additions dry up in an election year. Investors and businessmen postpone key decisions till a new government is formed, and wait to gauge what the future policy environment will be before launching major projects.
At the same time, the pace of industrial credit growth decelerates as fewer industrialists line up for bank loans ahead of elections. The average rate of industrial credit growth in election years was 1.8 percentage points lower in the past three decades compared with non-election years. The situation is not different in Kenya either.
Does democracy increase economic growth? Yes. The democratization is however accompanied by endogeneity problems. Elections might build better institutions and may improve governance, which in turn increases economic growth. While this is evidently true in developed world, it is the reverse in the case of Kenya.
The period preceding elections is characterized by looting of public funds and resources, the Jubilee Coalition government has had its fair share in this, from the NYS scandal where 791 million went missing to the Euro bond billions whose utilization was neither evident nor their whereabouts traceable. The counties too were not left behind with some counties, for instance, buying wheelbarrows at Sh110, 000 each. The counties can no longer sustain themselves, and crucial facilities under them such as for health running on recurrent strikes.
The counties have kept pushing for more funds and crying wolf that the National Government was oppressing them financially. The reason for such rampant corruption, besides mere aggrandizement, is to build financial war chests for the next General Election.
It is very ironical how there is so much wealth and funds to support and facilitate a democratic right but none to sustain growth. The government could merely increase the meager teachers’ salaries or of the doctors and nurses. It even has no money to improve medical facilities, install cancer equipment, increase the beds in hospitals, and build schools and infrastructure.
Article 38 (2) and (3) accord on every citizen the right to free, fair and regular elections and the right to vote. In the same Bill of Rights Article 43, on economic and social rights grants every person the right to be free from hunger, to have adequate food and of acceptable quality, right to the highest attainable standard of health. Of the two provisions; none is superior to the other. They are interdependent. However, it seems as though one exists to the detriment of the other, the right to vote at the expense of the economic and social rights.
Every five years we go into elections hoping to elect leaders of integrity who will uphold the spirit of nationalism and steer our country forward economically. Instead we have governments that make corruption their main agenda, all in “preparation” for the next elections. The next regime comes in and the cycle continues. It is all about the elections.
Afterwards they increase taxes to raise funds for elections. There is no realization of social and economic rights and where there is it is very minimal. We have been crawling to economic stature and stability, and are probably at an economic status we should have been in during the millennium in 2000; probably we could be a developed nation.
I do not refute the dire importance to vote but rather that in voting our economic and social rights are respected, upheld, protected and realized and not curtailed. I agree even more with Colonel Ignatius K. Acheampong of Ghana that the principle “one man one vote” is meaningless unless it is accompanied by the principle of one man, one bread.
