acrimony as house debates sexual offences bill

Source: The East African Standard (Nairobi)

April 27, 2006: Controversy and heated arguments marked the start of the debate on the Sexual Offences Bill when female MPs stormed out of Parliament to protest a slur by a male colleague.

Kasipul Kabondo MP Paddy Ahenda's contribution to the Bill, which seeks tougher penalties against rape, sparked protest from female MPs while it was met with applause and foot thumping by male MPs.

The LDP MP said while he supported the Bill, sections of it, unless amended, would open floodgates of court cases and unnecessary jail terms.

Ahenda said section 23 of the Bill, which criminalises making advances at women, would be tantamount to making marriage illegal.

"Mr Speaker Sir, African women are very shy and do not make advances and therefore criminalising making advances would be tantamount to outlawing marriage," he said.

Ahenda's remarks that African women will not say yes to sexual advances and that many a times their 'No' might actually mean 'Yes', sparked a barrage of points or order from majority of the female MPs.

Women walk out

Women seated at the public gallery were the first to walk out, prompting majority of the female MPs to follow suit. The walkout shortly after 6 pm left Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister Martha Karua and the mover of the Bill, Njoki Ndungu, as the only female MPs in the House.

Ahenda's contribution was cut short by several points of order by Kabete MP Paul Muite and Langata's Raila Odinga. Ahenda had earlier got into trouble with the female MPs when a Kanu nominated MP said he had referred to female counterparts as creatures.

Health Minister Charity Ngilu led the walk out by at least 10 MPs. They later made a noisy return to the Chamber to denounce Parliament's motto inscribed at the entrance, which describes it as a forum for the welfare of men.

"This message is stupid! This message is stupid!" the women chanted in protest at the message saying: For the Welfare of Society and the Just Government of Men."

Musila ordered that the women MPs be expelled for being "disorderly" but not before they had temporarily managed to disrupt Parliament's business. Diplomats, led by the US ambassador William Bellamy and British High Commissioner Adam Wood, were among dignitaries present during Wednesday's debate. Others were women leaders and human rights organisations.

Professional treatment

Nominated MP Njoki Ndungu said the Bill was intended to act as a deterrent to the rising number of rape and other sexual crimes.

She described rape as the "most traumatic experience that happens at the most private part of you" and that had nothing to do with sex as is commonly perceived. It was a tool of "humiliation and conquer" she said.

The Bill, she said, intends to introduce 21 new sexual offences and to provide for the treatment of sex victims including public-funded counselling. It takes a minimum of Sh15,000, she said, to grant professional treatment of rape and other sex offence victims.

Seconding the Bill, Nominated MP Mutula Kilonzo said the current Law on sex crimes was enacted in 1930 and was therefore inadequate and inconsistent with modern society.

"It is important to note this law intended to punish 'crimes of morality." That includes stealing. It clearly was not intended for the kind of crimes being witnessed today."

The Shadow Attorney General sought to allay fears that the proposed law could harm marriages or legalise "unAfrican" cultures such as sodomy. He said it only sought to enshrine in law all genders right to sexual freedom.

Unwelcome contact

But East African Cooperatives assistant minister, Bonny Khwalwale, though supporting the Bill, criticised it for allegedly targeting for criminalisation some cultures and for being "urbanite."

He said proposals to outlaw unwelcome contact as a form of indecent assault could be misinterpreted for mischievous reasons.

"When a mischievous driver applies emergency brakes in a matatu, you could end up touching someone's buttocks. Will that amount to an indecent act?"

The debate, at times, nearly degenerated into a personal quarrel between Khalwale and his Kabete counterpart Paul Muite when the latter claimed that courtship could be criminalised as unlawful act under the Bill. Khalwale had argued, to the wild cheers from MPs, that sex was often a consideration in marriage and could therefore qualify as an "intention to penetration" .