Women MPs must be assertive to push through gender agenda

The 2022 General Election resulted in 29 women being elected to the National Assembly on single constituency seats. This is a 31 per cent increase from 22 in 2017.

Added to the 47 county women representatives and the six political party nominees, the total number of women in the National Assembly stands at 82, which is 24 per cent of the total Assembly. This falls short of the one third proportion prescribed by the Constitution.

The configuration has negative implications in women’s legislative performance, going by studies on parliamentary work.

In the past two parliaments, passage of proposed legislation to enact the one third rule failed mainly because women did not have the numbers on their own to determine the result given the requirement that a constitutional amendment be supported by at least two thirds of the legislature. Despite virtually all women voting for the Bills on the matter, they were defeated.

If similar Bills come up in the new Parliament, and all the women are in support, they will still require 152 male legislators to guarantee success. To muster such numbers, women in the 11th Parliament assigned themselves to individually lobby male colleagues for the vote.

Should this strategy be re-used, each woman MP must successfully lobby two male colleagues. The risk with this strategy is that men may express verbal support but not turn up to vote. Moreover, there is no guarantee that all the women will themselves turn up.

Thus, the challenge lies in how to mobilise an overwhelming majority of male colleagues, considering their distaste for affirmative action, as demonstrated in the previous parliaments, and the mistaken belief that it benefits only women.

In general, women risk losing on matters determined by voting when they are outnumbered in legislatures. A study on the subject by Karpowitz, Mendelberg and Mattioli proposes that women attain a “super-majority” to be sure of tilting decisions.

Reduced support

The study further observes that minority status reduces the support women get from male colleagues, a situation complicated by the fact that they tend to be more willing than men to endorse a different position when outnumbered.

The option is to resort to persuasive techniques, which places them in a position of vulnerability. Such tactics belong to what Kanter’s Critical Mass Theory classifies as “loyalty tests”, solidified by “fear of retaliation” from men, hence perpetuation of their loneliness among peers.

Another disadvantage of being a minority is that women’s presence in parliamentary committees is compromised. Although the National Assembly standing orders require compliance with the one third rule to the extent possible, it is statistically impossible to get enough women to populate the committees because of their overall paucity. This translates into total absence from some committees and muted voices in others. This is unfortunate given that most parliamentary work is done in committees.

Of significance are departmental committees that generate majority of the Bills and scrutinise them. Rarity in these committees denies women the opportunity to meaningfully influence the content of legislation, especially when male colleagues are hostile to the same.

This happened in the 11th Parliament when the Marriage Bill was amended to remove the clause on marital rape, which men opposed on the basis that it negated the essence of marriage. Similar hostility led to removal of a provision to have the government establish shelters for victims of domestic violence, as was stipulated in the Protection Against Domestic Violence Bill.

Progressive achievement

Male majority was also used to present a Bill suggesting “progressive realisation” of the one third rule. The men knew that this Bill was ill-fated since women would oppose it for not providing timelines for implementation, but still tabled it. In short, numerical inferiority fatalistically predetermines women’s legislative influence.

The problem of minority is even more significant in the leadership of committees. A committee chairperson mobilises support for Bills and influences the final contents by virtue of being the last persons to read them before debate.

They also get more speaking opportunities than ordinary members when they table Bills, respond to petitions and present committee reports. Absence from these positions limits women’s speech opportunities and overall legislative influence.

A comparative study of European and American legislatures by Brechnemacher shows that even when their numbers increase but they remain a minority, women tend to be underrepresented in internal leadership positions.

This is because parliamentary tradition automatically vests seniority based on longevity in Parliament. Women are disadvantaged because few have had long tenures.

The bottom-line is that the women in the National Assembly must counteract their minority through assertiveness, synergy and strategic occupation of critical parliamentary committees and other leadership positions. They have no time for honeymoon if they are to gain space for effective legislative influence.

Dr Miruka is an international gender and development consultant and scholar ([email protected])