The woman who raised hard questions about CDF

Wanjiru Gikonyo sits quietly at Java Coffee House in Hurlingham, Nairobi, skimming through her notebook. The bright yellow top she’s wearing is ideal for the hot weather.

In a way it defines her keen sense of style. She is slim, alert and attentive. In her notebook, she has listed down the major points she wants to share in the interview, she offers. A quick peek reveals she has chronicled important events in her career.

Wanjiru has been at the centre of news this week following the landmark ruling she and her team from civil society filed on the constitutionality of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF).

As the national co-ordinator and a founder of The Institute for Social Accountability (Tisa), an institution she founded in 2008, she had just secured a crucial victory against CDF.

The High Court had ruled that the CDF Act was unconstitutional, a ruling that caught Members of Parliament by surprise. While they publicly vowed to save the fund that had received Sh44 billion since 2003, the civil society was ecstatic and more determined after long years of toiling.

“The ruling is a breath of fresh air,” said Ms Wanjiru, a graduate of Business Organisation from Herriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland. She is also a Masters of Arts in Rural Sociology and Community Development student at the University of Nairobi.

The journey leading to the court ruling, Ms Wanjiru said, was silent but one full of determination. She even denied herself sleep, she says, as she worked with others in civil society to save the Constitution.

“We never got to sleep,” she said. Her motivation is in seeing progress in the works she has initiated. Her dream, she said, is to see increase in equity and for Kenyans to give up a hand-out culture.

So engraved within her are issues of impunity that, during the interview, she gets worked up, coughing and fighting for air to continue with her breathless explanation.

Tisa sought a court injunction in 2012 to stop the release of CDF money during the General Election campaign period. MPs then were seeking Sh10 billion.

Tisa’s argument was that the fund couldn’t be made available since Parliament had been dissolved. They got the injunction but waited for a new Parliament.

“Of course, the current Parliament started on an outrageous stand. We have never even tried to engage the CDF committee because the tone of Parliament was such that we knew they were not listening,” said Ms Wanjiru.

Legislators had, upon taking oath of office, started demanding a pay increase, more CDF money and setting up project committees. These forced Tisa to start a court process.

The group was later joined in the case by Katiba Institute, whose director Waikwa Wanyoike is the legal counsel, Centre for Enhancing Democracy and Good Governance (CEDGG) and Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution (CIC). Ms Wanjiru and others in civil society started the CDF fight in 2003 with social audits supported by the Open Society Initiative of Eastern Africa (Osiea).

“It’s a process of citizens monitoring CDF use, compiling them and sharing them with MPs and committees with the view to getting them to improve the performance of CDF,” she said.

The project was supported by Osiea, International Budget Project, an India-based organisation and Muslims for Human Rights (Muhuri).

During social audits, they found a trend where MPs yielded so much control of the fund that when citizens presented an issue, there was a backlash.

“This was a complete imbalance because citizens should be able to call an MP when there is a problem and for him or her to be apologetic about it. But it was the reverse.”

Information was also limited, forcing Tisa to run a survey that showed the power wielded by MPs made them unaccountable.
They booked a date with MPs to share their findings to improve how CDF operates.

But CDF use had attracted the attention of many other institutions, including a steering committee on anti-corruption campaigns. Policy think-tanks Institute of Economic Affairs and the Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (Kippra) had also conducted own studies.

Tisa and its partners’ recommendation was harmonisation of the fund and to enshrine separation of powers, public participation and access to information. By 2008, Tisa had compiled policy recommendations but had nowhere to take them. Its previous attempts had been shut down by MPs. In 2009, a task force for CDF was set up, giving Tisa room to submit a memorandum. It was never published.

“So we sat there thinking this is another case of impunity,” said Ms Wanjiru, who did not want to talk much about herself, arguing the fight was a combined effort and it would be unfair for her to come out as the champion.

Those that have interacted with her, like activist Okiya Omtatah, have only kind words.

“Wanjiru is a gracious lady. She is neat, fairly focused, groomed and humble,” said Omtatah. He met Wanjiru a decade ago, while fighting against legislators’ push for pay rise. Since then, they have bumped into each other in workshops and meetings.

“All these studies were pointing towards the role of the MP undermining transparency in CDF. The framework for managing decentralised funds was also weak and there was much duplication.”

This made her group steely, but before fighting back, the review of the Constitution gathered pace. They presented their submissions on public fund and accountability  to the Constitution commission.

“The Constitution passed and we were sure because of enshrined separation of powers, we no longer had the conditions that had necessitated CDF.”

The fund, she reckons, came about because of bad governance. Under the Moi regime she says, politics determined development and CDF was a safeguard for local development.

They went back to Parliament for a follow-up and MPs promised to address the matter. Tisa and its partners were invited for a meeting in February.

The meeting took place but it had already determined CDF would continue. Changes were made. MPs would no longer be involved in the appointment of constituency board. Project committees were also given independence.

Tisa was not satisfied, but a new problem emerged, which was county functions, prompting the organisation to push removal of parallel development structures, which had been a historical problem.

There were local authorities, districts and CDF, and Local Authorities Transfer Fund.

Lack of clear structures to monitor the development processes pushed CEDGG and Tisa to go to court. Since the CDF Act was declared unconstitutional, Tisa and its partners are now waiting for MPs to wage a war since they have promised to appeal the ruling.

CDF is a good deal, the Tisa head concedes, but says it should be aligned with existing clauses of the Constitution to foster devolution. They propose that it be retained as a community development fund controlled by communities within the county government structures.

“Instead of the civil society leading the fight for a working devolution it’s the senators who should be doing this. Not us,” she said.

A fighter, who on a nice afternoon enjoys, a cup of hot chocolate with soya, said the threats to clip the wings of non-governmental organisations would never tame their resolve to see change under the new dispensation.

[email protected]