Access to public buildings must be eased

It is not until you experience the consequences of non-implementation of public policy that it hits you why we should never allow such a culture to take root in a country. Sadly, Kenya has for long been chided by its citizens for being good at developing policy statements, but very poor at execution.

This past week I was reminded of this statement when I visited Prosperity House in Kisumu. The building has had a chequered history. Abandoned for several years before completion, it used to stand out as one of the white elephants. It was, consequently a relief when it was completed.

However, its completion has not resulted in fully ensuring that the building’s past controversies become a thing of the past. When devolution was introduced, the building became a theatre of contestation between the national and county governments.

Both the county commissioner and the governor clashed over who should use the building. Each claimed ownership of the building to the exclusion of the other. This approach resembled the story in an article that forms the subject of my class on property law.

The article by Michael Heller and titled ‘‘The Tragedy of the Anti-Commons: Property in the Transition from Marx to Markets’’ argues about the dangers of multiple people having the right of exclusion to a property.

By exercising this right, they prevent people from having quiet and peaceable enjoyment of property rights. The arguments contrast with the situation in the famous argument by another property scholar, Garett Hardin, who in ‘‘Tragedy of the Commons’’ reasons that the cause of the tragedy in commons is actually multiple user rights without power of exclusion. In both instances the two authors agree on the dangers of tragedies of multiple owners.

Based on the above arguments, the situation at Prosperity House is actually a tragedy. To be sure the building houses both the county commissioner and the governor. Ironically, on the ground floor, there is a Huduma Centre, a space for provision of one-stop access to government services. In addition, it houses several government agencies on various floors. Unfortunately, the building does not meet the policy prescriptions on accessibility of any building, leave alone public buildings.

The country has recognised the need to ensure that its buildings become accessible to persons with disability and meets Constitutional and international standards. Buildings should be accessibility to the persons with disability. This requires amongst other things, that every building should have a ramp. I have spoken about my experience six years ago.

An aspiring Member of Parliament came to see me in an office in the run up to the 2013 elections. We spoke on phone when he was at the entrance to the building where I was based. It took him a long time to arrive from the time we spoke. I was initially surprised why he took that long. When he finally got to my office we spoke about accessibility. It is then that it hit me how difficult it is for persons with disabilities to access many public buildings. I was, consequently shocked that Prosperity House which has 14 floors, almost has no lift. Almost because there is currently only one small lift, which serves the entire building. This lift, was, incidentally fitted by one of the tenants to ensure that people can access their offices. It does not serve all floors in the building. In addition, it is not accessible to visitors going to other offices in the building.

I learnt this when I had to walk together with a few colleagues to the 11th floor and then come back to the seventh floor to meet people in two separate government offices. While the walk was good for our health, I started asking myself how persons with disability would be able to access the same government offices.

Due to the lack of lifts persons with disability and the elderly cannot access government services very easily. The next issue is whether, as a result, persons with disability can also not work for these institutions in those buildings.

What happens when the institutions advertise for a vacancy and such a person applies? Will they be discriminated against due to the fact that even if hired they would not be able to easily access their offices?