•Saturday, June 05, 2010
Christ is the Answer Ministries (CITAM) Position on the Proposed Draft Constitution
Preamble
The joint CITAM leadership, bringing together the Council of Elders, the Deacon Board, and the Senior Pastors met on 6th of May, 2010 to deliberate over the Proposed Draft Constitution and to come up with a joint position. The leadership considered this weighty matter against the full understanding that it has responsibility to offer prophetic and biblical direction to members of CITAM at this point in history.
The joint leadership consciously decided that it would be failing in its prophetic duty, to let this constitutional moment pass without drawing the Church's inspiration from our Statement of Faith and fundamental beliefs to inform and guide our analysis and position regarding the Proposed Draft Constitution.
Background
The church is consciously aware of the long quest by Kenyans to have a new constitution that would offer a new vision and constitutional framework for a better Kenya.
Indeed the leadership is cognizant of the fact that it has been more than twenty years, of a long and elusive search for the new constitutional dispensation for Kenya. Many, even among Christian leaders who have been at the fore front in the agitation for the new constitution, have suffered social and mental pain as well as physical brutality at the hands of those against reforms in the days past.
We are aware that following the 2007 General Election, the urge for a new constitution was accelerated after the adoption of the National Accord. Like most Kenyans, we believe that we need a new constitutional dispensation which anchors major reforms in a visionary constitutional framework for Kenya.
While applauding the efforts of those involved in the constitutional making process that is Parliament, the Committee of Experts and the Executive, we regret that the Proposed Draft Constitution has fundamental and non negotiable inadequacies that, in our view, urgently need to be addressed before the referendum.
CITAM has been part and parcel of the Kenya Church. The church has been at the forefront of calling for changes prior to the referendum. We have taken the view that the Government should make these changes now rather than later.
While the church has been ready for dialogue, the government side has shown no commitment to dialogue. We cannot, in the absence of a concrete agreement, believe any promise from the government to the effect that we support the passage of the draft now in the hope that the government will initiate the called for changes, soon after.
To that end, we now wish to reiterate our strong resolve to reject the Proposed Draft Constitution. We call on all our members to exercise their democratic right to vote NO at the referendum. Our position is informed by the following unresolved issues:
1. Article 2 (6) which provides that any treaty ratified by Kenya becomes part of law of Kenya, needs to be amended or deleted all together.
Our position:International treaties should be ratified and domesticated by Kenyans in exercise of their sovereignty through legislation to match the local context.
2. Article 8 states that there shall be no state religion. Previous constitutions had important provisions that "State and religion shall be separate" and "The State shall treat all religions equally."
Our position: These provisions must be put back. We believe that all religions should be treated equally without exception.
3. Article 24 (4) states that "the provisions of this chapter on equality shall be qualified to the extent strictly necessary for the application of Muslim law before the Kadhis Courts, to persons who profess Muslim religion, in matters relating to personal status, marriage, divorce and inheritance".
Our position: This provision, which also provides for the creation of Kadhis Courts, offends the principle of all religions and faiths being equal before the law. It should be deleted altogether.
4. The Church believes that life starts at conception and that every human being has a right to life. Article 26 (3) and (4) make for dangerous precedents which leave room for taking away of life arbitrarily. In particular, sub article 4 on abortion states " Abortion is not permitted unless, in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law"
Our Position: The net effect of that sub-article is that abortion is allowed and all that is needed is the opinion of a health professional to back it up! Emergency treatment is not explained. This opens a floodgate to misinterpretation.
Indeed it is separate from when a mother's life is in danger. The proviso in the constitution also creates room for parliament to pass a law that could allow abortion.
The Church stands opposed to this window in the constitution which opens all possibilities for procurement of abortion,
The only exception should be when the life of the mother is in danger and the person to make that opinion is a registered medical practitioner as stated in the Bomas Draft.
5. The reference in Article 43 (1) (a) gives every person a right to "the highest attainable standards of health, which includes the right to health care services, including reproductive health care"
Our Position: The ordinary meaning of the word including reproductive health care also includes family planning and extends to the right to terminate a pregnancy. In other words, proponents of reproductive health advocate for the procurement abortion. We demand the deletion of this proviso.
In Conclusion
For the reasons given above, we take the prophetic position of saying NO to the entire draft! It is not about whether or not the Church loses at the referendum. It is not even about whether or not the Church will remain credible if the majority of the people say YES. Indeed it is not about the YES proponents being right and die NO ones being wrong. Rather, it about being right with God's word!.
The CITAM leadership chooses to obey God and to stand on His side at this point in history. We respectfully invite you to join with us.
Make no mistake, we have yet to begin our real march, to take Kenya for Christ! Whether or not the Proposed Draft Constitution passes, we commit to ensuring that what we stand for and hold dear as articulated in this communique, will form key advocacy agenda for the church in the days to come, until we get a constitution that truly honors and glorifies the Lord God Almighty!
God Bless You,
Bishop, CITAM and Chairman
Deacon Board & Elders' Council
Secretaries, CITAM
2 comments:
WHY AS A WOMAN, YOU SHOULD VOTE NO!
INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF INJUSTICE AND
DISCRIMINATION BY GENDER
Kadhi’s courts are basically driven by Sharia law. Kadhi’s courts even as they are today, do not assure justice for Islamic women, because they are made purely for male domineering Muslims.
Here are the premises that underpin that assertion.
When it comes to inheritance, Kadhi’s courts do not respect, let alone recognize women as heirs to property. This implies that it puts women at a competitive disadvantage, from the word go. Justice demands that all participants; Jews or Gentiles, Catholics or Protestants, Sunnis and Shiites, men and women, young and old; are all judged on merit and substance, not natural predisposition. Any system, which begins from the premise of prejudice, should not belong to our constitutional mind frame.
Divorce: Islam allows the man to divorce, even without cause, while denying the woman even the basic right to raise a complaint against her husband. We need a constitution that recognizes women as being equal subscribers to the high table of justice, not mere handmaids of their male counterparts. Even in religious circles, the Muslim lifestyle is tailored around- so called high places, making it sharply divided on matters of gender.
The Muslim woman is treated as a commodity of ownership, devoid of a stake in her own destiny.
Arbitration: Islam being a religion like any other in Kenya must develop its own arbitration mechanisms outside the constitution. The jurisdiction of Kadhi’s courts is limited to matters in which both parties to a dispute are Muslims; it is however undermined by religious beliefs and age old cultural practices which do not hold in this time and age.
Muslim women who are qualified judges are not represented in the courts. They largely male controlled on the background of Islamic traditions. These courts have no custodians of the female members of the society at the center of the court system. This means that they are biased and offer limited access to justice for women in the Islamic culture compared to the men.
In addition with female Muslim judges in the judiciary, it is an abomination for a Muslim man to seek justice in a court administered by a woman.
ARE MEN AND WOMEN EQUAL BEFORE THE KADHI’S COURTS OR SHARIA LAW?
A good constitution is one that shields its people, against practices that run contrary to the spirit of the law.
Put simply, Kadhi’s court are repugnant to justice, and inconsistent with the very parts of the same constitution; that guarantees safety from discrimination on gender basis.
In sum, we are either secular or a religious state. There cannot be a hybrid!
NO AMMENDEMENTS, NO NEW CONSTITUTION!
VOTE WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE-SAY A BIG NO!
http://www.kenyachristianchurchforum.org/
I am shocked by the previous commenter, whoever they are, they should please not talk for women. If you have read propely you will know that women are in fact the biggest winners, whether we talk about non-discrimination of the basis of gender or representation and appointments to positions in Government. Incidentaly muslim women want the Kadhis courts more than the men because under muslim law they already get more than half, and they inherit from all male family members, unlike christians. so equality in marriage matters works against them not for them. muslim women have more rights than christian women anyway, this constitution is therefore there to help christian women. My very christian husband left me with his three children for a younger woman. He has refused to support them. This constitution will ensure he supports his kids even if he wants to continue his adultery. There are so many women suffering like me and believe me, we will all vote YES! Our childrens welfare is more important than all the reasons given by the church. They only speak, they do not help us.
Elizabeth nderi