Matrimonial property will now be shared on the basis of contribution by each spouse and not equally as had been envisaged in the Matrimonial Property Bill 2013.
But liabilities in the union will be shared equally.
This is after an amendment moved by Justice and Legal Affairs Committee chair Samuel Chepkonga to the bill was passed by male MPs through a simple majority.
The matter was put to question by Deputy Speaker Joyce Laboso and passed by the MPs after Nairobi women's representative Rechael Shebesh led the committee stage and reported the progress.The Bill is now awaiting president Uhuru Kenyatta’s assent before it becomes law.
The Bill had proposed that property acquired at the beginning, during and at dissolution of marriage be shared on a 50-50 basis.
The equal share was irrespective of the contribution of either spouse towards its acquisition.An attempt by female MPs to shoot down the amendment failed as their male counterparts carried the day.The female MPs caucused immediately after the amendment and agreed to petition the President not to sign it.
The heated debate saw members from both gender go to division to vote for or against the amendment. 87 legislators supported the amendment, 28 opposed and three abstained.
The MPs also amended the definition of matrimonial property to mean any movable and immovable property jointly owned and acquired during the subsistence of marriage. But women will be allowed to share property, which will be jointly acquired and owned during the marriage.
Another amendment was also made following prolonged pressure by the male membership forcing Legal Affairs committee chairman Samuel Chepkonga to change the Bill to read, “Property to be shared according to the contribution of a spouse in marriage.”
Male MPs argued that it would not be fair to share equally properties acquired during the marriage saying this would encourage women to force their way into marriage only to run away in order to demand property.
James Lomenen (Turkana North) led the onslaught saying that it would be unfair for the properties to be shared even after husbands had paid dowry.
“After paying so much in dowry, is it fair to again ask the husbands to share properties you have made during the marriage?” Lomenen asked.
Tiaty MP Asman Kamama said in many situation women find men with properties made before the marriage saying that it would be against the rule of natural justice to share equally the wealth with a woman who came with nothing.
“It is not applicable in African context, properties belong to husbands,” said Kamama.
Nyeri Town MP, Esther Murugi said it was wrong to treat married women unfairly.
“A woman will have fed and cleaned her husband even if she contributed nothing to the acquiring of family properties,” Murugi said.
Attempts by MPs Alice Wahome and Millie Odhiambo to stop debate on the amendment on the basis that it infringed on the constitution, were defeated.
The two argued that the Constitution was explicit on the rights of a woman in a marriage and could therefore be amended unless it is a constitutional amendment.
“The matter in question is a constitutional principle and cannot be amended now as members are trying to do, said Odhiambo.