The question of representation is a Constitutional issue while the population in a constituency is a policy and legal issue. So, definitely, the right to representation supersedes the policy and legal framework.
The wisdom that informed the creation of the 27 constituencies should apply. This goes beyond the population sizes since there are salient features that informed the decision to create these constituencies. The justification to create these constituencies still exist.
This is because people have a right to representation that is fair, a representation that responds to their uniqueness as a community. That being so, I don't think there should be a crisis over what is going to happen to these constituencies that did not meet the criteria during the 2012 boundary review which set the population threshold at 133,000 people.
The Constitution is clear as to what Kenyans require in terms of their political rights and right to representation. The delimitation of boundaries is a political issue, but where the facts are clear that doing away with these constituencies is going to cause instability by creating political upheavals, then matters should be left as they are. The needs and the rights of the people should be protected.
We cannot be told that someone in their wisdom expected that the population would grow and meet the threshold by the time then the next boundary review in 2020 is conducted.
From where I sit, delimitation of boundaries is a political matter while representation is a matter that goes beyond mere numbers.
It is not just a demographic issue. We have to look at how people are close to services from government institutions and non-governmental organisations.
We have to look at the social cohesion question and also at the dynamics which informed that decision, something which cannot just be wished away.
The executive director for Centre for Multiparty Democracy spoke to the Star
