Some of the leaders in NO team said that the reports were funded and manipulated by the US to favor the greens(may be/maybe not)..... but who is receiving the dollars here in Wazua for these kinds of polls? Can he/she share with us and stop being selfish... i bet that should be a mbuzi sometime in mid august......

thuks for sure I think we shall get more than 65%

LET THOSE WHO ARE IN RED FOLLOW ME INTO THE GREENER Pastures as Mudavadi was saying yesterday in Tinderet.

Be cautious. Kama aliuza kaburi.... the green pasture je?

Thank you @Dia. All those links are big on issues and I cannot believe how small the campaign looks seeing it is full of personality attacks.

Article 32(3) says that a person may not be denied access to any institution employment or
facility, or enjoyment of any right, because of the person’s belief or religion. The only institutions excempted is the kadhis courts. Comparing section 78 of the Current Constitution and the draft there is a radical, unjustified and suspicious shrink of the above right. So religious organizations which are set up to advance certain practices cannot discriminate on the basis of belief or religion. ISn't that VERY suspicious?

It is not about being charged in a muslim court. You miss the point. The issue is that the bill of rights states that you cannot discriminate on the basis of religion.

1. This flies in the face of the section about the qualifications of a Kadhi, who has to be a muslim and judges based on the KORAN, the Sunna and the Hadith (all are religious texts). I know many non muslims who can do this job well and have degrees in Islamic law. If it borders on religion, whether Christian or NOT, it ought not be here. Listen to this discussion (on the home page) on the Kadhi's court ruling and its wider implication: www.citam.org

2. Religious schools... including those run by muslims could be coerced to admit on their staff, people who do not necessarily share the same faith. This is not fair. Religious based instruction is also a right enshrined in the current constitution.. why take it away?

Article 32 (2 ) provides that: “Every person has the right, either individually or in community
with others, in public or in private, to manifest any religion or belief through worship, practice,
teaching or observance, including observance of a day of worship.”

This should be compared with the section 78(1) in our current Constitution;- “ Except with his
own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of conscience, and for the purposes of this section that freedom includes freedom of thought and of religion, freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others, and both in public and in private, to manifest and propagate his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

There has been concern on the current wording of this provision. Why were the words “to
propagate one’s religion and freedom to change, excluded, despite numerous requests by religious
organization such as the Church?
Will it then be foreseeable that a Kenyan can be denied the right to change his religion? Or to
manifest his religion by propagating it? Manifesting is not enough to mean propagate!
What Art 32(3) provides for that “A person may not be denied access to any institution, employment or facility, or the enjoyment of any right, because of the person’s belief or religion?

This may mean that, it will only be where the PCK expressly provides otherwise (e.g. Kadhis’
Courts, religious practice (art 32(2) etc) that it would be permissible to discriminate based on
religion.

Yet the reality is that there are many religiously run institutions such as schools and other private institutions which are reasonably left open only to persons of that community or faith. This position is expressly recognized under Section 78 (2), (3) and (6) of our current Constitution.

Pole... but I am peacefully voting NO on this one. I love my freedom too much

I beg to differ with you on various areas that you have pointed out.

First and foremost, let me say the constitution says there is no state religion. On the issues of kadhi courts, those opposed to it are conveniently forgetting that most of the points in the proposed constitution are founded on christian principles and which are binding even to hindus and muslims and other minority religions that may not necessarily be proclaiming the same faith with us.

The links from dia have serious info and propaganda from scaremongers.

I still think the katiba has flaws and it is one's view of how serious those flaws are that will determine his/her vote

@Kadonye....

You know what? You are on the money regarding The fact that the vote on 4th August, will be on whether one can live with the moral issues in this draft or not:

Can I live with Abortion on Demand or NOT? Articles 26 (4), Article 43 (1)(g) read in relation to Article 2 (5) and (6).

Can I live with the possible introduction of Gay Rights (as Law) in my society? I make no pretenses that they are among us already... but why create a structure for what is not normal to become normal. Article 45 – The Family

* PCK states in Article 45 (2) that; “every person has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex, based on the free consent of the parties.” It just confers a right but does not bar other unions.

* There is also no definition of MARRIAGE.

* Article 19 (3) states that the rights and fundamental freedoms in the bill of rights do not exclude other rights and freedoms not in the bill of rights but recognized or conferred by law except to the extent that they are inconsistent with this chapter. That means we can declare or acknowledge other RIGHTS.

Is this OK with you... and what about your future children and their generations...?

A Kenyan president can be impeached on the basis of international law... Article 145 (1)(b). Is this OK or even right? Lets not forget that International Law includes the whole gay and lesbian agenda as well.

Do we want a society where laws are not domesticated but are set outside our borders and once ratified become part of Kenyan Law immediately? Article 2 (5)


I could go on and on......


God is not on trial here... but our morals and our democracy sure is....

Our current constitution is not globalization-friendly.....

Let us also not forget that if we open the door to "Abortion on Demand" (which is VERY different from Emergency Abortion as put in our current constitution - Section 71), then Mercy Killing/Euthanasia and a whole Pandora's box follows....

The cost of devolved government is just way too high.... Check this document out. I did some math... this is untenable in an economy of our size.

Check this document out: Cost of Devolved Government on Wanjiku


I want to play my part to bring in a new Kenya... but not the way this document puts it

You may find these interesting points on the draft a good read as well... let me know your thoughts