By Robert Nyasato
The Affirmative Action principle enshrined in Kenya’s 2010 Constitution—famously known as the two-thirds gender rule—was designed to bridge the representation gap between men and women in elective and appointive offices.
Fifteen years later, after three successful General Elections, the intent of the framers of the law appears elusive.
Also Read
The two-thirds gender rule, as provided under Articles 27 and 81, requires that no more than two-thirds of members in any public body, including Parliament and county assemblies (CAs), should be of the same gender.
It was envisioned as a tool for gender equality, inclusivity, and fair political representation.
At its core, the measure was supposed to serve as a springboard for women, youth, persons with disabilities, and marginalized groups.
Beneficiaries were expected to leverage on nomination to gain political maturity, confidence, and networks, eventually competing on equal footing for elective seats.
But reality tells a different story.
“What was intended as a transitional empowerment mechanism has, in many cases, morphed into a cycle of dependency.”
-Robert Nyasato
Instead of moving up the ladder, some beneficiaries remain in the comfort of nomination, with taxpayers shouldering the burden of sustaining inflated wage bills for nominated members across counties and Parliament.
A shining counterexample exists in Suba North MP and Minority Whip Millie Odhiambo.
Nominated to Parliament in 2007 by ODM, she transitioned successfully to elective politics, winning her constituency seat in 2013.
Her trajectory illustrates what Affirmative Action was meant to achieve.
Unfortunately, this is not the norm.
The contradictions
Take the Woman Representative seat—an innovation meant to fast-track realization of gender parity in Parliament.
While the position is competitively contested by women, critics argue it has been abused. Ideally, once elected, a Woman Rep should use the platform to transition to constituency seats, creating space for new female leaders.
Instead, evidence shows some cling to the position for multiple terms, undermining the spirit of rotation and empowerment.
The Nyamira County experience lays bare the contradictions.
In the 2022 elections, all 20 wards elected men.
To comply with the Constitution, 14 members—13 women and one man—had to be nominated to the County Assembly.
Similarly, in all four constituencies, voters opted for men after women shied away from the ballot, perpetuating male dominance at the expense of the law’s vision.
The challenge is not unique to Nyamira.
Nationally, Parliament has failed to implement the two-thirds gender rule despite several court directives and deadlines.
The political class, both men and women, has dragged its feet, perhaps because nominations have become a convenient fallback for loyalists rather than a genuine empowerment tool.
Meanwhile, the irony is glaring: women and youth make up the majority of Kenya’s voters.
Yet their numerical strength rarely translates into proportional representation in elective seats.
Civic education, cultural attitudes, and the monetization of politics remain formidable barriers.
The country is heading toward the 2027 General Elections.
The critical question is: will Affirmative Action finally bear fruit, producing more Millie Odhiambos, or will taxpayers continue to fund a bloated system of nominations that negates the very principles of equality and inclusion?
Mr. Nyasato is a member of the Kisii Press Club.
