Cover StoryForeignOpinionPerspectivePolitics

Why Protests in Kenya?

By
9 Mins read
0
Share

The protests have been significant, involving various segments of the population, particularly young people and activists who are mobilizing through social media. The opposition and some public figures have expressed their support for the protests, but there has been no indication of UN intervention at this time​.

By Wenona Russ

As all of Africa and some parts of the world witness the chaos that is taking place in Kenya, I am sure there are many who have questions as to why the protests are happening.

It behooves Nigerians and the Nigerian government to grab pen and paper, watch what is going on in Kenya, take notes and learn the lessons on what NOT to do when in leadership.

First, let’s take a look at WHO is the Kenyan Leader? What is his political background and CV?  What are his political beliefs?

Who is William Ruto?

William Ruto is a Kenyan politician who has served as the President of Kenya since September 13, 2022. Prior to his presidency, Ruto held several significant positions in the Kenyan government, including Deputy President from 2013 to 2022. He is a prominent figure in Kenyan politics, having been involved in various political roles and parties over the years.

Background:

  • Full Name: William Samoei Arap Ruto
  • Date of Birth: December 21, 1966
  • Education: University of Nairobi (BSc, MSc, PhD in Plant Ecology)
  • Political Party: United Democratic Alliance (UDA)
  • Previous Positions:
    • Deputy President of Kenya (2013-2022)
    • Member of Parliament for Eldoret North Constituency (1997-2013)
    • Minister of Home Affairs (2002)
    • Minister of Agriculture (2008-2010)
    • Minister of Higher Education (2010-2011)

Political Style:

William Ruto’s political style can be characterized by several key traits:

  1. Populism: Ruto has positioned himself as a champion of the “hustler” nation, appealing to the common people, particularly the youth and the economically disadvantaged. He has portrayed himself as an outsider challenging the elite, despite his long tenure in politics.
  2. Charismatic Leadership: Ruto is known for his charismatic and energetic public speaking. He effectively uses rhetoric to connect with his audience, often emphasizing his humble beginnings and hard work.
  3. Grassroots Mobilization: He has a strong grassroots mobilization strategy, frequently engaging with local communities and using a robust network of supporters to rally votes. His campaigns often focus on direct engagement with voters.
  4. Digital Savvy: Ruto has effectively utilized social media and digital platforms to reach a broad audience, disseminate his messages, and counter opposition narratives.
  5. Development Focus: His political messaging often emphasizes economic empowerment, job creation, and infrastructure development, aiming to resonate with the aspirations of many Kenyans.
  6. Strategic Alliances: Ruto has a history of forming and breaking political alliances to advance his career. His political maneuvering has seen him switch allegiances and parties, demonstrating a flexible and pragmatic approach to politics.

Controversies:

Ruto’s career has not been without controversy. He has faced allegations of corruption and has been implicated in various scandals. Additionally, he was indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for his alleged role in the 2007-2008 post-election violence in Kenya, though the charges were later dropped due to insufficient evidence.

In summary, William Ruto is a dynamic and influential figure in Kenyan politics, known for his populist appeal, charismatic leadership, and strategic acumen. His presidency is expected to focus on addressing economic challenges and continuing his narrative of empowering the ordinary Kenyan.

The Finance Bill 2023 in Kenya has sparked significant controversy and discontent among many Kenyans for several reasons. Here are the primary concerns:

1. Increased Taxes

The bill proposes several new taxes and increases in existing taxes, which many Kenyans feel will exacerbate the already high cost of living. Some of the key tax changes include:

  • Housing Levy: The introduction of a 1.5% housing levy on employees’ gross salaries, which is matched by employers, has been particularly contentious. Many Kenyans view this as an additional burden on their already strained incomes.
  • Fuel Tax: The bill proposes doubling the VAT on petroleum products from 8% to 16%, leading to higher fuel prices. This has a ripple effect, increasing the cost of transportation and goods, further straining household budgets.
  • Digital Services Tax: The extension and increase of the digital services tax affects online transactions, impacting businesses and consumers who rely on digital platforms.

2. Economic Hardships

Kenya is facing economic challenges, including high inflation, unemployment, and a significant national debt. The proposed tax increases are seen as ill-timed, given the economic hardships many citizens are already experiencing. The additional financial strain from higher taxes is viewed as unfair and insensitive to the plight of ordinary Kenyans.

3. Lack of Transparency and Accountability

There are concerns about how the additional revenue generated from these taxes will be used. Many Kenyans are skeptical about the government’s ability to manage public funds efficiently and fear that the funds will not be used for their intended purposes, such as improving public services or infrastructure.

4. Burden on Businesses

The increased taxes are also expected to impact businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Higher operational costs due to increased taxes on goods, services, and digital transactions could lead to reduced profitability and potential job losses, further aggravating the unemployment situation.

5. Public Outcry and Protests

The bill has led to widespread public outcry, protests, and demonstrations. Many civil society groups, trade unions, and opposition parties have voiced their opposition, calling for the government to reconsider the bill and its potential impact on the economy and the well-being of Kenyans.

Government’s Position

The government, on the other hand, argues that the Finance Bill is necessary to generate additional revenue to fund critical development projects and reduce the fiscal deficit. They claim that the measures are aimed at boosting the economy in the long term, despite the short-term pain.

Kenyans are upset with the Finance Bill 2024 due to several contentious tax proposals that many feel will exacerbate the already high cost of living. The bill, introduced by President William Ruto’s administration, aims to raise additional revenue to manage the country’s debt and fund development projects. However, it has sparked widespread public outcry and protests.

Key points of contention include:

  1. Housing Levy: A mandatory 1.5% housing levy deducted from salaries, which many workers see as an unnecessary burden.
  2. Value-Added Taxes (VAT): While some VAT proposals, such as the tax on bread and sugar transport, were dropped, other items remain taxed, contributing to higher living costs.
  3. Excise Duties: Increased excise duties on various goods, particularly alcoholic beverages, which will be taxed based on alcohol content rather than volume. This change is seen as making alcohol more expensive.
  4. Import Duties: New taxes on imported goods, including specific food items, which could drive up prices further.
  5. Electronic Tax Invoicing: The introduction of electronic tax invoicing systems for small businesses and farmers, perceived as a cumbersome and costly requirement.

Despite adjustments made to the bill to address some public concerns, the overall sentiment remains negative, with many believing the new taxes will deepen economic hardship. Protests have occurred nationwide, including in major cities like Nairobi and even in President Ruto’s hometown, reflecting the widespread dissatisfaction and fear that the bill will push more people into poverty.

Parliament passed the bill in its second reading amid significant opposition and public demonstrations, and it now moves to the committee stage for further review​​.

There have been significant public protests involving civilians and other groups against the bill, which has led to clashes with law enforcement.

The protests have seen demonstrators, including activists and civil servants, taking to the streets to express their dissatisfaction with the proposed tax increases. These demonstrations have been met with a heavy police presence, including the use of tear gas and water cannons to disperse crowds. Notably, there have been reports of injuries among police officers during these protests. For instance, a police officer lost both his forearms when a tear gas canister exploded during one of the confrontations.

The Finance Bill 2024 has been highly controversial due to its proposed tax hikes on fuel, housing, and digital content, among others. Critics argue that these measures will exacerbate the already high cost of living in Kenya. The opposition party, Azimio La Umoja, and various labor unions have been vocal in their opposition, organizing protests and urging the government to reconsider the bill.

The United Nations has not announced any plans to intervene in Kenya regarding the protests against the Finance Bill 2024. The protests have been driven by widespread public discontent over proposed tax increases, which critics argue will disproportionately affect lower and middle-income citizens, exacerbating the economic challenges many Kenyans already face​​.

The protests have been significant, involving various segments of the population, particularly young people and activists who are mobilizing through social media. The opposition and some public figures have expressed their support for the protests, but there has been no indication of UN intervention at this time​.

For now, the focus remains on internal resolutions, with ongoing debates in parliament and calls for dialogue from different stakeholders in Kenya.

There has been some dialogue between President William Ruto and Kenyan youth regarding the Finance Bill 2024. President Ruto has been trying to address the concerns and opposition from various groups, including the youth, who have been actively protesting the bill. The youth have been particularly vocal about their opposition, citing the potential increase in the cost of living and the financial burden the bill could impose on already struggling populations.

In response to the protests and widespread opposition, President Ruto proposed some amendments to the Finance Bill, including tax relief measures for health and housing contributions. Despite these efforts, the dialogue has not fully alleviated the concerns of many youths, who feel the bill will still have a significant negative impact on their economic well-being and future prospects.

Furthermore, organizations like the Green Belt Movement have called for more inclusive and just policy-making, urging the government to engage in meaningful dialogue with all stakeholders, including the youth, to develop strategies that promote environmental sustainability and social equity without compromising economic stability​.

William Ruto’s decision to introduce new taxes and increase existing ones through the Finance Bill 2024, despite previous assurances to the contrary, can be attributed to several factors:

1. Economic Pressures

Kenya is facing significant economic challenges, including a high national debt and the need for increased revenue to fund essential services and development projects. The government argues that the additional taxes are necessary to generate the revenue required to address these financial obligations and support the country’s economic stability​.

2. Debt Management

The Kenyan government is under pressure to manage its debt levels, which have risen considerably in recent years. The tax measures proposed in the Finance Bill are seen as a way to raise the funds needed to service this debt and prevent further economic instability. The government has stated that the new taxes will help raise an additional KES 346 billion to pay off debts and fund various projects​.

3. Commitment to Development

President Ruto’s administration has emphasized its commitment to infrastructure development and other critical projects aimed at boosting economic growth. The additional revenue from taxes is intended to support these initiatives. The government maintains that these projects are vital for long-term economic progress, even if they come with short-term financial burdens for citizens.

4. Political Dynamics

Political considerations may also play a role. Ruto’s administration may be attempting to balance competing interests within the government and the ruling coalition, which could influence decisions on tax policy. Additionally, ensuring continued support from international financial institutions, which often advocate for fiscal reforms, might be another motivating factor​​.

Despite these justifications, many Kenyans feel betrayed by the tax increases, especially given Ruto’s previous promises to ease the financial burden on ordinary citizens. This sense of betrayal has fueled protests and opposition to the Finance Bill, as many believe the measures will disproportionately affect the economically vulnerable population​​

In summary, while economic and political pressures have driven the introduction of new taxes, the move has been met with significant public backlash, highlighting the complex balance between governance, economic policy, and public trust.

WHAT is the LESSON?

GOVERNMENT:

NO NATION is outside of the possibility that the people will revolt against any system that suppresses and violates the (human) rights of THE PEOPLE.  When leadership and government IGNORE the needs of the people, the people WILL eventually REVOLT against your governance.  Bad governance and lack of authentic leadership and a blatant disregard and ignoring of the oppression or violation against the people are all formulas for revolt.

It is in the best interest of ANY government to take HEED to the needs and the outcries of ALL the people. Deal with corruption and inequity amongst the people. DO NOT create laws that oppress people unjustly.  Do not setup systems that economically oppress ANY people.  Provide equal opportunities to ALL so that no one will feel that the government does not care about the needs of the people.

PEOPLE:

The government you elected into office have the obligation to ensure that they are providing equitable and fair governance and optimum leadership.  Do not ever feel like your voice does not matter….IT DOES!  It does not matter what your income bracket or class.  If you feel like the government is NOT addressing your needs, it is your civic DUTY to LET THE GOVERNMENT KNOW of your concerns!

Do not just shrug your shoulders, go to church or mosque and think that things will change by osmosis or supernatural means.  Faith without works is DEAD.  It’s ok to have faith.  But if your faith is not coupled with WORKS, nothing will EVER get done.

As long as your protests are peaceful, you are within your right to protest against any governmental ordinances that violate your human rights. You are protected by international law via the United Nations. International law supercedes ALL domestic law.

Trust – The U.N. is watching nationa all over the WORLD.  And if there are any nations that are violating human rights, at some point and time the U.N. can intervene on your behalf, especially if the needs of the people are being ignored by their national government.

 

 

   

0
Share

About author
Time Nigeria is a modern and general interest Magazine with its Headquarters in Abuja. The Magazine has a remarkable difference in editorial philosophy and goals, it adheres strictly to the ethics of Journalism by using the finest ethos of the profession to promote peace among citizens; identifying and harnessing the nation’s vast resources; celebrating achievements of government agencies, individuals, groups and corporate organizations and above all, repositioning Nigeria for the needed growth and development. Time Nigeria gives emphasis to places and issues that have not been given adequate attention by others. The Magazine is national in outlook and is currently being read and patronized both in print and on our vibrant and active online platform (www.timenigeria.com).
Articles
Related posts
All The NewsCover StoryNewsPolitics

Musa Tsoken Congratulates Kalu on Daily Times’ Lawmaker of the Year Award

By
1 Mins read
The National Coordinator of the Asiwaju Again Renewed Hope Support Initiative 2027 and National President of the APC Initiative for Good Governance…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

By
6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Cover StoryNewsSports

Union Bank, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard, Others Back 5th Cycling Lagos

By
2 Mins read
Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, AIICO Multishield, Checkers Custard and other corporate organisations have thrown their weight behind the 5th Cycling Lagos,…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com