The Outrage of the missing data of women with disabilities in Kenya “where are you my sisters?” Author Mugambi Paul.

The upcoming international women day’s gives scholars, practitioners and other public policy stakeholders to ask ourselves the pertinent question.
Has Kenya done well in advancing the rights of women and girls with disabilities?
Has Kenya broken the barriers of inclusion of women with disabilities?
Has the disability space been accommodative of women with disabilities?

As a public scholar I join in the reflection of the Kenyan disability public space.
Absolutely not, this is one of the debates which the stakeholders in the disability sector need to engage.
Are women with disabilities actively engaged?
I live that to other analysts. As a matter of principle, I say representation matters.
On the other hand, I thank the president of Kenya having appointed Madam MUkhobe at the highest decision-making organ in the country since 2013.
Where is the Data and statistics of the disabled?
Numbers don’t lie.
Globally disabled persons are at 15 %.
3.8 of the are persons with moderate to severe impairment.
5.1 % of the children with disabilities are below the age of 14.
0.7 % have severe functional impairment.
19 % are women with disabilities world report 2011.
To put matters into perspective, In the latest 2020 national council of population report has no data of women or girls with disabilities.
Does this mean that women and girls with disabilities do not get pregnant?
Are women and girls with disabilities not sexually active?
Different media channels on a weekly basis in Kenya have been reporting of how women and girls with disabilities have been experiencing gender-based violence in the hands of family members or even under the institutions mint to support them.
I believe This is another big blow to disabled persons in Kenya after the release of Kenya bureau of statistics 2019 census report. Which in essence reduced the data of disabled Kenyans.

Will disability sector continue with the same old ways of addressing this challenge?
Will the disability sector move out of board rooms and actualize the dreams of girls and women with disabilities?
Does the national council of population have a disability mainstreaming committee?
The lack of disability desegregated data will obviously affect planning and service delivery for girls, boys, men and women with disabilities.
In other words, the national council of population affirms that women and girls with disabilities have never experienced gender-based violence nor gotten pregnant.
Let me remind the disability stakeholders women with disabilities are more likely to experience sexual violence than women without disabilities.
This is also coupled with disabled Kenyans who face barriers to accessing services in both public and private sectors.
Most disability policy stakeholders know the barriers that disabled Kenyans face but have refused to actualize them.
Disabled Kenyans persons have been left chanting in the social media as a tool of advocacy.
Am not surprised to note in March 4th, 2020 a person with physical impairment was begging for a wheelchair on in one of the social media platforms.
Which system works for disabled Kenyans?
Will the Big four agenda be realized for disabled persons?
When will Kenya declare begging an economic enterprise for disabled persons since the constitution provisions aren’t working for disabled Kenyans?
several studies show Women and girls living with disabilities often face additional marginalization in their experiences of abuse as well as specific barriers to accessing services, due to:
• economic and/or physical dependence on the abuser, which challenges efforts to escape (particularly within family and sometimes institutional set ups. Several research in Kenya have indicated women with disabilities have suffered from forms of abuse specific to women living with disabilities (e.g. withholding of right medications, like the case of national children council exposed by NTV Kenya in 2019.
research done by women with disabilities organizations in Kenya show denial of assistive devices is also rampant.
Additionally, there is also refusal to provide personal care), which are less documented and may not be explicit within legal definitions of abuse.
For instance, Menstrual Health in Kenya: Landscape Analysis published in May 2016 never showed the extent to which women and girls with disabilities can’t access sanitary pads.
As Well lack of or limitations in physical accessibility of venues for women with disabilities still remains one of the barriers.
Furthermore, perceptions by service providers like health continue to plague the system in place.
This is because many believe that they cannot provide services for women with disabilities given their resource or capacity limitations. Mainstream women organizations and women service providers have not entrenched any inclusive measures of engaging or consulting women with disabilities.
In other words, lack of programming informed by and implemented in consultation with Kenyan women with disabilities or misinterpretation of their needs in escaping and overcoming the abuse they have experienced. Thus, having gaps in collaboration between disability organizations and service providers supporting survivors, as well as assumptions by each group that survivors are served by the other. A study by Kenya national human rights commission in 2015 indicated low sensitivity among law enforcement personnel or other service providers, who may not inquire about abuse by caretakers, or disregard reports from women with visual, speech/communication or motor coordination disabilities (e.g. cerebral palsy), assuming they are intoxicated or are not serious in their claims. The KAIH who have been working closely in the legal apparatus affirm that biases among judicial personnel and courts is evidently seen.
For instance, cases of provision of preferential treatment to the abuser in child custody due to the victim’s disability (

What can disability sector and stakeholders do to change the narrative?
Develop Strategies and tools to prevent violence against women with disability. E.g. have inclusive training tools on gender violence.
Ensure collection of data collected is gender, age and disability desegregated in reporting and monitoring
Share best practices of gender and disability equitable practice
develop inclusive Referral system and services which can assist in responding to women with disability who experience violence
have more role models among women with disabilities.
Collaborative initiatives with the mainstream women organizations
list end support men with and without disabilities who are supporting reduction of gender-based violence initiatives.
Conduct inclusive training to service providers in both health and law enforcing agencies.
Ensure engagement and meanful consultation with women and girls with disabilities from rural and urban set up.
This will actualize the slogan not living any one behind as the sustainable development goals advocate.
global commitments 2018.

In conclusion:
The truth of the matter is Kenya is known to have progressive disability
related laws and policies but poor implementation is the order of the day.
As a result the dire state of affairs of women with disabilities is not due to lack of new ideas. The biggest problem is lack of capacity to take up and implement the new ideas in existing policy documents.

The views expressed here are for the author and do not represent any agency or organization.
Mugambi Paul is a public policy, diversity, inclusion and sustainability expert.

2 disability experts paints a grim picture on the BBI report “why the disabled Kenyans always fall into cracks” Authors: DR Siyat Abdi and Mugambi Paul.

According to the World Bank, WHO and the United Nations One billion people, or 15% o

f the world’s population, experience some form of disability.
Persons with disabilities, on average as a group, are more likely to experience adverse socioeconomic outcomes than persons without disabilities. Such as less education, poorer health outcomes, lower levels of employment, and higher poverty rates.

Barriers to full social and economic inclusion of Kenyans with disabilities include inaccessible communication, navigating the physical environments, inaccessible transportation, the unavailability of assistive devices and technologies, non-adapted means of communication, gaps in service delivery, utter unemployment inequality and generally discriminatory prejudice and stigma in Kenyan society.

From our professional lenses and in-depth analysis, we observe that the voice of this largest minority was never hard on the BBI 156-page report.
Notwithstanding, understanding the influence of different stakeholders in public policy making is very Critical “Carolyne 2016].
Although the BBI Taskforce had lots of public network in executing some of the insisted public approaches [Carolyne 2017], the task force did a total disservice and provided just a window dressing of Kenyans with disabilities.

In our collective opinion, the first omission and a major setback was the lack of representation of persons with disability in the BBI task force for persons living with disabilities.
This affirms the incessant notion of the government of Kenya of not ensuring article 54 of the 2010 Kenyan Constitution is realized.
Our expectations were high, and therefore, we expected the Taskforce would provide a clear direction on accessible representation that responds to the needs of persons with disability.

Secondly, on behalf of all Kenyans with disabilities who are the largest minority, we affirm the term “Disability” appeared 9 times in the BBI Report.
This was not in reference to any commitments to the 9-point agenda in their Terms of Reference but giving basic information of the experiential circumstances people with disability find themselves in Kenya.
In other words, the task force deliberated on the historical background on issues regarding persons living with disabilities without offering any commitment on how the nation will address the historical and traditional social injustices encountered by person with disabilities in Kenya.
Instead, the Taskforce echoed the common cliché we are used to by outlining traditional principles which clinically failed to work in the past.
No doubt, the BBI task force affirms what Paul Mugambi said in one of his articles, emphasising why the disability movement in Kenya must change tact once and for all!
http://www.mugambipaul.com/2019/11/17/why-the-disability-movement-in-kenya-should-stop-crying-faw/.
Increasing inclusivity on a political, economic, social, religious, cultural, youth, and gender basis is not Inclusivity devoid of disability.
How long are we going to continue being marginalised both in the national government and in the Counties?

It is worth noting the reflective theoretical commitment of Kenya to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development goals.
It affirms clearly that disability cannot be a reason or criteria for lack of access to development programming and the realization of human rights.
Additionally, the SDGS framework have already been integrated in both short- and long-term Kenyan plan strategies, but limited wheels of implementations are in actions.
Its significant, to pronounce that the SDG framework has seven targets, which explicitly refer to persons with disabilities, and six further targets on persons in vulnerable situations, which again include persons with disabilities.
The SDGs address essential development domains such as education, employment and decent work, social protection, resilience to and mitigation of disasters, sanitation, transport, and non-discrimination – all of which are important obligations for the Kenyan government.

Unfortunately, the BBI task force team clearly seem to have been communicating to persons with disabilities in the charity model.
This is to mean the expressions reference to persons living with disabilities seem to be a separate group from Kenyans and this shows that there was exclusion in addressing persons with disabilities in the BBI report.
Thirdly, the term inclusion appeared 24 times.
The only relevant was the 22nd mention.
The cruel irony is that Article 174(e) of the Constitution provides that one of the objectives of devolution in Kenya is ‘to protect and promote the interests and rights of minorities and underserved or discriminated-against communities.’
It is for this reason that the Taskforce strongly feels that measures leading to greater inclusion, equality, equity, and basic fairness at the National level should be mirrored in the Counties, both in law, policy and administration.”
Do you think people with disability will enjoy this commitment?

Fourthly, the term Physical access has been mentioned twice and the 2nd one is relevant to persons with disabilities.
Increase physical access for people with disabilities into buildings, particularly public ones, and transport.
This shows the limitation of the BBI report since it’s not just enough to talk of physical access of built environment and transport only.
Kenyans living with disabilities still need more in area of universal and accessible housing, employment opportunity, and access to building (public and social facilities), communication and access to adaptive technology among many other disability services.
Fifthly, the term “has access” has been mentioned 42 times in the report.
The only relevant area is the 2nd mention. “
The aim should be for all Kenyans to have to cover the same distances to access public services.”
The access to information seems to be one of the major recommendations for the BBI task force but they avoided to demand for alternative accessible formats which could have ensured those with vision loss (blind), those with cognitive disability and other print disabled access information.
The BBI task force would have well utilized the Marrakesh treaty as a benchmark on access to information with excellent literature support from the United Nation Convention for the Rights of Persons with Disability (UNCRPD).

The BBI report missed opportunities to present across several mechanisms on enhancement of rights of people with disability in Kenya:
For instance, we anticipated that they would have an opportunity to present a structured Social protection systems that would be barrier-free and inclusive, and in a manner which ensures that everyone has equal opportunities to access social protection schemes, which may require special measures for particular categories of the population who may face additional barriers, such as persons with disability and the elderly Kenyans.
They missed to articulate the structure and design implementation of social protection, taking into account Human rights principles and standards at every stage of the schemes in the context of the level of marginalisation experiences of persons with disability both in the national government and in the Counties.
We welcome the Taskforce proposal to change the County Executive, including, but not limited to, the running mate of every candidate for the position of Governor.
While it is commendable to suggest consideration of the opposite gender, window of opportunity should have been given for any governor to decide their running mate, and if possible opportunity to make informed decision to pick a person with a disability as a Deputy Governor.
Another missed opportunity was to empower the National council for People with Disability NCPWD to be elevated a disability commission instead of a semiautonomous body incapable of servicing people with disability.
This could be either through a referendum or by legislation which could have subsequently ensured that the disability commission is well resourced and has the capacity to provide appropriate disability services based on social model and ensure the realization of disability rights.

On a positive note, the beauty of the BBI report is the importance of public participation and engagements. We hope people with disability will be fully engaged in decisions that matter to them.

In conclusion, the BBI report seem to have nailed the coffin for persons with disabilities by claiming that people with disabilities in Kenya are bunch of winchers, always complaining of injustices.
It seems the task force doesn’t understand that people with disabilities in Kenya are tired of the prolonged injustices experienced.
Yes, we must complain and continuously complain because we don’t expect civil and political elections of representatives in Party primaries and nominations to be fair; free and transparent elections in the context of persons with disability.
We must raise our voice because we are severely marginalised both in the national government and in the Counties in terms of employment and social services.
We cannot be satisfied with the BBI solution of just using reputable private recruitment companies to help, but to put in place recruitment legislations that give Kenyan people with disability opportunity to exercise their skills and talents to maintain their livelihood.
What the Kenyan people with disabilities need is real tangible implementation of legal and policy frameworks and ensuring persons living with disabilities actually access all government and private services just like any other Kenyan.

The views expressed here are for the authors and do not represent any agency or organization.

DR Siyat Abdi
Is a independent disability consultant.
Mugambi Paul is a
Public policy diversity and inclusion expert.

Public participation event

address to the public on importance of engaging disabled persons