[kictanet] Day 4 of 10 - KCA 2008, IT Section - The Good
John Walubengo
jwalu at yahoo.com
Thu Jan 15 08:05:25 EAT 2009
Hi Harry -didnt know we have another Harry who was not the Hare ;-). Anyway, we shouldnt close the contributions...but yes I agree, lets not get personal either. I did sense a bit of that too.
But meanwhile, from our program, today we embark on the IT Section. Belated contributions on previous themes are still welcome as long as you chose the correct subject matter/line (Makali, plse dont re-write my subject lines, bwana! that can really get us personal yet Kenya ni yetu not for one of us).
Here is what I gathered as the +ve aspects for IT fraternity from the Kenya Communication Amendment Act (KCA 2008):-In particular the bit about eLectronic Transactions and signatures is quite timely and long overdue. The issue of eCrime -despite some reservations on what hacking is - is also welcome. I am informed the MPESA(Safcom) chaps are somewhat pleased to have a legal mechanism as opposed to a gentleman understanding for their operations. In additiona, the BPO (Business Process Outsourcing) chaps are also excited that foreign investors can not only sign deals electronically but can rest assured that their data has a legally protective framework.
I think these are some of the bright things for the ICT community. Anymore I may have left? Plse share, we have only 1Day Good, tomorrow we go for some of the Bad...
walu.
--- On Wed, 1/14/09, Harry Delano <harry at inds.co.ke> wrote:
> From: Harry Delano <harry at inds.co.ke>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Brian Longwe's Response to Makali
> To: jwalu at yahoo.com
> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2009, 11:49 PM
> Friends,
>
> I suppose it's time for this online debate to come to a
> close, and take in
> more of the interventionist
> steps/measures arising out of the consultative forums
> currently ongoing.I
> suppose the goodwill is there,
> now that everyone is back to their senses and much informed
> on the
> legislation ( I'm sure all of us).
>
> Based on the strong critique we've all witnessed here,
> definitely everyone
> has a point to make.
>
> This is not pitting Media against ICT, or vice versa. The
> simple nugget is
> that this is our country,and
> there is a lot that we all need to join forces to get
> sorted and this is
> just but a tip of the iceberg.
>
> Fundamental socio-economic, and democratic gains attained
> this far, MUST be
> responsibly guarded,as we move
> forward to gain more ground.
>
> Many thanks, and hopefully this is closure.
>
> Harry
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> kictanet-bounces+harry=inds.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> [mailto:kictanet-bounces+harry=inds.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke]
> On Behalf Of
> kictanet-request at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 7:59 PM
> To: Harry Delano
> Subject: kictanet Digest, Vol 20, Issue 46
>
> Send kictanet mailing list submissions to
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> kictanet-request at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> kictanet-owner at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
> specific than
> "Re: Contents of kictanet digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Makali's response to brian longwe: KCA
> 2008-Broadcasting-The Recommendations (Brian Munyao
> Longwe)
> 2. Re: Makali's response to brian longwe: KCA
> 2008-Broadcasting-The Recommendations (Victor Maloi)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:39:20 +0300
> From: Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Makali's response to brian
> longwe: KCA
> 2008-Broadcasting-The Recommendations
> To: "dmakali at yahoo.com" <dmakali at yahoo.com>
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Message-ID:
> <1EA7B49F-9251-4A1D-A8EB-1AF0139AAF5F at gmail.com>
> Content-Type:
> text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> Hey Daudi,
>
> No reason not to like me just coz I see things a bit
> differently. But that's
> cool, as u already know, I have plenty of haters....
>
> Anyway back to the point. I know that you have personally
> experienced the
> abuse of power in the hands of the executive and misguided
> officials. I have
> huge respect for your unshaking stand in the face of gross
> cruelty.
>
> But please let me clarify myself. I am not for or against
> Sec 88. I just see
> it as a piece of a puzzle which is much bigger and which
> needs to be looked
> at from many angles by different people.
>
> I hope that you will b at the consultations kesho at
> Regency so that with
> others we can discuss appropriate interventions.
>
> Best regards bro,
>
> Mblayo
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 14 Jan 2009, at 4:56 PM, David Makali
> <dmakali at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Brian,
> > I thought you are a nice guy, but now I am beginning
> to think that
> > when you run for president (of malawi? hahaha!) i will
> not vote for
> > you because i can detect a dictarotial streak in your
> genes (smile).
> > Now let me turn to your views, which i hold to be
> fundamentally wrong
> > and misguided. To start with, please stop giving
> sympathetic
> > interpretations to a bad law. The law is read in the
> letter (and the
> > spirit left to the courts). May be you have not
> suffered injustice and
> > that is why you espouse such optimism about Sect 88.
> If you have read
> > that law, please re-read it to see the venom it has.
> It can be used
> > arbitrarily and has no respect to private property or
> the presumption
> > of innocence of the victim of its application.
> >
> > There are many reasons why i think it is bad law but i
> will be brief.
> > The law says that the Minister can declare a public
> emergency
> > (NOTE: it has NOTHING to do with the State of
> Emergency provided for
> > in the Constitution!).Anything can be a public
> emergency, including
> > houseflies at city market. And all that is required is
> for the
> > minister to determine it is, and for the purposes of a
> law, issue a
> > certificate do declaring, and bar communication
> between people. What
> > is worse is that if for instance the minister is wrong
> and he cannot
> > return your equipment (at the end of the so-called
> emergency), he
> > alone will determine the value to compensate you!
> > Now, is that fair? What happened to the right to be
> heard? Due
> > process?
> > But that is not grave perhaps. It is your wrong
> interpretation of
> > that law that prompts me to respond:
> > The law, as i havbe stated above, does not come into
> force during the
> > period when a State of Emergency has been declared by
> the President as
> > laid out under the constitution sect 83. NO, that
> section brings into
> > force provisions of section 57 (preservation of public
> security act).
> > And what would you say Michuki used when he authorised
> the attack and
> > seizure of KTN /Standard Group equipment on the
> pretext that the group
> > had infomration prejudicial to state security (his
> socks were torn,
> > perhaps)?
> > As you may have noticed, he has never produced the
> information,
> > returned the seized equipment, or compensated them.
> And as you well
> > know there was no state of emergency. Good thing is he
> never cited the
> > law he employed. Up to now.
> > Earlier last year, there was no stat eof emergency
> declared when the
> > Minister fo Internal security invoked sect 88 to ban
> live
> > boradcasting. As you well know, the ministry
> recapitulated and dropped
> > the ban when we took them to court. Why? Because it
> was illegal!
> > Finally,let me inform you and others that that
> section, in fact dos
> > not deal with boradcasting stations but those other
> communication
> > installations and short wave radio (call them
> "over-over") used by
> > security firms, G4, Cartrack, Taxis and other courier
> services.
> > Please do not justify what is patently wrong.
> > For us in the media, we don't want such arbitrary
> actions that
> > threatene our lives and those who invest. So we havbe
> asked that those
> > provisions apply to you if you want or so love to keep
> them.
> >
> > For those who have not read, I am reproducing that
> offending sect
> > below:
> >
> > 88. On the declaration of any public emergency or
> in the interest
> > of public safety and tranquility, the Minister for the
> time being
> > responsible for internal security may, by order in
> writing, direct any
> > officer duly authorized in their behalf, to take
> temporary possession
> > of any telecommunication apparatus or any radio
> communication station
> > or apparatus within Kenya, and ?
> >
> > (d) in the case of radio communication, that any
> communication or
> > class of communication shall or shall not be emitted
> from any radio
> > communication taken under this section; or
> >
> > (e) in the case of telecommunication, that any
> communication
> > within Kenya from any person or class of persons
> relating to any
> > particular subject shall be intercepted and disclosed
> to such person
> > as may be specified in the direction; or
> >
> > (f) in the case of postal services, that any postal
> article or
> > class or description of postal article in the course
> of transmission
> > by post within Kenya shall be intercepted or detained
> or shall be
> > delivered to any officer mentioned in the order or
> shall be disposed
> > of in such manner as the Minster may direct.
> >
> > (2) A certificate signed by the Minster for the
> time being
> > responsible for internal security shall be conclusive
> proof of the
> > existence of a public emergency, or that any act done
> under subsection
> > (1) was done in the public safety or tranquility.
> >
> > (3) A telecommunication apparatus constructed,
> maintained or
> > operated by any person within Kenya or any postal
> article which is
> > sized by any officer duly authorized under subsection
> (1) (a) shall be
> > returned to the telecommunication operator at the end
> of the emergency
> > or where such apparatus or article is not returned,
> full compensation
> > in respect thereof, to be determined by the Minster,
> shall be paid to
> > the owner.
> >
> > (4) A person aggrieved by a decision of the Minster
> under
> > subsection (3) as to the compensation payable in
> respect of anything
> > seized under this section may appeal to the High Court
> within fourteen
> > days of such decision.
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > --- On Wed, 1/14/09, Brian Longwe
> <blongwe at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Brian Longwe <blongwe at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Day 3 of 10:-KCA
> 2008-Broadcasting-The
> >> Recommendations
> >> To: dmakali at yahoo.com
> >> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions"
> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> >> Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2009, 2:22 AM I have
> some slightly
> >> different views regarding section 88
> >>
> >> Remembering that fact that this section can only
> be activated during
> >> a state of emergency, let us remind ourselves that
> since the infancy
> >> of this nation there has only been a state of
> emergency declared
> >> twice (in over 50 years).
> >>
> >> Why?
> >>
> >> This is because there are other laws, including
> the constitution,
> >> that state, when and how a state of emergency
> ought to be declared.
> >> These lay out the specific types of circumstances
> that MUST prevail
> >> before such a state is declared, and also who has
> the authority and
> >> mandate to declare such a state.
> >>
> >> Let us remind ourselves that during a state of
> emergency we have the
> >> equivalent of martial law - and the millitary
> basically have a carte
> >> blanche to take whatever measures necesarry to
> preserve the peace.
> >>
> >> The reason I say this is because whether section
> 88 exists or not, if
> >> a state of emergency is declared, broadcasters
> will be the first to
> >> receive urgent attention to ensure controlled
> dissemination of
> >> information.
> >>
> >> In fact, if the circumstances that would
> necessitate a state of
> >> emergency took place it is unlikely that any of
> the journalists or
> >> media owners would venture further than their
> window to peep outside
> >> and see if everything is OK.
> >>
> >> My point is, let us not get too emotional and
> overreactionary on this
> >> issue
> >> - let us keep in sight the greater goals that the
> KCA Amendments Act
> >> intends to achieve and let's get to work.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Brian
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 8:05 AM, John Walubengo
> <jwalu at yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thanx for the earlier contributions of Faima
> and
> >> Vincent, and more so the
> >>> recent input from the Hilton Public forum as
> reported
> >> by Barrack. I will now
> >>> go ahead and post the proposed amendments with
> regard
> >> to the issues/problems
> >>> raised yesterday.
> >>>
> >>> 1. that the retained 'draconian'
> clause 88
> >> gives unrestricted powers to the
> >>> two ministers (Internal Security and
> Information
> >> Ministers) and their
> >>> regulatory (CCK) appointees. These Powers
> enable them
> >> to declare an
> >>> emergency and raid media houses. The beef is
> that
> >> these powers are likely to
> >>> be abused particularly because of the heavy
> Govt
> >> composition of the
> >>> Regulatory Authorities who would likely serve
> their
> >> appointing authority
> >>> (Executive) rather than the common good
> (Public)
> >>>
> >>> Recommendation 1: Delete it or ensure that the
> >> Regulatory Authority (CCK)
> >>> is farily balanced in term of Board
> representation
> >> (i.e Govt, Media, Civil
> >>> Society, Academia, etc). All proposed Board
> Members
> >> must be vetted by
> >>> Parliament.
> >>>
> >>> 2. that the Content Regulation (Programming
> Code)
> >> aspects is also flawed in
> >>> that it is ONLY the Information Minister and
> his
> >> appointees who can decide
> >>> what is prohibited and what is not, what
> should go on
> >> air and at what time.
> >>>
> >>> Recommendation 2: This bit should be taken to
> the
> >> Media Council, whose Act
> >>> (Media Council Act) should be strengthened to
> give the
> >> Media Council some
> >>> teeth (enforcement) capabilities.
> >>>
> >>> 3. that a Signal Distribution Monopoly would
> be
> >> enforced given that current
> >>> broadcasters would need to channel their
> transmission
> >> through a licensed
> >>> signal distributor i.e. dismantle their
> current
> >> distribution infrastructure
> >>> in the likely event that they are not the
> designated
> >> signal distributor.
> >>>
> >>> Recommendation: ???-Havent picked up this bit
> of
> >> recommendation, someone
> >>> could fill in?.
> >>>
> >>> Feel free to make belated contributions on the
> >> previous themes as well.
> >>> Tomorrow we enter into the IT section and we
> shall
> >> stick to the same format
> >>> i.e. dissect the Good, the Bad and (the Ugly?)
> >> Recommendations.
> >>>
> >>> walu.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> _______________________________________________
> >>> kictanet mailing list
> >>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> >>>
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
> >>>
> >>> This message was sent to: blongwe at gmail.com
> Unsubscribe or change
> >>> your options at
> >>>
> >>
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.
> >> com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Brian Munyao Longwe
> >> e-mail: blongwe at gmail.com
> >> cell: + 254 722 518 744
> >> blog : http://zinjlog.blogspot.com
> >> meta-blog: http://mashilingi.blogspot.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> kictanet mailing list
> >> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> >>
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
> >>
> >> This message was sent to: dmakali at yahoo.com
> Unsubscribe or change
> >> your options at
> >>
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/dmakali%40yahoo.
> >> com
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:03:22 +0300
> From: "Victor Maloi"
> <victormaloi3 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Makali's response to brian
> longwe: KCA
> 2008-Broadcasting-The Recommendations
> To: dmakali at yahoo.com
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
> <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Message-ID:
> <6e538b390901140903k70b727a2p2e42ac1d8986a628 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Everybody knows very well that when the rating of some
> specific media house
> goes down, they chokosa government so that people can be
> sympatetic. End of
> Decenber they tried to use my Maasai brother to do the same
> but this time
> round the government was smarter.
>
> I wish people like Makali can do some research instead of
> making arguments
> like an unschooled person.
>
> In Australia the arguments of Broadcast are presented in a
> civilized manner.
> Please read the attached:
>
>
>
> Victor Maloi
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/private/kictanet/attachments/20090114/b
> 6c59118/attachment.html>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: Media Ownership Regulation in Australia.doc
> Type: application/msword
> Size: 195072 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL:
> <http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/private/kictanet/attachments/20090114/b
> 6c59118/attachment.doc>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
>
> End of kictanet Digest, Vol 20, Issue 46
> ****************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
> This message was sent to: jwalu at yahoo.com
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com
More information about the KICTANet
mailing list