[kictanet] DAY 10: The Name "The Independent Communications Commission of Kenya"

Fri Feb 25 17:09:46 EAT 2011

I support KK - shedding  'regulator' tag is very important - it will be a
pointer to a new paradigm of  sector development - see my posting of DAY1

cheers 

Muriuki Mureithi 

The happiest of people don't necessarily 
HAVE the best of everything; 
They just MAKE the best of everything

-----Original Message-----
From: kictanet-bounces+mureithi=summitstrategies.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke
[mailto:kictanet-bounces+mureithi=summitstrategies.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.k
e] On Behalf Of k.k. ombati
Sent: 25 February 2011 16:00
To: mureithi at summitstrategies.co.ke
Cc: henry at article19.org; kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
Subject: Re: [kictanet] DAY 10: The Name "The Independent Communications
Commission of Kenya"

what about a name without 'regulate' in the title. everyone has been
adamant that the ICCK shld not be 'regulatory' hut rather focused on
facilitating development in the sector.

On 2/25/11, Vitalis Olunga <volunga at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am not a lawyer but in my opinion, the new constitution not cast on
stone.
> There should be a provision of forming other Commissions apart from the
only
> listed ones. However, if there none, and using of the words Commission in
> the
> name of the new regulatory authority can have a legal implication and slow
> down
> the process, then I support the suggestion of using a name without the
word
> Commission.  To this end we can propose EITHER “Communications Regulatory
> Authority of Kenya (CRAK)” as suggested by Wangusi OR “Independent
> Communications Regulatory Authority of Kenya (ICRAK)”.
>
> Regards
>
> VKO
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: warigia bowman <warigia at gmail.com>
> To: volunga at yahoo.com
> Cc: henry at article19.org; kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> Sent: Fri, February 25, 2011 2:36:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] DAY 10: The Name "The Independent Communications
> Commission of Kenya"
>
>
> The independence of the CCK is very important
>
> First, I think the constitution writers made a very bad decision in
listing
> commissions in the constitution. However, it is unrealistic to expect them
> to
> have listed every single commission. Thus, other kk correctly points out
> that in
> the long run, other commissions will have to be made provision for.
>
>
> Second, the key to an independent commission is that the commissioners
> directors
> do not answer to a minister. They also should have some security of
tenure,
> so
> that they cannot be removed by political figures, but rather, they are
> secure in
> their term of office in the absence of gross malfeasance.
>
>
> Third, there must be balance among commissioners, between the public,
> private
> and NGO sector. One potentially dangerous issue is that the CCK could
become
> a
> board which responds only to corporate interests, while ignoring the
> consumer.
>
>
> Yours, Rigia
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:21 PM, k.k. ombati <kaykerubo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> hi listers,
>>i would like to respond to 2issues: the first one being that the ICCK
>>is not among the commissions listed in article 248 of the constitution
>>and the second one that article 34(1)&(5) of the constitution only
>>contemplates one body to regulate the media i.e media council
>>1:on a careful reading of article 248(1) it states that '...this
>>chapter applies to the commissions specified in clause (2)'..it does
>>not say that those are the only constitutionally mandated commissions
>>2:article34(5) refers to a the establishment of a body that sets media
>>standards and we are all agreed that it is the media council.
>>the role of the ICCK is to facilitate development of the
>>telecoms,broadcasting sector so the functions of the 2 bodies are
>>distinct and there is no contravention of s34(5) because the ONE BODY
>>that it contemplates to regulate media standards is the MCK but this
>>does not in way bar the establishment of the ICCK
>>
>>
>>On 2/25/11, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Muriuki
>>>
>>> I think Wamuyu had raised the concern of which body (ICCK or the Media
>>> Council) is envisaged in article 34 (5) of the Constitution.
>>>
>>> Having read the article, and having consulted with the a media lawyer
>>> Henry
>>> Maina, the Director of Article 19, that envisaged body is the Media
>>> Council
>>> which will in 5 (c) set media standards and regulate and monitor
>>> compliance
>>> with those standards.
>>>
>>> This being the last day of this debate, and in which I believe we can
>>> make
>>> any comments on any of the sections discussed, I  will reiterate that
>>> article 2 of the ICCK 2010 (Object of the Act) be deleted as it belongs
>>> to
>>> the Media Council.
>>>
>>> Rgds
>>> GG
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
>>>-
>>> If you have the strength to survive, you have the power to succeed. Life
>>> is
>>> all about choices we make depending upon the situation we are in. Go
>>> forth
>>> and rule the World!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: mureithi at summitstrategies.co.ke
>>> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 08:03:36 +0300
>>> Subject: Re: [kictanet] DAY 10: The Name "The Independent Communications
>>> Commission of Kenya"
>>> CC: kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>>> To: ggithaiga at hotmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Indeed Catherine , the same issue was raised by Wamuyu Gatheru
>>> I not a lawyer – but  the constitution  is supreme
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> Muriuki Mureithi
>>>
>>> The happiest of people don't necessarily
>>> HAVE the best of everything;
>>> They just MAKE the best of everything
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From:
>>> kictanet-bounces+mureithi=summitstrategies.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>>>
>
[mailto:kictanet-bounces+mureithi=summitstrategies.co.ke at lists.kictanet.or.k
e]
>>> On Behalf Of Catherine Adeya
>>> Sent: 25 February 2011 07:32
>>> To: mureithi at summitstrategies.co.ke
>>> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
>>> Subject: [kictanet] DAY 10: The Name "The Independent Communications
>>> Commission of Kenya"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Listers,
>>>
>>> Today is the final day on the discussions on the Independent
>>> Communications
>>> Commission of Kenya Bill 2010.  I think it would be worthwhile to
revisit
>>> a
>>> concern Mr Wangusi raised on the first day. He was concerned that in the
>>> new
>>> Constitution -- specifically  in Chapter 15, Clause 248 (1&2) which
>>> establishes Commissions in this country -- the ICCK name does not appear
>>> to
>>> be among those listed. So is this title in contravention of the
>>> Constitution
>>> and should we suggest another name like “Communications Regulatory
>>> Authority
>>> of Kenya” or something like that.
>>>
>>> We would appreciate your thoughts.
>>>
>>> Best Wishes,
>>>
>>> Nyaki
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list
>>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>>> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet This message was
>>> sent
>>> to: ggithaiga at hotmail.com Unsubscribe or change your options at
>>>
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ggithaiga%40hotmail.com
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>kictanet mailing list
>>kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>>http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>>
>>This message was sent to: warigia at gmail.com
>>Unsubscribe or change your options at
>>http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/warigia%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Dr. Warigia Bowman
> Visiting Assistant Professor
> American University in Cairo
> Global Affairs and Public Policy
> (office)(202)2615-4346
> (cell) (201)05590948
> warigia at aucegypt.edu
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet

This message was sent to: mureithi at summitstrategies.co.ke
Unsubscribe or change your options at
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/mureithi%40summitstrate
gies.co.ke