[kictanet] [ISOC_KE] Thoughts on Kenya's National Broadband Strategy

Tue Jul 23 15:41:28 EAT 2013

How about the attached. My input to the so called "National Public Key
Infrastructure Stakeholder Consultation"

Despite personal phone calls which I received from both Dr. Ndemo and Paul
Kukubo that I would receive a response, it seems that somewhere along the
way - I was dismissed as a "noise-maker" - I tried to keep it quiet, now
let me make some noise.

I was also very disappointed to hear through the grapevine that some senior
people said "Brian is only making noise because he doesn't have a job"
along with the implication that I was seeking an appointment/assignment
into the PKI project....disgusting....

Anyway, here are the attachments. Zero response to date - and I can promise
you, zero change in the plans/design...

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:24 PM, James Mbugua <jgmbugua at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> They are here. Let them respond.
>
> As for the Cabinet Secretary, we will judge him by performance not by
> statements. He should state at least three flagship goals he intends to
> achieve.
>
> James
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Barrack Otieno <otieno.barrack at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> You raise a very important issue. I attended the broadband meeting and
>> whereas it was elaborately organized there is a lot of discomfort that i
>> will raise on this platform.
>>
>> Clearly it appears the multi stakeholder model is under serious attack
>> and if we are not careful the gains we have made in the last 10 years in
>> building an enviable ICT community Internationaly will go down the drain. I
>> interacted with several technocrats and to my dismay majority of those in
>> Civil Society Organisations that are meant to check the government are
>> branded as trouble makers. Difference in opinion is treated as personal
>> affront , worse still it was clear that our input no longer matters to put
>> it bluntly from the few engagements i had this morning, we are resource
>> persons. You may have noticed that COFEK raised a similar issue in a press
>> release and i have just seen an email from a lister in which he was quoting
>> the CS that some people are making noise in a corner which i found to be
>> undiplomatic if at all it is true.
>> You have spoken for many who are murmuring and i hope the Cabinet
>> Secretary who is on this list takes note of this concerns, once goodwill is
>> lost it might take time to recover it  and this will result in stalled or
>> worse still failed projects. We need meaningful engagement based on
>> national aspirations not personal preferences and cronyism, i agree
>> meaningless stakeholder consultations should be put to an end, we need a
>> clear process of soliciting for public input, the same should show when the
>> public views have been dropped and why? ever wondered why open data is
>> still a myth to name but a few?
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I have just gone through the recently launched National Broadband
>>> Strategy.
>>>
>>> Sadly, none of my submitted input (included below) was accomodated (even
>>> after confirmation from CCK that they had been received). I guess this is a
>>> sign of the times, because it seems that over recent years "public
>>> consultations" by CCK and Govt on ICT issues have been merely stage-managed
>>> exercises aimed at giving an appearance of inclusion, but in reality are
>>> merely rubber-stamping exercises which allow largely third party driven
>>> agendas (vendors, foreign govts) to take center stage and prioritization in
>>> our strategies, policies, laws etc...
>>>
>>> I guess I will just have to stop making the effort to "contribute" to
>>> these processes as it seems to be pointless and an exercise in futility.
>>> Hopefully others will have better luck?
>>>
>>> Have a good day,
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe at gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I had shared these thoughts in ISOC-KE and someone asked if I would
>>>> mind sharing them with KICTANET. Well, here goes:
>>>>
>>>> ------------
>>>>
>>>> Is it right to explicitly name a particular technology within the
>>>> context of such a high level strategy?
>>>> Pg 6
>>>>  ¬† the immediate plan to further deploy    broadband through a
>>>> nationwide LTE system
>>>>
>>>>  The language in principle 2 (pg 8) and principle 7 (pg 9) seem to be
>>>> contradictory. While principle 2 emphasizes technology neutrality (a good
>>>> thing), principle 7 in elaborating competitive use of technologies
>>>> explicitly names fiber optic and wireless broadband. It is proposed that
>>>> the language here be changed to distinguish between fixed and non-fixed
>>>> media as alternatives for infrastructure
>>>>
>>>>  Pg 21 - the relationship between a pacemaker (for heart conditions)
>>>> and content & applications is not immediately obvious - could this be the
>>>> wrong kind of example to use in this section?
>>>>
>>>>  Pg 22 (Table 4) on the problem of an unstructured innovation chain;
>>>> wouldn't it be better to aim at developing a National Innovation System -
>>>> rather than simply seeking to "institutionalize the innovation value
>>>> chain"? The current recommendations fall far short of *really* tackling the
>>>> underlying issues and proposing sufficient interventions to address the
>>>> problem in the medium to long term.
>>>>
>>>>  Pg 23 the figures related to mobile penetration should be updated with
>>>> latest market estimates and not figures from 2011. Current estimates are at
>>>> 100% mobile penetration. Also the percentage of *youth* is questionable as
>>>> it is based on a 2005 study. Should statistics that are 8 years old be used
>>>> in such an important document?
>>>>
>>>>  pg 26-32 Section 3.4 Policy, Legal & Regulatory Environment
>>>>
>>>>  While CCK has over the past 13 years of it's existence facilitated
>>>> massive transformation with the information and communication technology
>>>> sector in the country and the region as a whole. It could be argued that
>>>> the Commission's mandate has become bloated over the years, leading to a
>>>> "too many eggs in one basket" problem.
>>>>
>>>>  It could be recommended that specialized agencies be established to
>>>> deal with essential issue that do not strictly fall under the regulatory
>>>> mandate of CCK and may, in some cases create opportunity for conflict of
>>>> interest. These include but are not limited to: Operation and
>>>> Administration of the Universal Service Fund, Operation and Administration
>>>> of cyber-security related units, consumer protection etc...
>>>>
>>>>  While it is evident and obvious that CCK has served and may continue
>>>> to serve as an ideal "incubator" for these types of services/agencies. It
>>>> is true that they encompass a potentially vast amount of work, especially
>>>> within a national context and could be better served by specialized
>>>> agencies that can focus time and resources and deal with issues in a
>>>> focused and timely manner.
>>>>
>>>>  pg 33 Section 3.5.2
>>>>
>>>>  by specifically referring to a particular technology (in this case
>>>> LTE) as a means to accomplishing the objectives of this strategy - it might
>>>> appear that the strategy is biased towards particular vendors or operators
>>>> and may not necessarily be taking the best interests of the marketplace and
>>>> the greatest stakeholder - the citizen - into consideration. It is
>>>> recommended that the language in this section be reworked to eliminate the
>>>> mention of specific technologies.
>>>>
>>>>  The section on Financing and Investment should include recommendations
>>>> on various incentives to promote activity in the area. Tax breaks,
>>>> concessions, PPP proposals, allocations from various existing (and new)
>>>> funds etc...
>>>>
>>>>  Section 4 Implementation
>>>>
>>>>  once again, specific reference to LTE may not be in the best interests
>>>> of leaving the strategy open enought to allow for competing and maybe more
>>>> affordable technologies that can achieve stated objectives.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> isoc mailing list
>>> isoc at orion.my.co.ke
>>> http://orion.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/isoc
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Barrack O. Otieno
>> +254721325277
>> +254-20-2498789
>> Skype: barrack.otieno
>> http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> kictanet mailing list
>> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>>
>> Unsubscribe or change your options at
>> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jgmbugua%40gmail.com
>>
>>
>> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
>> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
>> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
>> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
>>
>> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
>> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
>> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
>> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform
> for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
> regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
> sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
> online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
> share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
> not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20130723/eafa971d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Kenya PKI Cover Letter 22-3-2013.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 76548 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20130723/eafa971d/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Proposed Structure for Kenya National Public Key Infrastructure.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 142968 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20130723/eafa971d/attachment-0001.pdf>