[kictanet] Update on the ICT Practitioners Bill - Get the Facts Right

Sat Dec 10 10:10:32 EAT 2016

Dear Listers,

One thing is certain, the proposed law is flawed. A proposed law that fails
to appreciate the reality of an industry fails to meet the bare threshold
then becomes oppressive to those it is meant to govern.

It doesn't matter how many workshops or stakeholder meetings there are, if
the spirit of the proposed law is wrong ab initio then it must be quashed
at the earliest instance.

The main question is what mischief did the law intend to cure?

It has been stated that there are several quacks in the industry and this
law will help root them out. This Industry has seen great advances from
self taught individuals worldwide, and there is no dispute about this.
There are adequate legal remedies to deal with substandard work without
having to resort to a purported blanket law.

It is nothing personal but a matter of being realistic and working in the
best interest of the industry, the proposed law in any format will
definitely not work and must not see the light of day.

We will have moved ourselves a million years backwards as an industry if we
allow this law to see the light of day.

Anyone with the true interest of the industry at heart should be asking
which ways to assist the industry players so that we reach our utmost
potential as the Silicon Savannah but not stifle whatever growth we have
had so far.

Kind regards,

Rosemary Koech-Kimwatu.

On 10 Dec 2016 07:24, "Ali Hussein via kictanet" <
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:

> Kamotho
>
> Personal attacks will not deter me or others from saying it as it is:-
>
> *That the very idea of this bill is flawed - Democracy followed or not. *
>
> I would like to address your claims/comments one by one:-
>
> 1. I didn't attend meetings hence I have given my 'representatives' a raw
> deal. Firstly I do not claim that I was anointed. When we first attended
> (Grace Bomu, Walubengo and Myself) the meeting at KEPSA to discuss this
> bill and it's implications we simply said we were Kictaneters and were
> there as such. Anyone else on this list was free to attend as this meeting
> was discussed on the list. I or Grace Bomu attended several meetings
> including the one which was chaired by John Omo at CCK and the
> Parliamentary Committee meeting where you also attended. Subsequently I
> contributed substantially to online discussions between the then 'Coalition
> of the willing' which comprised of KICTANet members, Bake, KEPSA, MOICT and
> iHub. The fact that I didn't attend some physical meetings doesn't at all
> negate my participation and contribution. However, that I do not need to
> justify to you. I'm merely putting forward my thoughts.
>
> Who do you represent Kamotho? Since this issue of representation is a door
> you have opened. Who is ICTAK? A quick look at the website doesn't tell me
> much as to who are the bona fide members and officials of the Association,
> when were they elected/appointed, how long is their term and when is the
> next election or appointments? How about the management?
>
> http://www.ictak.or.ke/
>
> The reason I ask this is since you or ICTAK to be specific purport to
> represent the ICT Community in this country then proof of mandate is
> important don't you think?
>
> A quick cursory search online to look at how such associations operate
> took me to this site:-
>
>  http://www.aiita.org/ of the All India IT Association. The information
> there in is instructive. From the Board of Directors to Management, this
> information is missing on the ICTAK site,
>
> Or ISACA (https://www.isaca.org/) whose local chapter holds regular
> elections.
>
> Or the U.K IT Association (http://members.ukita.co.uk/
> index.php?option=com_acymailing&ctrl=archive&task=view&mailid=48&key=
> d804decf5d06e74e2b30819cd84db9e8&Itemid=66) which holds annual AGMs.
>
> 2. On point 2 I begin by quoting you on your email:-
>
> *'Deliberations proceeded in good faith. Needless to state, this Bill like
> any other is not a matter of life and death.'*
>
> My brother, for some of us *IT IS* a matter of life and death. Imagine
> waking up one morning and you have been legislated out of your profession
> or business because of an organization that purports to represent you and a
> government that is supposed to be a '*Digital Government'* sitting by as
> a bystander and seemingly powerless to defend the very people they have
> been purporting to protect, defend and promote.
>
> You like any other Kenyan has a right to promote any bill whatsoever. In
> the same breath, I and any other Kenyan has a right to oppose it if we feel
> it will curb our ability to earn a decent living and protect our families.
> Make no mistake about it this bill is a matter of life and death for some
> of us.
>
> 3. Another quote from you to emphasize my point on my hardline stand.
>
> *'Parliament would be within its mandate to pass the Bill intact, to amend
> it or to reject it altogether.'*
>
> So why then are we wasting time in deliberations? Why legitimize a
> process so that you guys can go back and say *'We consulted and hence
> this bill is a good place to start and has the blessings of the community.'*
> I'm sure I'm speaking to the majority listers when I say this is unfair and
> flawed.
>
> This country has a habit of using certain clauses of our new constitution
> to justify nefarious actions, we will simply not stand for it and be seen
> to be powerless or do anything about it. One that is used to devastating
> effect is this issue of public participation. WCIT12, Dubai, is still fresh
> in my mind where the previous ICT Ministry officials led by Dr. Ndemo was
> instrumental in engaging all stakeholders in crafting a Multi-Stakeholder
> Position on ITRs. This position was then changed by the new regime that
> replaced Dr. Ndemo. They did not even have the decency to inform the
> community. This impunity must stop. Government is supposed to represent the
> people and when this is abused it is a serious matter indeed. Some history
> here is important:-
>
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/2012-December/018900.html
>
> And if I speak alone on this so be it because Tyranny is Tyranny whether
> it is executed by a minority or a majority.
>
> 4. To quote you..again:-
>
> *My humble understanding is that KICTANet is a serious platform where
> listers are at liberty to exchange ideas that are supportive of ICT
> sectoral progress. To this end wisdom should flow unfettered. This imposes
> a responsibility to ensure that information supplied is factual, evidence
> based and not merely driven by a passion for online flamboyance. In the
> alternative, this forum could easily degenerate to mediocrity of
> proportions only comparable to that of third rate blogs. God forbid!*
>
> Indeed Ndugu Kamotho. The fact that we disagree and can express ourselves
> in the very list where the majority who have contributed to this discussion
> have opposed this bill is in itself a testament to the maturity that
> listers have demonstrated. If at any time I have come across as opinionated
> it is because sometimes I am. :-) It is a flaw that I work hard every day
> to tamper. I am after all human. :-) and I do apologize to anyone that I
> might have rubbed the wrong way. Including you my brother. I believe that
> we are mature enough to enjoy a mug of Malindi Macchiato (my favorite drink
> at Java) and are free to disagree over it? :-)
>
> 5. Lastly the ICT CS, Government Spokesperson have been categorical
> publicly in rejecting this bill.
>
> http://cio.co.ke/news/main-stories/government-of-kenya-
> rejects-ict-practitioners-bill#
>
> Positions may have changed since then and it is the onus of this
> government to tell us if in fact their position has changed, what
> precipitated it and what is the new position.
>
> *Ali Hussein*
> *Principal*
> *Hussein & Associates*
> +254 0713 601113
>
> Twitter: @AliHKassim
>
> Skype: abu-jomo
>
> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim
>
>
> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking
> what no one else has thought".  ~ Albert Szent-Györgyi
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 9 Dec 2016, at 8:35 PM, wamuma via kictanet <
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
>
> Following keenly these new developments of UPDATES and COUNTER UPDATES as
> a silent follower and player . Thanks
>
> Anthony Weru
>
>
>
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Kamotho Njenga via kictanet <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Date: 09/12/2016 11:49 (GMT+03:00)
> To: wamuma at gmail.com
> Cc: Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga at gmail.com>
> Subject: [kictanet] Update on the ICT Practitioners Bill - Get the Facts
> Right
>
> Fellow Listers,
>
> The purported updates regarding the ICT Practioners Bill that have been
> intermittently flying in this forum are fallacious and misleading. If
> indeed the author of the updates was anointed to represent KICTANet on the
> Multi stakeholder consultations on the Bill as claimed, then listers
> obtained a raw deal. The self styled supplier of "updates" was not present
> at the various stages of consultations including forums held at the
> Communications Authority premises, stakeholder position's harmonization at
> MOIC Teleposta, the stakeholders Retreat with the Energy Committee that
> included representatives of the MOIC, Communications Authority, ICTAK,
> KEPSA, KITOs among others. As much as there is zeal to share "updates", the
> good citizen is severely limited in terms of subsequent developments,
> having participated very tangentially in the process of deliberating on the
> Bill.
>
> Contrary to the antagonistic impression painted through and through, the
> stakeholders were able to reason together and by the time the Retreat with
> the Parliamentary Committee on Energy and ICT concluded, consensus had
> largely been reached on all the issues. The deliberations largely succeeded
> because parties adopted an open minded approach and applied themselves to
> intellectual focus to justify their positions on the Bill. On point was the
> Cabinet Secretary for ICT, Joe Mucheru who was able to justify his
> reservations against the Bill, not by displaying "power and might" but
> through a meticulously reasoned and deeply analytical presentation.
>
> Hard-line positions were melted down not by online braggadocio but by
> cogent arguments wrapped in sound logic. People persuaded others and got
> persuaded by others. Deliberations proceeded in good faith. Needless to
> state, this Bill like any other is not a matter of life and death.
> Parliament would be within its mandate to pass the Bill intact, to amend it
> or to reject it altogether. All the same, I have full confidence that the
> Energy and ICT Committee will sift the issues as requested jointly by
> stakeholders and make drastic recommendations on the Bill to eliminate any
> possibility of negative disruption to the Kenyan ICT growth trajectory.
>
>  Thus, personal obsession should not form a basis for castigating the
> views or initiatives of others regardless of how unsound one perceives them
> to be from their own perspective. Listers must also be wary of people who
> will never approve anything as long as it has not passed through their own
> hands. As long as we are in a constitutional democracy, individual citizens
> wield a right to lawfully pursue any agenda of choice. Nothing for instance
> would prevent anyone from forwarding a "Nyama Choma Practitioners Bill" to
> Parliament for Consideration.
>
> My humble understanding is that KICTANet is a serious platform where
> listers are at liberty to exchange ideas that are supportive of ICT
> sectoral progress. To this end wisdom should flow unfettered. This imposes
> a responsibility to ensure that information supplied is factual, evidence
> based and not merely driven by a passion for online flamboyance. In the
> alternative, this forum could easily degenerate to mediocrity of
> proportions only comparable to that of third rate blogs. God forbid!
>
> Kamotho
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/info%40alyhussein.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/chemukoechk%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/20161210/457167c0/attachment.htm>