MPs trivialising debate about the family and domestic violence

There has been furore in Parliament over a family-related Bill; the Protection against Domestic Violence Bill.

Once again Members of Parliament have been divided into the men and women gender camps. It curious that on all matters except family-related issues, lawmakers take positions depending on their party affiliations. When it comes to family-related Bills, however, they vote as men and women.

Hon Aden Duale is reported to have said: "Mr Speaker, we don't want to create laws to manage our bedrooms and sitting rooms. We have more serious issues to deal with like terrorism, food insecurity and devolved systems."

Hon Denitta Ghati is reported to have said: "It is unfortunate every time we are talking about issues of family law, it appears to be a battle of sexes...it is wrong...I appeal to male members not to shoot it down."

I could not have put it better than Hon Ghati. I join you in reminding your colleagues that their constituents who elected them are men and women.

As article 45 of the Constitution under which the lawmakers were elected states, family is the fundamental institution of society and the basis of social order.

If the family is the fundamental unit of society Hon Duale, then how can issues affecting the family be said to be less important than terrorism, food security and devolution?

Indeed, Hon Duale is terrorism not violence that kills, maims people or causes destruction of property? Is that not what happens in domestic violence? How many spouses and children have been killed in bedrooms and sitting rooms?

I recall just last month, a newspaper headline screaming about increased murders in the family. Only about a fortnight ago, a policeman in Kasarani reportedly killed his wife and then killed himself, in their bedroom. Their children are now orphans and will carry that burden all their lives. I am at a loss to understand how prevention of such violence can be trivialised to bedroom and sitting room matters.

Hon Duale, how can there be food security if the members of the family responsible for it, are victims of violence. If a man or woman is maimed as a result of domestic violence, will they be able to work?

Devolution is a big issue Hon Duale but it cannot be bigger than the people for whom it is intended. Indeed the whole purpose of devolution is to enable people access resources. Such resources include this country's wealth and security. If I was sitting where you were sitting, I would have supported the Bill on the basis that it is part of the devolution process; taking security to the smallest unit of devolution which is the family.

In a nutshell, the Protection against Domestic Violence Bill seeks to provide for the protection and relief of victims of domestic violence.

Among other things, the Bill empowers Courts to issue protection orders against a person in a domestic relationship who has violated or threatened violence to another.

A person is regarded as being in a domestic relationship with another if the person is a spouse or a former spouse, is living in the same household with that person, is a family member of that person, is or has been engaged to be married to that person, has a child with that person or has a close personal relationship with that person.

The Bill also proposes the establishment of shelters and the provision of counselling and conciliation programmes.

The Bill has 46 sections so please read on. Perhaps, many of our people who have been maimed or killed would have been saved if there was a protection order or shelter that they could run to.