2. Different Roles Performed By Csos And Other Partners In Wpp

ELECTIONS, CONSTITUTION, PENAL CODE...

...Women running for elective seats experience electoral related GBV, which discourages those aspiring to run for office...

Since independence from South Africa, Namibian women have fought to be heard, seen and represented in public affairs and decision-making processes. They have worked through female organizations formed since 1989 to date, such as Sister Namibia, based in Windhoek. Over the years, Namibian women have strategically increased awareness of feminine-related issues using the voice and backing of various female organizations such as Women’s Action for Development (WAD). WAD focuses on the advancement of women in rural areas. Other organizations are Namibia’s Women’s Health Network (NWHN), Namibia Women Solidarity, Namibia Planned Parenthood Association (NAPPA), among others. Their constant belief is that empowering women in all aspects is important in preparing them to hold elective or appointive offices and continue pushing the feminine agenda in an otherwise male-dominated field.

3.4. Senegal

Despite the governments of Rwanda, South Africa and Namibia passing special quotas that provided for gender inclusivity in political structures and decisionmaking bodies, Senegal went a step further. Senegal is currently positioned 17 in IPU’s ranking, with 71 women out of 165 holding seats in the National Parliament. The Government’s nationwide campaigns to implement and domesticate the gender quota incorporated in the Constitution (in 2010) stands. It is the sole reason behind the increase in WPP.

Worthy of mention is the collaboration between the Senegalese Council of Women (COSEF) and the Senegalese Association of Women Jurists (ASJ) to develop proposals that pushed the agenda of gender parity in the Senegalese Government. The strong backing of the Former President, Abdoulaye Wade, following his election into office in 2000, helped push that agenda even further. It paved the way for a change of attitude by the nation towards normalizing the Senegalese Law on Parity that he later enacted in 2010.

4. KENYA AND TANZANIA IN COMPARISON TO THE BEST PRACTICE

Based on the IPU ranking, Tanzania and Kenya are trailing the other four countries, Kenya being further back. It is instrumental to note that Kenya and Tanzania have affirmative action seats set aside for women. The legal frameworks for these countries are supportive of WPP. However, some challenges have occasioned the gap in WPP. The First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) System of election adopted by Kenya and Tanzania is not suitable as the proportional representation (PR) that is practised in all the countries under comparison. What has worked better for Tanzania has been the commitment of the Presidency to giving women a chance to take leadership positions. Below is a brief analysis of the key challenges facing WPP in the two countries.

Kenya

i. Lack of commitment to the constitutional gender provisions. There is no constitutional framework to implement the ‘two-thirds gender rule’ in parliament;

ii.Political parties, which are the vehicles for most women to get into political offices, have not invested in women parliamentarians. They have in some cases dissuaded them from competing in the general electoral seats, confining them to women's special seats;

iii. Although CSOs have been at the forefront of agitating for WPP, they have faced several challenges, including limited resources, lack of coherence and partisanship;

iv. Kenya lacks a strong united women movement to work as an accountability body towards the implementation of the gender quota laws; v. Persistent social, cultural, and religious norms make it difficult for women to support political campaigns. This situation is worsened by violence that is witnessed against women during electioneering periods;

vi. The media has not been helpful to women candidates and has on many occasions perpetuated the negative norms against WPP; and

vii. Women running for elective seats experience electoral related GBV, which discourages those aspiring to run for office.

Tanzania

i. Political parties have not supported women parliamentarians fully to realize their potential in WPP. Similar to Kenya, the parties have in some cases dissuaded them from competing in the constituency and ward specific seats, confining them to women's special seats;

ii. In preparation for the 2020 elections, the CSOs, more so human rights organizations, had a difficult time operating in the country due to the animosity that was created between them and the ruling party. This may have affected the support towards women candidates;

iii. Incidences of violence against women vying for political office and police brutality have continued to make it difficult for women to run for office safely;

iv. Persistent social, cultural and religious norms make it difficult for women to gain support for political campaigns; and

v. The media has, on many occasions, perpetuated negative norms against WPP.