 Hello. It's my pleasure to welcome you to this timely and important webinar on the land reform agenda in Kenya, which is co-organized by Kenya Land Alliance, the Government of Kenya, the Land Portal Foundation, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations of the European Union. Thank you for joining us today. My name is Michael Odiambo. I'm the Director of People, Land and Rural Development, and it's my distinct honor to model this forum. Our discussion today is on land reform in Kenya. Land use and land reforms are at the heart of Kenya's political and economic future stability. The quest for policy and institutional reform is driven by concerns about equitable access for land, efficient accountable land administration, and security of Kenya, particularly of community land. When the national land policy and the question of Kenya 2010 were adopted, this constituted a single achievement for land reform. But eight years down the line, the challenges of gender disparity and security of community land tenure and poor land administration persist. This webinar will review the land reform process and address these and other challenges with a view to defining a path forward that will lead to individual justice in uniform and use that benefits communities and increases food security. The panelists will address five key questions. First, where are we in the land reform process in Kenya? Secondly, what are the main challenges that need to be addressed in policy frameworks on land reform and use? Three, how can the gender imperatives of land reform be actualizing? Four, what are the implications of community land dispensation? Finally, how is digitization addressing underlying inconsistencies in land resistance? I have the pleasure to introduce to you our esteemed panelists of today. The three panelists are Dr. Colin Sodokio-Lo, who is a senior lecturer at the University of Norobi Law School. Mr. Odenda Lumumba is the Chief Executive Officer at Kenya Land Alliance and Ms. Hosnam Barak, who is the Land Governance Program Manager at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in Kenya. These panelists bring to this discussion many years of engagement with land reforms in Kenya and we look forward to a dynamic discussion that will provide insights into the way forward for the reform process. We will begin with a round of questions with the panelists. This will be followed by some discussion among panelists. We encourage participants to please ask questions, use the questions feature to post questions to the panelists, and we will ensure that these are addressed in time during the open discussion that will follow after the interventions by the panelists. Let me post the first question to Odenda Lumumba. Mr. Lumumba, where are we in the land reform process in Kenya? Essentially, Kenya has gone through the constitutional, legal, policy, institutional framework, but when it came to implementation, where we ought to be, the process has become so sluggish to the extent that if I measure Kenyan land reforms from the indicators of restructuring property ownership, production structure, support services, and land delivery systems, I would basically say that Kenya has gone off the mark. And my reasons of saying so are that given our new constitutional dispensation, we were supposed to have redressed historical land injustices. We ought to have reviewed land leases. We ought to have fixed the minimum and maximum acreage to a land private holder. We ought to have operationalised land, commercialised committed land, recognition, protection and registration, but all these standard crossroads. And what we are now witnessing is a question which can basically be said, instead of going the road of land reforms, we are now doing counter reforms in as far as the whole mechanism of rolling out land reforms are concerned in Kenya. And that is the main concern that we have at the moment. Husna, do you agree with Mr. Lumumba and do you have anything to add? Yes, actually I would kind of agree. But one thing I need to put forth is that within the policy agenda around land reform, I think Kenya is quite far advanced. The only problem or the only challenges which we really need to look into is the implementation, the operationalisation of those policy and the laws in place and the enforcement of it. Because when you talk of land reform, it's actually it doesn't amount to policy reform only. So it's the whole cycle. We have beautiful laws, but we have to make sure they are implemented. We have to make sure that they are enforced by all means. And I think this brings up around all stakeholders involved, including the government to actually execute and enforce, but also the people to be able to account and actually use the laws parallel to the enforcement and the execution. And I think this is where now Kenya should really fall, I mean, really prioritise in so many ways. Okay, so we have beautiful policies and laws, institutions have been created, but we are not making progress in realising the vision of the land reform process. Dr. Rute, why is this the case? What are the underlying reasons behind the lack of progress with the reforms? I think there are several underlying reasons, Michael. And I want to just mention three. The first one is, I think, you know, why do we have been a reform trajectory? We have unwilling reformers. Land is a political issue and unfortunately the political elite see land reform as going against their political interests. I think that's the first underlying issue. The second underlying issue why land reform hasn't gone on as well as it should be is we require all hands on deck in the land reform trajectory. And two critical stakeholders have removed their hands on that deck. The first group of stakeholders that have removed their hands on the deck are development partners. In the run-up to the adoption of the national land policy, development partners were very focused on land issues. But because of negative reactions from government, you find that funding to land reform work has done a little bit. A day or two, you'll only find one or two organisations supporting that. Sadly, even civil society that were extremely critical on land issues aren't as engaged as possible. So you find people doing a little work by doing it differently. Just this morning, we were having a separate conversation with Husna. And you will notice that there's an effort to review the national land policy. And sadly, the land commission that is supposed to be in charge of that process is going about this thing without involving stakeholders. So you cannot be able to make progress when you think that the process of reforming is not a process that is inclusive. It's not a process that is consultative. And it's a process that focuses on delivering the good for all countries. In a sense, you're anticipating, you've anticipated my next question. Building on what you've just said, maybe you can go further and just identify what the major challenges are that you would need to address in order for you as to move in the policy reform process, in the land reform process. I think for us to move in the land reform process, there are several things we'll have to do, Michael. The first thing that we'll have to do is we all have to re-engage as institutions. And this is government must realize they can't solve the land problems on their own. So they must be willing to engage. Actors must realize that government on its own or criticizing government alone will not deliver land reforms. So we must be proactive. Thirdly, I think we must realize this land is for communities and is for people on the rural areas. So we must bring them on board. We must create awareness for them. And I think lastly, we need to realize that resource allocations are critical. Land reforms are fairly expensive process. So we need to ensure that there's sufficient resources both from government and also from development partners for the process to be able to move forward. And then, sorry, how can I forget that? I think knowledge generation and knowledge dissemination as part of that process is going to be critical. And that's part of the work. As the academy, we can be able to contribute by providing options to be able to ensure that our land reform process moves in a manner that is acceptable. And in a manner that aligns itself to, for example, the AU guidelines and policy frameworks that were adopted in 2000. Thank you. Thank you. That is helpful and also helpful that you also identify what the academy where you come from can contribute to this. Odenda, do you have anything to add to what we need to do in order to be able to address the challenges? And maybe speak to what civil society can do. I think the quick list is practically we need to face the challenge of this jointed organizations and institutions charged with land and natural resource sector governance. Basically, the National Land Commission is supposed to be coordinating monitoring and over citing all agencies that are managing land and natural resources for public good interest and purpose. That is not happening. For the civil society, I think we need to, the challenge we have been facing is basically we are basically donor dependent. And as it has been said, the donors have slacking or they have other priorities other than land reform. And therefore we really need to face the challenge of how do we get the taxpayers money to in Kenya to finance the civil society operations so that it is not only calling on civil society to be accountable for what they do, but also to be accountable to extend that the taxpayers money would be used for them to cause participation in the land reform process. Those are the key elements I would add. Thank you. Hosuna, you by default, you now talk for the development partners here and as the, as Collings has indicated, development partners who are key to the process when it started and then they slackened. What do you think, what are the challenges from the perspective of the development partners? I think the main challenge has for any development partner to engage, it has to be stability. It doesn't, I mean, I could call it political stability, I could call it social stability, I could call it even economic stability. Let's look at what has happened in Kenya for the last, actually eight years, especially when we had the new institutions coming up like the National Land Policy. There was quite a lot of confusion around whose mandate is where whose mandate is, I mean, who's supposed to do what, especially at the government, at the government level. And I think that's one of the main challenge which there was no clarity and the development partners could not really engage. I must say the current development partner group on land for Kenya is being chaired by FAO after USAID handed over. And we are trying actually to re-engage so as we are able to really know where, where can we put in and we're using what currently FAO is working around land governance in Kenya with the EU funding. But just to add a thing, I think within both the development partner, the government, the supply side of the institutions, there is lack of coordination. If you look at what government is doing, as I stated earlier, the NLC is doing their thing, the ministry is doing their thing, the various other agencies and institutions, Parastatos are doing their thing. Some of their processes are quite contradicting each other. There is, actually there is no coordination. And I think that is where one of the main challenges in this country is coordination. We might really want to look at how can we call, I mean, how does the Kaukang, the government want to coordinate their processes. And also, even from the angle of development personnel, how do they need to re-engage and also coordinate the work within Kenya. There's a lot of duplication of efforts, but that doesn't mean that it's bad. It could be very good, but I think coordination will be the main prioritized area for engagement within the land reform agenda. Thank you. I think that that gives us a good basis to continue our conversation. We have a fairly good picture of where we are, what is holding us back and what needs to be done to move forward. Now, let's turn to substantive issues for land reform. I'd like to ask Osuna to start us off on this with regards to gender. Osuna, how can the gender imperative for land reform be actualized? Actually, when we were discussing sometimes that when we look into gender, we only look at women, but I must state that probably for a long time and the move for affirmative action in Kenya around really engaging, targeting both men and women, but having affirmative action to target women into the whole reform agenda is quite crucial. Looking at the various aspects of the use, the participation within the planning and actually bringing everybody on board to be able to make sure they make good and conclusive decisions in a participatory way is very important. And that brings in the whole aspect of we are all equal before the law and of course the sovereign power of Kenya lies with the people that is the both men, the women and the men. And I think it's also high time. Of course, when we look at the affirmative action, they have to be controlled. So currently, for Kenya, when you're looking at the whole participation of women in the land reform agenda, but also in terms of management of the land and natural resources is quite one thing. So we might we really need to bring on board looking at the value they bring around agriculture around, you know, the whole aspect of the management of it. And I'm sure nobody will I mean looking at the customary ways nobody will really look into exploiting of the natural resources in a way that I'll just selfishly in a way that I'll just use it for me today and don't have it tomorrow. But if you look at the whole intent of even the rural women, the rural men, all about sustainable management of land and natural resources. And I think that should really be documented and should really be accepted in a way that I mean recognized in a way that is also within policy frameworks within the implementation and the execution of all the land reform agenda. The both men and women are targeting. Okay, what are your thoughts on how to ensure that gender equality is realized? I will basically start by saying this October and October for me means looking back 10 years ago will cognize the role of the rural women, not just rural women but their labor force in agricultural production. October talks about the poverty day and the face of that has been the woman. We are talking about food security or the world food day in October. Essentially, I would say that beyond simple thinking and intense, we just need to implement the constitutional provisions that promote gender equity and equality. And we do have those very clearly in the Kenyan constitution. I would basically also say that the imperative of the gender actualization should basically be faced from the political income of a gradient change by basically answering the basic questions. Who owns what in Kenya and who does what in that in this particular space and who gets what in this space and what would they do with it. These four basic questions will basically shame all of us in terms of the role of women and how we have belittled the change in the gender imperative to titling where the titling process is going on, but essentially it is affirming the men, the male dominance or the main dominance in matters land that is what need to be fixed. And if we can just answer those four basic questions, I think we are all really dry. Do you have anything to add to what was said with regards to gender? I think just a slight difference from LUMON. I think in the one area where we made substantial progress in the area of gender, at least on paper, because before the 2010 constitution, a lot of land relations were based on the fact that women's greatest concern was in terms of being a labor force for agricultural production. And the constitution recognizes two fundamental things. The constitution recognizes that one, in the past women have been discriminated against in terms of ownership of land. They have been discriminated because they were actually required to get approval from their husbands before they could get mortgages. But also secondly, that husbands would sell matrimonial property without consulting women. And the constitution now requires, A, that the matrimonial home must be the joint names of both entities. The second is that when you are mortgaging, when you're selling land, you have to get approval from your wife. So for me that's useful. The second thing that's useful is the constitution recognizes that our practices as a country, in terms of traditional cultural practices, have been discriminated against women. And Article 60 of the constitution makes provision for the elimination of those cultural practices. I think the challenge, and that's why I agree with Odenda, the challenge is the process of actualizing these provisions because of what we said in terms of the stalling of land reform have not been implemented. So when you go to rural areas, you'll find that women are still treated as secondary citizens. They are still not seen as if they own land. But then the other issue is, as we worry about dealing with land, we also must worry about the opportunities that women have. The opportunities to education, the opportunities to employment and the opportunities to capital, that they are able to also hold, use and transfer their property rights to them. Thank you. The second area of reform, one of the major areas of reform was the community land. And let's turn to that now. And Dr. Dote, can you start us off on what you see as the implications of land reforms with regards to community land rights? I think I just made the point that we have made the greatest rise agenda. The reverse is true in community land. We have made the least amount of strides in community land. And we've made the least amount of strides because for a long time, our official policy, legislative and administrative practices saw community land as what Garrett had it used to call the tragedy of the common. It needed to be converted into other forms of property. And this was despite the clear position by African scholars like Professor Ogedo, who argued against looking at Africa as community landers. When we adopted the 2010 constitution, we recognize the importance of community land. Unfortunately, the process of implementing that provision has been slower than other positions. People will remember in 2012 when we were enacting new land, community land was not a month. It's only in 2016 that we didn't enact the new land. Even when we did the regulations to operationalize it, have not been put in place. Parliament just rejects those regulations a few months ago. So we still have a law, which law has not been operationalized. This is dangerous, Michael, because if you look at areas like Tolucana, we have discovered extractives. So community land is sometimes appropriated without necessary compensation. And there are people who have argued by the time we implement the legislation, luckily we know community land to talk about. So for me, that I think is the greatest challenge in terms of the process of implementing community land. And this is critical that land reform focuses on community land because close to 80% of our land is uncommunal. If we don't deal with community land, the land reforms will be land reforms, which are land reforms in the air, and also addressing the fundamental concerns of the majority of our population in the country. Absolutely. This is also an area of major concern within your program. What do you have to add to what Dr. Ote said? Actually, I must confirm that as much as we are working around community land, we're really trying to have the aspects of the principles of the VGTs and the AU guidelines and stuff like that. But the problem has been really the recognition is very good in law around community land rights. But now the implementation of the same law is what we are waiting for. And in this, the country is being ruled by, I mean, it's under rule of law. And for this meaning that it has to be actualized through a regulation which to date actually has not been enacted or have not been approved by the National Assembly. And that definitely brings in a stop to the whole thinking or the whole practical aspects of actualizing that law till the regulations are passed through. Meaning that for anything to be legal around securing of community lands, it has to be through after the regulations have been approved. But in all, the main intent is around having it for the people and by the people. And I think this is one of the best way that people are able to manage their resources. The communities are able to manage their resources in the best sustainable way possible. And I think for me is one of the best action or best practices that the country is intending to have. And I think this also brings in the recognition around the cultures, the recognitions around the community of common interest. And also bringing the power to the people, especially around land use. It also brings in the change or the enhancement development positively around their livelihoods. And the security of tenure becomes everything in this country. So you can be able to negotiate, you can be able to decide on how you want to really land in a way that is good for you and for the people too. So our focus currently in Kenya is really on the how to be able to secure community land interests in this country. And that is what we are trying to showcase the best way possible using the national and also the international laws and practices which have worked well for communities. And I think even the definition of communities within the Kenyan constitution and the community land act actually brings out that recognition that community comes first before public and private. And I think this is very, very important to be able to be actualizing in Kenya. Denda, your thoughts? I think for me, this is the point at which, if it was fashionable, I would have said communities need to start a revolution. And the revolution for me would be the recognition, protection and registration is being circumvented by not only Kenya, but all East African countries. And this has come in the form of putting forward new legislation about the compensation in laws, which is basically trying to disabuse the new dispensation of community land regime. Because all the East African countries, Kenya inclusive, they are hell bent on a mega projects approach as the way out of our poverty, old spare economic development. But in that, they seem to forget that communities and the space which they occupy is the space that is available for infrastructure. It is the space that has and is embodied with the extractives. It is the space that it is available for green economy, blue economy, if you may. And I basically say that short of a revolution, given that we are talking about going for a referendum again on the constitutional provisions. And given that we are eight years since the propagation of the constitution and almost 10 years since we adopted the national land policy. I don't have any hope other than saying let the communities of Kenya and East Africa rise up and be counted. Okay, but we'll need to come back to this a little later because we thought when the land policy was adopted that it was quite revolutionary. But let's come to that after you have had a final conversation around digitization. We need to look at digitization is one of the key aspects of the reform process. And Husna, how is digitization addressing the underlying inconsistency land registry? How is it contributing to this reform process in a positive way? For me, like you say, the world is going digitally in so many ways. But with the aspects of documentation and the land administration, I think it's in Kenya is what the government is moving forward with. In a way that they want to document and also this means access by the users is going to be easy. But also this will in so many ways cut down on time, cut down on energy and energy will look into human resources and stuff to be able to have work done efficiently. Or inquiries done efficiently, aspects of conflicts could be pegged out. But also it's also confirmed security to so much of the information, but also centralized where you can be able to access information at whatever point you will be. Especially if everything is going to be online. This at some point also reduces corruption because within the system, we know what happens to aspects of land documentations in country. We have issues to do with files go missing. We have issues to do. Documentations are destroyed, which are in hard copy. So it's important that these things are done online and it's one of the most secured looking at the practices around other countries in the world. And for Kenya, I think the government is really trying to have this done well. I know they are also currently with the with the with our with the EU funded program, which is FAO is implementing. They are currently looking at a custom. Yes, the digitization process. They're looking into a customer portal linked to the e-citizen where you can, you know, do a lot of a transaction. But also if you look at look at this digital system also it kind of monitors and especially where. Money is involved financial and economic aspects are involved because every every other transaction will be transparent. And it is easy actually to account on the on the on the processes but also be able to account on the on the money. So for for for for me, I mean, I feel that this is one of the actually is I will say is long overdue because it is taking a while for the for the country to be able to decide what software to use what what type of land information management system the country will require how is it integrated, you know, all the land registries and how is it integrated to the financial institutions to the credit facility to other agencies of the government. I second a while but I think they're moving forward in a in a very positive step to be able to actualize the whole process. Okay, what are your thoughts. Kenya is the home of mobile money. And for me that's the best way Kenya understand digitalization. They can now reach their money and transfer it very quickly and the optimism that who's in the house is a very normative position. Actually everybody would want to have land systems digitalized so that we can see our plots on our phones as we wake up as we go all over. Since we have an attachment to land that is more than ever in the world, witnessing Kenya. However, I think that the experience we are, we have had in Kenya with the National Land Information Management System. That was Julie sponsored by the Swedish international development agents, but it's barely just gathering dust within the National Land Commission for me is a pointer of a very reluctant digitalizing digitalizing country, and that we are very busy trying to computerize very few records without even doing you care to do the ground truth thing to find out what is it that we are putting in in the digital system. Is it clean cleaned up with formation or are we digitizing disputes. The other element I would basically say that as we move towards digitalization of land records. I think it is important that as a country, we embrace freedom of of information or access to information. Because it becomes foolhardy when we start digitalizing and the only focus we seem to have is how to use digitalization to collect the tax. I think tax is important, but it's not the all of it is not the whole the whole thing. We must be very careful not to be basically embrace digitalization, simply because it allows us to collect dues on land, but rather it must facilitate the whole process of enjoying the transactions, the usage and all the imperative information that people need to utilize their land. I would say that we are too slow because we ought to be doing this all land and especially if we had done so by embracing the community land tenure regime. It really requires to be on on the platform because community land is the borderline of Kenya. If you asked me between Kenya and Uganda, where, where is the borderline coming to land? Is it digitally known? No. Between Kenya and Ethiopia, where is the borderline? It's coming to land. Is it on the platform? No. Between Tanzania and Kenya, where is the borderline coming to land? Is it on the platform? No. And I could tell you that even community land vis-a-vis the ocean, Indian Ocean, it is not on the on the on the platform that start worrying me. And basically, I would say we need to do more and we need openness, other than opaqueness while doing this. Dr. Dote, openness is, I guess, the essence of digitization. We should not have opaqueness with digitization, should we? Your thoughts on this digitization process? We shouldn't have opaqueness in digitization, but you see, our efforts at digitization only solves one problem in the land reform trajectory. It solves the process of transparency and the process of efficiency. But that is, in my view, a transactional view of land reforms. It ensures that you're able to transfer your land more effectively. It's similar to the focus the government has had over the last three years on titling. Just two days ago, I listened to the deputy president saying, you know, the solution to poverty in this country is a process of issue with title deeds. Because now people can be able to go and get loans, they can be able to trade their land well and good. But you know, the fundamental issue that requires to be solved is actually not just digitization. The fundamental issue that requires to be solved is entitlements as opposed to titling. We need to clarify who owns what land. We need to be sure those boundaries are clear. So that when we are registering, as Momba says, we don't end up registering disputes. And I think we have focused a lot on digitization and forgot to address the fundamental issue about entitlement, which is about clarifying the rights. Having said so, I'm a complete supporter of digitization because it solves one end of the spectrum. All we need to do is to ensure that is not all we do as a country, that all our process of land reforms becomes a process which is only on the process and not on the substance. Because digitization focuses on the process. It doesn't focus on the substance. We must ensure both substance and process are addressed if we must have sustainable and long lasting land defense. To remind everyone that title, title deeds don't create rights. They affirm existing rights. So unless the procedure of creating those rights is proper, having a title deed does not necessarily ensure security of that property right. We have come to the end of the five questions that we'd set for ourselves. And I'd like to just maybe go back to just a bit to delve deeper into what we've discussed. One thing that is clear is that the policy reform process has created good policies. Equally clear is the fact that those policies are not being implemented. It's a challenge for implementation both in terms of putting in the necessary legal and regulatory framework for implementation, but also just in terms of substantively implementing the policy. So the question that maybe we could round off this conversation with is what can we do, what needs to be done in order to ensure implementation. I think we've been very good as a country in the promulgation of policies, but our weakness is in having these policies adopted. Our weakness in making is almost an industry. Every policies are being produced every day, but we don't seem to reflect on what progress are we making in terms of implementation. Can I have your thoughts on how do we move to the same level of efficiency in implementation as we have in promulgation and adoption of policies. And maybe we'll start with you, Dr. Dote, as an academic. I think this conversation that we're having today is because laws and policies don't implement themselves. I think as part of implementation, there are several things we need to do. One of the things we need to do is to create awareness on the existence of those laws and policies because once people are aware, they will claim their rights. The second thing that we need to do is to ensure that institutions that are responsible for implementing the laws are manned by the right people. I want to use this opportunity, for example, say the absence of government in today's discussions is disturbing because with them we'll be able to share ideas, they'll be able to carry out some of those ideas. Hopefully next year, when the time of the National Land Commission comes to an end, it will have men and women who have the moral aptitude and who have the conviction to be able to push the land reform agenda forward. Lastly, I think we need to ensure that governments allocate sufficient resources to be able to ensure that the land reform agenda is carried forward. The civil society in a sense made wife to this reform process, I mean, and the Kenyanya Land Alliance used specifically an important role in pushing for the policy to be put in place. But now the second struggle is how to get that policy implemented. How do we do that and what role does civil society have to do and how does it have to do differently in order to make sure that that happens? I think the civil society did that, it evokes it very well. But I think we need to switch gear to implementation gear. And to do that, I think we do not want to advocate for good policies, laws and legislations or institutional frameworks and let implementers be those who are part of the problem we are fixing. Right now, the reason why we have not moved far is that we let those who are part of the problem to be the fixers. And I can tell you for free, those who are part of the problem are not part of the solution. And therefore, the civil society colleagues need to line up themselves to compete and challenge how some of these people are occupying the positions of implementation when we know they are looking backward instead of looking forward. Okay. Now, Husna, you, FAO presently chairs the donor group on land. And the donors played a key role in triggering the reform process and supporting it materially. But we also noticed that they withdrew, they kind of went off the platform once the policies were adopted. What are you guys doing now? And what would your thoughts be from your position on how we move to implementation? I know your program is about implementation. Okay, that's one, actually, is we are looking into actualization, how actually they're implementing those laws and policies into the country. But speaking in, not really on behalf, but speaking about the development partners, I think is one of the things which we really need to insist is the coordination angle to the whole discussion of land reform. And also, looking at the priority areas, again as the priorities area of focus within the development partners is very good. And one of the most important aspect is the networking aspects where you all move as a group. Because one of the things we really want to call forward to is not really institutional reforms per se, but putting strategies which stabilizes the institutions in a way that they are coordinated, they are networked and they integrate and complement each other. And this also includes the academics and also the civil society organization. So as we don't look like we are all moving in different direction, but more of complementing each other. And that's one of the aspects we really need to bring forward. So as stakeholders and with interest to the land reform to Kenya. And it's very important, yes. Okay, that's the fact that we are implementing the pollution, which is in our very major restructuring of governance. Does that bring into this discussion any challenges or opportunities? Maybe start with Odenda on this. I think it is an opportunity because we are basically the concentrating power from the center. We are basically centralizing management of land process. But I think the danger we seem to face and which we need to stand up against is a devolving corruption, abuse of power, that seems to be starting to be the face of devolution. I think that we need to really stop it. And I think we must be very alive to also, just like we are saying, we cannot afford to let other people implement reform on our behalf. I think we have done that the detriment. Some of the people that were part of the problem at the national level are now the people that are heading devolution. And I fear the danger is they have just moved from one level to another level. And all what we can see is a major danger. As we speak right now, it is very interesting that Kenyans are now even wondering how we can manage our debt if corruption at the devolve level and national level is almost eating up 60% of what we are borrowing from other people to grow our economy. And I think that is an acceptable thing. So in the same manner, we cannot expect much from devolution until we make sure that we are not devolving abuse of power and corruption alongside the whole process of a good system that we thought that the concentrating power from the presidents as it used to be at the center is the way out. Okay, Dr. Dotay, if you just round that up, we have a number of questions that we need to respond to. So do you have any words on this, the opportunities or constraints arising from devolution? I think devolution provides several opportunities. Because it involves resources, we require resources for purposes of exploiting our land and natural resources. Because it involves power, it ensures that we have people at the local level who can solve health problems. The greatest challenge we have with devolution, in addition to corruption, is that our frameworks have not clarified the place of devolution in land governance. I think that's where work is required. Because there's lack of clarity as to what the devolved units can do in terms of managing, in terms of administering and in terms of solving unaccepted limited instances like survey. And even in those, you don't see them doing as much as you'd have wanted. Okay, let's look at the questions that we have and see if we can react to them. The first question I have on the platform is from Florian. And this is a land expert both with the UN and private sector. And the question is, don't you think that enforcement goes with registration and basically land information system, a concrete translation of the policy? If we, who's not due, do you agree to answer that question? Yes, actually, I will agree, yes. And I think of some of the system, it could be, it's not actually a concrete translation of the policy, but basically is part of the translation of the policy. Because as we say, registration entails the whole process. Let's give an example of Community Land Act what it's calling for, especially in terms of registration. Before even the registration, it talks of recognition and then it talks of protection, and then basically you go to registration. And for me, is that you have to currently the way Kenya is security, everything has to go together. You cannot wait for one to be finalized because already we have existing information which needs to be regulated to be coordinated. So the registration process has to go on putting a fact that you have to first recognize what it is and bring along the aspects of protection and protection entails a lot and tells the management of the resource land. What is that, be it forest, be it waters, be it, you know, all those aspects of it and how they should be managed and basically now getting into the registration process. That's what I can say. Okay, because, okay, thank you, because we have so many questions and we are running out of time, you're going to have each one person answer a question. So the next question I'll ask you to answer, and the question is from Joe Nowino, and he says, if the politicians are supposed to provide leadership towards the implementation of the land reforms policies and legislation are reluctant because they are the major culprit, especially as far as historical injustices are concerned, where will the leadership come from? And I would like to request that we answer as briefly as possible so that we cover as many questions as we can. Then where will the leadership come from? The leadership comes from society. And as a society of Kenya, we need to produce leadership. And politics, whether good or bad, informs our economic development. And to that extent, it's our responsibility to ensure that whichever leaders we have, we hold them to account and they do what we desire. I think the idea that we get politicians and we let them go, it is very dangerous. That is what we have been having in Kenya. Once elected, we just watch as they mess up with the country and we must put a stop to this. Thank you. Collins, Adam Leach asks, thinking about coordination with government, within government, between government and donors, what is the function that long term planning can play in aligning donor funding and land reform objectives? Michael, after the NAC government came in place in 2002, there was the economic recovery strategy, ERS. And ERS was then followed up by the government justice law and order sector. Both those documents provided a long term frame of where government wanted to go, first in terms of economic development and then in terms of reforms in the government justice law and order sector. What those then did is ensure that anybody who wanted to work with the government knew what to expect and ensure that support and work was coordinated. I think long term planning helps to clarify the reform trajectory, helps to ensure that resource allocations are long term and not short term, and ensures that we avoid whims of different government agencies. And I think that's what we need to go back to in terms of the long term process. Hussein Wario asks, and we are coming to you Husna, alongside the development of legal and policy reforms around land. The country has undergone governance reform with the creation of the county governments and the pollution of various functions. I think that's a comment and it is already, I think we have already talked about the implications of that. Yeah, so the next question, so you'll have to answer this question. This is from Ruth Menzendik. Ruth asks, what is the security of Kenya for women in community lands? There is often controversy about whether discriminatory practices mean that women need individual land rights or whether they can have secure Kenya within communal lands. Where does this stand in Kenya? And she recognizes this might vary from one community to another. Actually with the legal, let me call the law in Kenya actually, this is one of the areas which, okay, let me start from the constitution. The recognition actually in Kenya, I mean the general rule and the recognition of women participation was really a stand out well. The other aspect is the inclusion within the law itself, the Community Land Act and the various other land in terms of inclusion and participation of women within the communal lands is quite key to that. And actually it's even dictates how many, you know, the general within the constitution, but within the act also, within the even the aspects of the leadership. I think the act talks of the Community Land Management committees, which actually even between 7 and 15 people, but also it breaks down who should be in those communities. But the fact remains that the recognition of adults within the community are simply so clear. So meaning that he didn't say the adults mean actually it talks of the adults, which means even if a husband and wife, it shows to be recognized a man and a woman into that community register. So that is one of the main focus around women and also within the management of those structures. And when you talk of an assembly during the decision making processes, of course the women are. But the fact remains the cultural aspects of all this, the recognition of it, the law states that, but the practice around our own cultures might really be a little challenge, a little challenge. And Odote mentioned earlier on in terms of really need to look into the awareness of this and the awareness will include actually the influencing of why women should be part of the processes within the practical processes within land governance in this country. So that is where it is now. And I use an example, one of the communities actually when you are talked about women and core ownership women and registration of their land broader question like who told you that we want to have our names on the title who told you that I want to make decision on land in my community. Those are some of the real real challenges. I might not call them challenges, but some of the real issues, especially around our rural engagement, which comes out strongly of course as a person, I'll put my culture before before the law, but the fact that brings you that you have to be ruled by the by the laws. So if there will be a claim, there'll be a complaint because some of the things need to be out, but I still insist they are one of the awareness component has to really, to really be to be done by all stakeholders within. And then again, for those who are really calling for their right after I mean whoever has a right has a responsibility. So they should be also another move of claiming your right, especially after you really understand that you have an you have a niche and also you have a percentage of participation within the land governance in this country. We have very little time, ladies and gentlemen, and we need to really push fast. Rumba is a specific question to you from Kevin Wanza. He asked you to elaborate on the maximum and minimum size of land issue that you mentioned at the beginning. You mentioned that you have not dealt with that. Can you elaborate on that? Yeah, I think it's because there are people who own land in Kenya in bigger sizes that Kenyans feel they're not utilizing all of them. And it at one time it had been pointed out that people own almost a space equivalent to our regional regional areas in terms of land. So the ideal situation was basically to make the minimum so that we offload the excessive land in the market so that other people can be distributed the land. But the issue of the minimum was basically the fragmentation of land into sizes that are not economically viable was also not helping because we have places in Kenya, which they are carrying land carrying capacity is just beyond the acceptable levels and they keep on fragmenting land beyond any reasonable usage. For example, we used to know that at least a plot of hundred is what you required at least to put up a comfortable shelter. But we now have people even only 20 by 30 or 20 by 20. And that's not just for the kiosk is what somebody deems to be habitat and you have nothing else to do. And even even for just the farming or grazing, those spaces were not done. So the reason why we have not done this, there was supposed to be the commissioning of a scientific study to determine this, this element of minimum and maximum because of the different ecological systems within our country that will require that that minimum and maximum might not be uniform, but will be varied to shoot the circumstances so that we make meaning out of it, but the essence was to limit people holding land excessively and people fragmenting land beyond any economic variability. Thank you. We have a question from Brand Eversman and he refers to the land governance assessment framework. We have an assessment report for Kenya since 2016. And he wonders whether this cannot be used to ensure participation of also mean cannot be used to guide the process going forward since it provides for participation of all stakeholders and the example is given of where Ethiopia where this has worked. Can I have Collins respond to this. Yes, I can respond to that because I was part of the Elgaf assessment for Kenya. And we actually had the conversation on presenting the findings to both the minister, Professor Kaimeni and the late PSL Maui at the University of Nairobi. The LGF assessment framework provides a very useful opportunity for reforms. Unfortunately, as soon as the reforms were presented, Kenya went into an electioneering mood. That meant that the momentum for implementation was then lost. But I think as we start the process review in our land policy, it provides very solid evidence and comparative information as to areas where we can improve so we are able to address our land reform process. Thank you. A listener on Community Land, there's a message from Carol, a question from Caroline Oako. She asks, what is the way forward for Community Land, especially where the extractives have been discovered in some counties that convince the community members to adjudicate the land saying it is more secure and easier to sell. I think that's one of the challenges. The influence of looking into adjudication and especially to private and actually there is that rush currently, even some of the group branches are really calling for their own private, I mean, what do you call it, the division of those lands to individual who can be able, one can be able to make, but it is so clear within the law, and especially if also around the benefit sharing, especially where extractives are concerned one also. But remember within the constitution, there's quite clear definition when it comes to public land, community land and private land. But also there are other policies which really entails in terms of at what level of the land, especially around the issues of surface rights and subsurface rights, how they come in and the constitution also refers to what you call it prompt, fair and just conversations. And these are some of the things you have to look at them deeply. But most of the land, if you look at an example of Turkana, we have the oil, let me use that, but the land there is not registered. So that's some of the challenges who does what, who is supposed to make those decisions in terms of the surface rights before the subsurface rights, who will give access to that discussion. And it's a whole conflict and confusion, even around how much percentage of the benefit will go back to the communities and go to the government and such type of things. So I will, I must say, there must be gray areas. So we really need to look deep into how this could also be done. Okay, but then Rachel Knight, whom both of us know has a questionnaire which goes back to the issues we were raising about implementation, quoting the example of Mozambique with their land in 2000. In 2000, she says, maybe we should think about a massive campaign in which the people demand for implementation of the policy and she wonders whether there are any plans to have a massive public campaign for implementation that would involve radio, TV, billboards, t-shirts, theater groups, everybody participating. Is Kelly thinking about this? We are thinking of it, but it has a positive value, which we need to raise resources that go to it. I can tell you that if I had resources, I said the communities need to stand up and be counted. And that process of public education, awareness raising, mobilizing and reaching out for action is the thing that Kelly loves best, but Kelly is limited to the extent of the resources or the wherewithal to do what we know best. If we are given, we don't lack leadership to steer the campaign to effective conclusion. Okay, there is a question from Oana, I'm probably not pronouncing that right, but Collins, she says Oana is from Development Bank of the Netherlands and would like the speakers' views on how, on the nexus between community rights and indigenous peoples' rights to land. Friends, can you respond to that, the nexus between community land rights and indigenous peoples' rights to land? You know, in several countries, in Latin America, where you have indigenous communities, there is a big distinction between community rights and indigenous peoples' rights. In the Kenyan context, our conversations about communities and indigenous peoples are almost intertwined. Because when we start talking about indigenous peoples, we start asking ourselves, are those the communities of the Masai, are those the Ogex, so to a limited extent you'd be looking at those kind of people. But with the community land rights, it is much more expensive. It focuses on the Ogex and the Masais, the same way it focuses on the lures and the lures. So I think the framework for community land rights recognizes the unique aspects of indigenous peoples, but also the rights of all other communities in the country. Thank you. This is really interesting, but I think we've overshot our time already. We have to wrap up and would like to let the participants know that all the questions that have been asked will be responded to by the panelists. And then they'll be responded by the panelists and the organizers will send back the answers to the participants. I think we have to stop at this point. I think we apologize that there were so many questions and there's so much to discuss and we didn't just have enough time to answer everybody. But this is an interesting conversation, which I hope will continue both online, but also within the country in Kenya. I thank the panelists and the organizers and let's hope that we'll see more come out of the land policy reform process. Thank you, Huzna. Thank you, Collins, and thank you, Linda. Thank you.