FROM KIOO CHA JAMII TO THE SENATE: A REFLECTION ON THE CREATIVE ECONOMY SUPPORT BILL 2024.

It started as a simple idea—bringing together creatives and legal experts working within Creative Industry in Kenya in a space designed to amplify voices often drowned out in policy discussions. 

On Thursday 29th August 2024, at the cozy offices that are Baraza Media Lab, Keystone Park, we held our inaugural Kioo Cha Jamii sitting! We sat down – baraza style – and listened to both artists and legal experts dissect the Creative Economy Support Bill 2024 with an intent to understand its implications. 

Was the Bill really what we needed as an industry? Did it cure some of the ills already being faced within the industry? Most importantly, did it offer any plausible solutions or a way forward?

People from all over Kenya’s artistic sector showed up in numbers, which was impressive. The energy in the room also showed that artists are ready to fight for their place in the economy.

We learned about the Bill’s possible roots from professionals who worked on previous policies in the same area. They told us that the current Bill was a messed-up version of what was originally planned in policy. The National Music Policy of 2006 was mentioned as a guideline by Ms. Suzanne Gachukia, who was there with hip-hop star Budhha Blaze. 

At said time – 2006 – four main issues stuck out:

  1. A lack of proficiency training in the arts in Kenya (talent not being complimented by actual study);
  2. The need to grow and develop the Kenyan music market;
  3. The need for funding;
  4. The possible establishment of a body to aid in the creation of ‘as proper as can’ be structures within the space.

It is a cautious assumption to be made that the National Music Policy 2015 might be a child of this policy. This is however not the subject of this article.

Back to Kioo Cha Jamii.

What emerged from the session on Thursday was clear—the bill had potential, but there were glaring mischiefs. It promised support, but it left too much to interpretation. For example:

  1. There was language that felt dangerously vague, and underlying issues that sparked concern over whether it truly sought to empower creatives or simply exert control;
  2. The creation of a discriminatory Creative Fund that was on the face of it in contravention of Article 26 of the constitution of Kenya 2010 on ‘Freedom from discrimination’;
  3. The lumping of all Creative Industry sub-sectors under the governorship of one Creative Guild left little to no room for the unique challenges each sub-sector faced;
  4. The impracticability and proposed bureaucracy that the Guild would introduce to an already informal sector grappling to establish structures as is it;
  5. The inclusion of mandates that are already occupied by other state agencies such as KECOBO and KIPI;
  6. The over-extension of the mandate of the Ministry for Trade in key decision-making processes within the Creative Industry.

By the end of the session, there was a pulpable feeling in the room – the Bill needed to be completely overhauled or thrown out.

Fast forward to Monday, September 2nd 2024. 

The public hearing hosted by the Senate Committee for the Ministry of Trade, Investments and Industry, was buzzing with contributions—contributions that had largely stemmed from forums like ours. The Senators were surprised, pleasantly so, at the number of submissions they had received. More than 80! But what they might not have realized was that this response wasn’t an accident. It was the result of creatives banding together, demanding that their voices be heard, and ensuring that the bill wouldn’t pass without thorough scrutiny.

At the heart of the issue was the provision granting broad powers to the Cabinet Secretary for Trade, a department seemingly disconnected from the realities of the creative economy. The bill proposed that the CS appoint individuals to run the Guild without requiring any qualifications or proficiency in the creative arts—a clear misstep and a perfect example of how bureaucratic mischief can be hidden in seemingly well-intentioned legislation. 

Why? 

Artists need a system that reflects their diversity, not one that bundles them into one guild or appoints leaders with no real connection to their world. Each sub-sector, from film to music, requires its own guild, led by experts with a deep understanding of the challenges they face. 

We also proposed for the deletion of certain sections and the expansion of others. 

We then questioned;

  1. The mandate of Senate to propose Bills that touch on functions of National Assembly:
  2. The seeming over legislation of the Creative Sector when we already had two Bills before Parliament in the form of the Culture Bill 2024 and The Creative Industries Bill 2023:
  3. The omission of criteria/ qualifications for one to be part of the Board of the Guild;
  4. The optional stance of Parliament to choose whether or not to allocate money to the Creative Fund – another ‘may’ and shaaaall’ conversation;
  5. The proposed interference in Intellectual Property (IP) infringement matters by the Guild when IP is a private right.

P.s if you would like to receive a copy of the full memo that we sent to Parliament please send an email to info@artlawkenya.com requesting the same.

The sponsor of the Bill, Senator Eddy Oketch made an attempt to defend the Bill citing that the ambiguity of the Bill was intentional. In his reasoning, he wanted us to appreciate that the Bill may not encompass everything we wanted, but it would at least get us through the door whereupon we could then draft subsidiary legislation and regulations to enforce it better.

Sitting before the Senate, we couldn’t help but feel a sense of responsibility. The discussions in that room echoed what we had passionately debated at Kioo Cha Jamii just days before. We had started a conversation, and now, it was being heard at the highest levels.

But this is just the beginning. The bill, while flawed, has sparked a much-needed dialogue. The creative community, once marginalized in these discussions, is now more united and ready to demand meaningful change. 

We are told that the Bill will go back for amendment by the Committee, having listened to our concerns, whereupon it shall be taken to the Senate to be voted upon. If passed, it shall progress to the House of the National Assembly and we shall have a second time to air our views at its next public participation stage

As we left the Senate hearing, one thing was clear—this isn’t just about the Creative Economy Support Bill anymore. It’s about ensuring that the voices of artists across Kenya continue to be heard, not only in forums and meetings but where it matters most: in the legislative halls shaping their futures. The road ahead is long, but the message from Kioo Cha Jamii to the Senate was simple: creatives are watching, and we will hold them accountable.

VIVA!

Immaculate Juma

Immaculate Juma is an Advocate (of the High Court of Kenya) and a creative whose inclination towards the arts has largely influenced her practice in areas of law including Intellectual Property Rights and Management, Music and Entertainment Law, Art Law, Privacy and Image Rights, Software licensing and Employment Law. She completed her Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) from The University of Nairobi and has previously worked at Mohammed Muigai Advocates, J. Louis Onguto Advocates and the Karen Village Arts Cultural and Heritage Centre. Additionally, she holds a Certificate in Copyright Law from Harvard Law School from the CopyrightX Program; a distance-learning initiative of Harvard Law School and the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society.

Leave a Reply