Dear Barrack and all

I agree with you on the multistakeholder issue. There seems to be different interpretations /understanding of multi-stakeholder policy processes.

A question that was consistently raised before WCIT by stakeholders involved in the process
-“to what extend was stakeholder proposals and contributions taken into consideration when determining what position/proposals Kenya would support?

The assumption was that Kenya's position would be developed after national multistakeholder consultations. And they were several as you mention below, the Kenya IGF, the East African IGF (day two was dedicated to discussing the ITRs), and the Kenya stakeholder consultations organised by CCK. These consultations developed and produced several viewpoints, and the expectation was that these views would have been taken into account when developing the national position or "agreeing" on what proposals Kenya was to support.

This clearly did not happen.

It is therefore important to continue discussions on what multistakeholder consultations mean and how we interpret constitutional provision article 10, which states " (1) the national values and principles of governance in this 

Article binds all State organs, State officers, public officers and all persons whenever any of them–– (a) Applies or interprets this Constitution;  (b) Enacts, applies or interprets any law; or (c) Makes or implements public policy decisions. (2) The national values and principles of governance include–– (a) Patriotism, national unity, sharing and devolution of power, the rule of law, democracy and participation of the people"

In addition to discussing and getting clarity on multistakeholder policy processes, I support Dr. Ndemo's call for further national consultations to discuss some of the new provisions that have altered the nature of the ITRs. Some of these include the unprecedented expansion of Human Rights language in the preamble of the treaty, which is inconsistent with international human rights standards and precedents particularly with the shift from individual human rights to collective state rights. Are the ITRs a good place for creation of what appears to be new human rights? National consultations may consider this question and also consult with our relevant legal/human rights experts to determine if this expansion of human rights is appropriate.

By the way it is very normal for countries to sign treaties after a round of consultations at the national level.

Best
Alice