Effects of citizen engagement strategies on the legislative process of the Finance Bill, 2024, in the National Assembly of Kenya
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17252204Keywords:
Citizen engagement, Finance Bill, 2024Abstract
Citizen engagement, which is a key element of participatory communication, is the pillar of participation by members of the public in the legislative process. It is the principle measure of what defines a democracy (Mburu, 2020). It is a two-way involvement of citizens in their government’s activities and decision-making processes, fostering transparency, accountability, and collaboration to improve public policies and community well-being. Consequently, it enables citizens to share their perspectives, contribute ideas, and hold officials accountable, leading to better-informed decisions that reflect the community’s needs and values (Kiguta, 2020). Methods for engagement include public meetings and consultations, online platforms and participatory budgeting, all aiming to build trust and a stronger democratic society. This study therefore aimed at examining the role of citizen engagement in the legislative process of the Finance Bill, 2024, in Kenya’s National Assembly. Guided by Participatory Communication and Deliberative Theories, the study employed a qualitative design. The target population included 349 Members of Parliament and 2,109,284 Generation Z citizens (aged 18–28) from Nairobi, Nakuru, Mombasa, and Kisumu. A purposive and quota sample of 60 respondents was drawn: 20 MPs (including committee members, liaison officers, and key informants) and 40 youth participants in four focus groups. Piloting was done with Senators and Machakos residents. Data was collected through interviews and FGDs and analysed using NVivo 9 with both content and thematic analysis. Findings revealed that citizen engagement, especially digital activism, raised awareness and improved debate quality but had little policy impact due to weak feedback loops, partisan dominance, and institutional capacity gaps. Public participation was therefore largely symbolic, undermining trust and weakening legislative legitimacy. The study concludes that citizen engagement in Kenya’s legislative process remains superficial without neutrality, inclusivity, structured feedback, and institutional commitment. It recommends impartial facilitation, decentralized and inclusive engagement formats, and institutionalized feedback systems. Parliament should strengthen its capacity to process submissions, track amendments transparently, and demonstrate how citizen input shapes legislation. Embedding these reforms would enhance responsiveness, rebuild trust, and improve the democratic legitimacy of future bills.
Downloads
References
Adhiambo, L. C. (2018). Examining communication techniques adopted by the Senate to promote mandatory public participation in Kenya (PhD thesis, University of Nairobi).
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352.
Bwire, V. (2024). Youth engagement in policy making: Assessing perspectives from Kenyan parliamentarians, civil society, and the youth.
Campos-Domínguez, E., & Ramos-Vielba, I. (2022). Parliaments and key transformations in digital communication. In B. García-Orosa (Ed.), Digital political communication strategies (pp. 25–41). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81568-4_2
Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? Zed Books.
Cornwall, A., & Coelho, V. S. P. (2007). Spaces for change? The politics of citizen participation in new democratic arenas. In A. Cornwall & V. S. P. Coelho (Eds.), Spaces for change? (pp. 1–29). Zed Books.
Creswell, J. W. (2024). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). Sage.
Dalkin, S., Forster, N., Hodgson, P., Lhussier, M., & Carr, S. M. (2021). Using CAQDAS (NVivo) to assist realist theory generation, refinement and testing. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 24(1), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2020.1803528
Dolný, B. (2011). Possible application of deliberative democracy in parliament. Human Affairs, 21(4), 422–436. https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-011-0041-5
Fernández-Aballí Altamirano, A. (2020). The importance of Paulo Freire to communication for development and social change. In J. Servaes (Ed.), Handbook of communication for development and social change (pp. 309–327). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2014-3_76
Servaes, J. (2022). Communication for development and social change. In The Routledge handbook of nonprofit communication (pp. 23–31). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003170563-4
Servaes, L., & Servaes, J. (2021). Participatory communication for social change. In Handbook on communication for development and social change. Edward Elgar.
Thungo, J. S. (2019). The role of the Gauteng Provincial Legislature in promoting public participation (Doctoral dissertation, University of Johannesburg).
Wachira, M. (2020). Citizen participation in budget processes in Kenya. African Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 8(4), 299–317.
Weisiko, C. M. (2023). Implementing the right to public participation in the legislative process in Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi).
Wilson, A., & Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2021). Digital participatory planning: Citizen engagement, democracy, and design. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003190639
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Elijah Ichwara, Kahura Ndung’u (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Every single publication in Fastlane Journal is licensed under open-access so that anyone can read it, share it, and use it provided that the original work is being credited.
