President William during the AIC Fellowship Annex 8th Anniversary thanksgiving service in Kesses Constituency, Uasin Gishu County, on March 9, 2025. [File, Standard]
In the wake of President William Ruto’s latest reshuffle, which saw ODM leader Raila Odinga’s political acolytes make more gains in government, it is becoming clear he intends to keep changing to suit the moment.
But it is not him changing. Rather, he is making those who work with or under him anticipate change all the time. They must always be prepared for redeployment, demotion or sacking. But the lucky ones may get promoted.
In just three years, Ruto has reshuffled his Cabinet thrice, dissolved it once and reorganised it four times. Two ambassadorial redeployments have also happened, with the latest Principal Secretaries’ reshuffle that saw his broad-based government devotee, Raila Odinga’s, allies included in various old and new dockets.
Sources hint that Ruto will, for the fifth time, be reshuffling his Cabinet by the end of this month where anti-government voices, such as Public Service and Human Capital Development Cabinet Secretary Justin Muturi, will be shown the door. He will also be seeking to fill the gender docket that has remained without a CS since the dissolution of the Cabinet in July 11 last year.
Ruto’s surprise reorganisation of government has left many who enjoyed State resources and trappings of power exposed and in the cold, and their capabilities dented as Kenyans doubt whether they have been shown the door due to their inadequacies or poor performance.
In his recent reshuffle, former ICT Principal Secretary, Edward Kisiang’ani, infamous for repeated attempts at curtailing media freedoms, was sacked and reappointed as a member of President Ruto’s council of economic advisors. 14 persons were appointed PSs and six were moved.
Those appointed included former Nyeri Deputy Governor Caroline Karugu who was nominated as PS for East African Affairs, replacing Abdi Dubart. Karugu was part of the team that lead Raila’s flopped bid to be the Africa Union Commission’s chairperson. She served as Raila’s Deputy Chief Agent in the 2022 General Elections.
Boniface Makokha replaced James Muhati in the Economic Planning Department, with Regina Ombam taking over from Alfred K’Ombudo in Trade.
Those who were moved included Belio Kipsang’, who was transferred from Basic Education to Immigration and Citizen Services docket. He switched jobs with Julius Bitok. Former Kenya Medical Practitioners and Dentists Union Secretary General Ouma Oluga was nominated as PS for Medical Services in the Health ministry.
Others were Jane Imbunya (Public Service and Human Capital Development), Abdulrazak Shaukat (Science, Research and Innovation), Michael Lenasalon (Devolution) and Carren Achieng (Children Welfare Services).
On December 19 last year, Ruto made sweeping changes in his Cabinet that led to the removal of Margaret Nyambura and Andrew Karanja from key ministerial positions of ICT and Agriculture and Livestock Development respectively.
Nyambura was appointed as Kenya’s High Commissioner to Ghana, but she turned it down, while Karanja was nominated as Kenya’s Ambassador to Brazil.
Their positions were taken by former Kiambu Governor William Kabogo and former Nyeri Senator Mutahi Kagwe.
The Cabinet reshuffle also included a significant shake-up of State corporations and foreign service appointments.
Notable among these were Ndiritu Muriithi, who was named chairperson of the Kenya Revenue Authority board and Ababu Namwamba, who was appointed Permanent Representative to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations Office in Nairobi (UNON).
In July 11 last year, at the height of Gen Z protests, President Ruto fired 12 CSs as he promised citizens that he would run a lean government following the withdrawal of the Finance Act 2024 that was among the key drivers of protests by the youths. He also announced sweeping austerity measures to curb wastage of public funds.
Before the country learnt that only 12 out of Ruto’s Cabinet would be dropped, he had dissolved his Cabinet and only left Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi and former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua in charge of all dockets.
Those fired included Aisha Jumwa (Gender) Eliud Owalo (ICT) Mithika Linturi (Agriculture) Njuguna Ndung’u (Treasury), Ezekiel Machogu (Education) Ababu Namwamba (Youth) Moses Kuria (Public Service) Susan Nakhumicha (Health) Florence Bore (Labour) Simon Chelugui (Co-operatives) Penina Malonza (EAC) and Zacharia Njeru (Water).
In Ruto’s first Cabinet reshuffle on October 4, 2023, some of his ministers who were prone to gaffes, gaudy and outrageous public utterances were taken to less visible dockets.
They included the moot Moses Kuria, who was moved from Trade to Public Service. Alfred Mutua was also transferred from Foreign and Diaspora Affairs to Tourism and Wildlife.
Alice Wahome, who had been in the news after she clashed with her Principal Secretary, was removed from the Ministry of Water and Irrigation to Lands, Public Works, Housing and Urban Development.
At the same time, eight Principal Secretaries were affected by the new changes. Among those who were shuffled were Dr Paul Ronoh, who is now in charge of Crops and Development, Veronica Nduva (Performance and Delivery Management), Anne Wang’ombe (Gender and Affirmative Action), Idris Dokota (Department of Cabinet Affairs) and Shadrack Mwadime who took charge at the Labour and Skills Development ministry.
Julius Korir has been moved to Water and Irrigation while Harsama Kello is now in Asal and Regional Development. Geoffrey Kaituko will now head Shipping and Maritime Affairs.
With his ever changing Cabinet, Ruto seems to be seeking to impress Raila Odinga to form a political vehicle for his re-election. But this has seen him create a bloated government, a decision that goes against his very own assurance that he would operate on a lean government.
Gitile Naituli, a lecturer at Multi Media University, opines that the formation of the broad based government is not a political masterstroke but a betrayal of the people. He argues that despite claims that the new formation was meant to foster national unity, it was only about self-preservation, political patronage, and entrenching a culture of elite deal-making at the expense of ordinary Kenyans.
“Kenya was promised a lean, efficient government. Instead, what we are witnessing is an expansion of government offices to accommodate political allies and neutralise opposition voices. This is not leadership. It is conmanship of the highest order,” Prof Naituli says.
He stresses that Ruto ascended to power on the promise of running a government that would be different and pledged to cut unnecessary spending, reduce wastage, and channel resources towards economic relief for struggling Kenyans but ended up doing the opposite.
“His administration constantly lectured the public on the importance of financial discipline, asking Kenyans to tighten their belts. Yet, after the Gen Z protests on July 19, 2024, which demanded accountability and real change, Ruto has chosen not to fix the governance failures that sparked the unrest. Instead, he has expanded government positions to accommodate political allies. This is a complete reversal of the pledges he made to the electorate. It exposes a dangerous pattern, one where campaign promises are mere words to win votes, not commitments to be honoured,” Naituli avers.
“While ordinary Kenyans endure relentless tax hikes, high inflation, and skyrocketing costs of living, the political elite are busy creating more government positions for their convenience. The Ruto administration preaches austerity and financial discipline yet engages in political excesses.”
On his part, Charles Ng’ang’a, a don at the Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT), says “Ruto’s actions indicate that he preaches water while drinking wine” warning that Kenyans will have to endure until 2027 when they will decide whether they will “vote along tribal lines or vote based on their conscience.
In the wake of President William Ruto’s latest reshuffle, which saw ODM leader Raila Odinga’s political acolytes make more gains in government, it is becoming clear he intends to keep changing to suit the moment.
But it is not him changing. Rather, he is making those who work with or under him anticipate change all the time. They must always be prepared for redeployment, demotion or sacking. But the lucky ones may get promoted. In just three years, Ruto has reshuffled his Cabinet thrice, dissolved it once and reorganised it four times.
Two ambassadorial redeployments have also happened, with the latest Principal Secretaries’ reshuffle that saw his broad-based government devotee, Raila Odinga’s, allies included in various old and new dockets.
Sources hint that Ruto will, for the fifth time, be reshuffling his Cabinet by the end of this month where anti-government voices, such as Public Service and Human Capital Development Cabinet Secretary Justin Muturi, will be shown the door. He will also be seeking to fill the gender docket that has remained without a CS since the dissolution of the Cabinet in July 11 last year.
Ruto’s surprise reorganisation of government has left many who enjoyed State resources and trappings of power exposed and in the cold, and their capabilities dented as Kenyans doubt whether they have been shown the door due to their inadequacies or poor performance.
In his recent reshuffle, former ICT Principal Secretary, Edward Kisiang’ani, infamous for repeated attempts at curtailing media freedoms, was sacked and reappointed as a member of President Ruto’s council of economic advisors.
Those appointed included former Nyeri Deputy Governor Caroline Karugu who was nominated as PS for East African Affairs, replacing Abdi Dubart. Karugu was part of the team that lead Raila’s flopped bid to be the Africa Union Commission’s chairperson. She served as Raila’s Deputy Chief Agent in the 2022 General Elections.
Boniface Makokha replaced James Muhati in the Economic Planning Department, with Regina Ombam taking over from Alfred K’Ombudo in Trade.
Those who were moved included Belio Kipsang’, who was transferred from Basic Education to Immigration and Citizen Services docket. He switched jobs with Julius Bitok. Former Kenya Medical Practitioners and Dentists Union Secretary General Ouma Oluga was nominated as PS for Medical Services in the Health ministry.
Others were Jane Imbunya (Public Service and Human Capital Development), Abdulrazak Shaukat (Science, Research and Innovation), Michael Lenasalon (Devolution) and Carren Achieng (Children Welfare Services).
On December 19 last year, Ruto made sweeping changes in his Cabinet that led to the removal of Margaret Nyambura and Andrew Karanja from key ministerial positions of ICT and Agriculture and Livestock Development respectively.
Nyambura was appointed as Kenya’s High Commissioner to Ghana, but she turned it down, while Karanja was nominated as Kenya’s Ambassador to Brazil.
Their positions were taken by former Kiambu Governor William Kabogo and former Nyeri Senator Mutahi Kagwe.
The Cabinet reshuffle also included a significant shake-up of State corporations and foreign service appointments.
Notable among these were Ndiritu Muriithi, who was named chairperson of the Kenya Revenue Authority board and Ababu Namwamba, who was appointed Permanent Representative to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations Office in Nairobi (UNON).
In July 11 last year, at the height of Gen Z protests, President Ruto fired 12 CSs as he promised citizens that he would run a lean government following the withdrawal of the Finance Act 2024 that was among the key drivers of protests by the youths. He also announced sweeping austerity measures to curb wastage of public funds.
Before the country learnt that only 12 out of Ruto’s Cabinet would be dropped, he had dissolved his Cabinet and only left Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi and former Deputy President Rigathi Gachagua in charge of all dockets.
Those fired included Aisha Jumwa (Gender) Eliud Owalo (ICT) Mithika Linturi (Agriculture) Njuguna Ndung’u (Treasury), Ezekiel Machogu (Education) Ababu Namwamba (Youth) Moses Kuria (Public Service) Susan Nakhumicha (Health) Florence Bore (Labour) Simon Chelugui (Co-operatives) Penina Malonza (EAC) and Zacharia Njeru (Water).
In Ruto’s first Cabinet reshuffle on October 4, 2023, some of his ministers who were prone to gaffes, gaudy and outrageous public utterances were taken to less visible dockets.
They included the moot Moses Kuria, who was moved from Trade to Public Service. Alfred Mutua was also transferred from Foreign and Diaspora Affairs to Tourism and Wildlife.
Alice Wahome, who had been in the news after she clashed with her Principal Secretary, was removed from the Ministry of Water and Irrigation to Lands, Public Works, Housing and Urban Development.
At the same time, eight Principal Secretaries were affected by the new changes. Among those who were shuffled were Dr Paul Ronoh, who is now in charge of Crops and Development, Veronica Nduva (Performance and Delivery Management), Anne Wang’ombe (Gender and Affirmative Action), Idris Dokota (Department of Cabinet Affairs) and Shadrack Mwadime who took charge at the Labour and Skills Development ministry.
Julius Korir has been moved to Water and Irrigation while Harsama Kello is now in Asal and Regional Development. Geoffrey Kaituko will now head Shipping and Maritime Affairs.
With his ever changing Cabinet, Ruto seems to be seeking to impress Raila Odinga to form a political vehicle for his re-election. But this has seen him create a bloated government, a decision that goes against his very own assurance that he would operate on a lean government.
Gitile Naituli, a lecturer at Multi Media University, opines that the formation of the broad based government is not a political masterstroke but a betrayal of the people. He argues that despite claims that the new formation was meant to foster national unity, it was only about self-preservation, political patronage, and entrenching a culture of elite deal-making at the expense of ordinary Kenyans.
“Kenya was promised a lean, efficient government. Instead, what we are witnessing is an expansion of government offices to accommodate political allies and neutralise opposition voices. This is not leadership. It is conmanship of the highest order,” Prof Naituli says.
He stresses that Ruto ascended to power on the promise of running a government that would be different and pledged to cut unnecessary spending, reduce wastage, and channel resources towards economic relief for struggling Kenyans but ended up doing the opposite.
“His administration constantly lectured the public on the importance of financial discipline, asking Kenyans to tighten their belts. Yet, after the Gen Z protests on July 19, 2024, which demanded accountability and real change, Ruto has chosen not to fix the governance failures that sparked the unrest. Instead, he has expanded government positions to accommodate political allies. This is a complete reversal of the pledges he made to the electorate. It exposes a dangerous pattern, one where campaign promises are mere words to win votes, not commitments to be honoured,” Naituli avers.
“While ordinary Kenyans endure relentless tax hikes, high inflation, and skyrocketing costs of living, the political elite are busy creating more government positions for their convenience. The Ruto administration preaches austerity and financial discipline yet engages in political excesses.”
On his part, Charles Ng’ang’a, a don at the Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT), says “Ruto’s actions indicate that he preaches water while drinking wine” warning that Kenyans will have to endure until 2027 when they will decide whether they will “vote along tribal lines or vote based on their conscience. Ndungu Gachane, The Standard
Tunisia faces increasing concerns over a rollback of freedoms under President Kais Saied [Getty]
Tunisia has said it is withdrawing from the human rights court of the African Union, as rights groups denounce another rollback on freedoms in the increasingly authoritarian North African nation.
Tunisia announced in a declaration circulated by activists since Thursday "the withdrawal of its recognition of the competence of the (African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights) to accept cases from individuals and non-governmental organisations".
The statement did not provide a reason for the government's withdrawal from the Arusha-based court, which is tasked with enforcing the AU's human rights charter.
The Tunisian foreign ministry did not respond to AFP's requests to comment.
Tunisia had granted its citizens and NGOs the right to petition the court in 2017 after it emerged as the only surviving democracy from the Arab Spring of 2011.
Kais Saied was elected president in 2019 but in 2021 he staged a sweeping power grab and human rights groups have since raised concerns over a rollback on freedoms.
A number of his leading critics are currently behind bars.
Some are being prosecuted in an ongoing mass trial on charges of plotting against the state. Human rights groups have denounced the case as politically motivated.
In May 2023, the relatives of four detained opposition figures, including Ennahdha party leader Rached Ghannouchi, filed a case with the African court demanding their release.
In August, the court ruled against Tunisia, urging authorities to stop preventing the detainees from accessing their lawyers and doctors.
The Tunisian League for Human Rights (LTDH) denounced Tunisia's withdrawal from the court as a decision "taken secretly".
It said the move was "a dangerous step backwards and an attempt to withdraw from independent judicial institutions capable of fighting impunity and guaranteeing justice".
Tunisian human rights group, the CRLDHT, said the withdrawal "nullifies a historic commitment" to the court and was "a shameful renunciation" of Tunisian pledges to protect human rights.
"This decision now deprives Tunisian citizens and human rights organisations of the ability to bring cases directly before the African court to challenge state violations," it said. The New Arab & Agencies
In a dramatic twist of fate, Prof Edward Waswa Kisiang’ani has been unceremoniously dropped as Principal Secretary for Broadcasting and Telecommunications and reassigned as an adviser to President William Ruto.
This follows his controversial directive barring government advertisements in private media, particularly the Standard Media Group, for being “anti-government.” While his reassignment may seem like a routine government reshuffle, it is, in reality, a disgraceful downfall of a man who once used the same media he sought to destroy, to build his own relevance.
Kisiang’ani’s story is a textbook example of political hypocrisy and should serve as a warning to those who believe they can weaponize state power against independent journalism.
Before his appointment as PS, Kisiang’ani was a frequent guest on TV political panels, where he gained prominence as an outspoken critic of the Uhuru Kenyatta administration. He leveraged media platforms such as Citizen TV, KTN, and NTV to push his political views and build his brand as an academic and political analyst.
During the heated 2022 elections, he was a vocal defender of William Ruto’s presidential campaign, using the same media he later sought to undermine to advance his personal and political interests. Kisiang’ani made a name by calling out what he claimed were media biases against Ruto.
Ironically, once in government, he did exactly what he had accused the previous administration of — turning the media into an enemy when it refused to align with state propaganda.
Once he secured a powerful government position, Kisiang’ani wasted no time in trying to silence the very platforms that gave him a voice. His directive that all government advertising be channeled exclusively through the Kenya Broadcasting Corporation (KBC) was not only a financial attack on independent media but a blatant attempt to control the national narrative.
His war against independent media quickly became a public relations nightmare for the Ruto administration. His move sparked immediate backlash from media stakeholders, legal experts, and civil society, leading to lawsuits and increased scrutiny of the government’s commitment to press freedom.
The Law Society of Kenya took legal action, arguing that Kisiang’ani’s directive was unconstitutional and violated the principles of a free press. The Kenya Media Sector Working Group (KMSWG), a coalition of over 20 media associations, condemned the move as an attempt to financially cripple independent media houses that dared to hold the government accountable.
Soon, it became evident that Kisiang’ani had become a liability to the Kenya Kwanza administration. His dismissal as PS was a desperate attempt by the government to distance itself from the controversy he created. However, rather than holding him accountable, Ruto simply reassigned him as an adviser — an indication that his loyalty was still valued.
Kisiang’ani’s downfall should be a clear warning to all public officials who believe they can use their positions to attack independent journalism.
The government may protect them for a while, but when the pressure becomes too much, they are quickly discarded. The media is not an enemy of the state — it is the Fourth Estate, an essential pillar of democracy that holds those in power accountable. Those who seek to silence it are bound to fail. His story is also a reminder that political loyalty does not guarantee protection. Today’s enforcer can easily become tomorrow’s scapegoat.
While Kisiang’ani’s removal as PS is significant, it does not necessarily mean the government is abandoning its anti-media tactics. His directive to shift all government advertisements to KBC has not been officially rescinded, meaning private media houses continue to suffer financial strain.
If the government is serious about upholding press freedom, it must rescind Kisiang’ani’s directive and ensure government advertising is allocated fairly across all media houses; stop intimidation of journalists, who expose corruption and government failures and respect the role of the media as an independent institution that serves the public, not the ruling elite. By Jim Bonnie, The Standard
I have been following debates on the legality of the political developments in and around Juba. The parameters asserted by various lawyers appear, to some extent, misconceived.
In an opinion dated March 13, 2025, published on Radio Tamazuj, one lawyer seemed to contend that the circumstances surrounding Dr. Riek Machar’s home amounted to false imprisonment. The learned author appeared to conflate law with politics, even though some legal principles may overlap with political considerations. The innocent and unsuspecting public may be misled by his conclusion that “surrounding Dr. Machar’s residence with forces met the criteria of false imprisonment.”
This conclusion, to me, is contradictory, considering both past and contemporary legal and political trajectories. Understanding this issue requires placing various legal principles, including but not limited to the definition of false imprisonment, into context.
What Does the Law Say?
The notion of false imprisonment in South Sudan’s legal system can be traced back to the Magna Carta of 1215, an early constitutional instrument in Europe that prohibited the deprivation of personal liberty in a manner not provided for by law. Common law courts have since addressed numerous cases of false imprisonment, including two notable cases: Bird v. Jones [1845] 7 QB 742 and Meering v. Grahame-White Aviation Co. Ltd (1920) 122 LT 44. In Bird v. Jones, Lord Denman CJ of the High Court of England and Wales stated:
“Every restraint of a man’s liberty under the custody of another, whether in a gaol, house, stocks, or in the street, is in law an imprisonment; and whenever it is done without proper authority, it is a false imprisonment, for which the law provides a remedy.”
False imprisonment is both a civil and criminal wrong and is actionable per se.
Upon gaining independence in 2011, South Sudan inherited several legal systems, including English law, whose features are present in various legislations, such as the South Sudan Penal Code Act of 2008. While the Penal Code Act does not explicitly provide for the offense of false imprisonment, Section 284 addresses wrongful confinement. It states that whoever confines a person in such a manner as to prevent them from proceeding beyond certain circumscribing limits commits the offense of wrongful confinement. However, it is unclear whether the lawyer’s conclusion on false imprisonment was made in the context of a crime or a tort.
From the 1845 English definition of false imprisonment, a key element is the absence of “proper authority.” This definition has remained consistent. The latest legal definition of “false imprisonment” in Black’s Law Dictionary (12th Edition) describes it as the restraint of a person in a bounded area without justification or consent. The key elements here are “without justification or consent.” Before concluding that surrounding Dr. Machar’s residence amounts to false imprisonment, it is imperative to address these key elements: the absence of proper authority or justification, and the lack of consent. I will elaborate on this below to put the matter to rest.
Authority
The contentious issue is whether the person who ordered the deployment of forces around Dr. Machar’s residence had proper authority or justification. In the current political hierarchy, Dr. Machar, as the First Vice-President, enjoys immunity and can only be deprived of his liberty upon orders from the President if the issue is political. Such authority falls within the constitutional powers of the President of the Republic. There is no dispute that the President has proper authority.
Article 1.5.1.1 of the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS), 2018, stipulates that H.E. Salva Kiir Mayardit shall continue as the President of the Republic of South Sudan. Among other functions, the President has the power to preserve and protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of South Sudan (Article 1.6.2.1 of the R-ARCSS) and to perform any other function as prescribed by the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan (TCRSS), 2011 (as amended), the Agreement, and the law (Article 1.6.2.20 of the R-ARCSS).
Article 101(a) of the Transitional Constitution of South Sudan, 2011 (as amended), mandates the President to preserve the security of South Sudan and protect its territorial integrity. Under the current legal system, the President, vested with the power to preserve South Sudan’s security, can order forces to surround any residence, even that of the First Vice President. Some lawyers might argue that such an action violates the R-ARCSS. However, surrounding Dr. Machar’s residence with forces, if ordered by the President in the interest of safety and security, falls within the constitutional powers entrusted to the President. There is no inconsistency in the exercise of such powers that would invoke the Supremacy Clause of the Agreement under Article 8.2 of the R-ARCSS. I would therefore contend that the President had proper authority, and as such, there is nothing illegal about the confinement.
Justification
Having proper justification implies that there must be a valid reason for a particular action. Was there justification for the deployment of forces around Dr. Machar’s residence? The answer could reasonably be yes.
Given the controversial nature of the revitalized agreement, it can be argued that following the Nasir incident, security around Dr. Machar’s home was necessary for his personal safety. Another justification could be preventive detention, aimed at restraining Dr. Machar from reverting to his military constituency, which could escalate tensions.
From the above analysis, there is no convincing evidence that surrounding Dr. Machar’s home amounts to false imprisonment in law. The lawyer’s opinion appears to be more political than legal. As to whether the courts can determine the legality of the situation, the political question doctrine may currently hinder such a determination.
At this stage, the immediate solution lies not in the law but in the ability of the President and his First Deputy to agree that the country’s interests supersede their own. Two competing political interests should not overshadow the interests of the honourable citizens of South Sudan.
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj. Radio Tamazuj
Women from diverse communities gathered at West Herts College to commemorate this year’s International Women’s Day. They spoke about great things they do but their focus was on mental well-ness. The event was hosted by Spiced in Watford Cooking Experience founded by Eva Mbiru. It has been supported by Watford Football Club, Chamber of Commerce, Rennie Grove Peace Hospice Care and Rotary Club.
The event was attended by Watford MP Matt Turmaine, PC Dani Howlett-Bolton -Community Engagement Officer, CLLR Rabi Martins, Guest Speaker Neelam Chalwa and others. Singer LadyPruu ensured all were entertained. The aim of Spiced in Watford cooking series is to create a conducive environment where anyone going through mental stress at home or workplace can meet other people going through the same to chat and socialize while cooking.Experts have argued that cooking activity can nourish the body, the mind and soul. Others see it as an experimental therapy.
Speaking during the meeting, MP for Watford Matt Turmaine said:
“We should remember what we think about International Women’s Day not just as one day of the year event but every day. Women have such a great hard time across the world, different regimes do not respect and treat women in the way that they should- in this country we struggle with what we call glass ceiling and equal pay even though its more than 50 years since equal pay was introduced by Barbara Castle and still, we don’t have equal pay. In relation to mental health, it’s a big health crisis and we really need to recognize that. There is a lot of health inequalities we experience that we have in the society. “
The MP said he is doing something to address that. The Guest Speaker Neelam Chalwa spoke on the importance of creating more awareness on Mental Health. She said,
“Tell people what mental health is. Mental health is not a negative word, it needs pampering. It needs looking after. “
She said although we cannot change the world, we should try to change the life even of one person. She urged all attending to prioritise looking after themselves to ensure their mental well-ness.
During the panel talk, different experts and leaders also in different fields shared about what they do and how they could be contacted in the future engagement. The key message to all women attending was to look after themselves and others for a better society.
Informer East Africa is a UK based diaspora Newspaper. It is a unique platform connecting East Africans at home and abroad through news dissemination. It is a forum to learn together, grow together and get entertained at the same time.
To advertise events or products, get in touch by info [at] informereastafrica [dot] com or call +447957636854. If you have an issue or a story, get in touch with the editor through editor[at] informereastafrica [dot] com or call +447886544135.
We also accept donations from our supporters. Please click on "donate". Your donations will go along way in supporting the newspaper.
