Nairobi Woman Representative Esther Passaris has stirred debate with her recent remarks targeting Kenyans living abroad. In her statement during a parliamentary session, Passaris accused the diaspora community of unfairly criticizing President William Ruto and his policies, including flagship projects like affordable housing and universal healthcare. While her intentions might be to defend the government’s efforts, her tone and arguments miss the mark. Here’s why Passaris should not attempt to dictate how Kenyans abroad view or comment on the government.
The Diaspora’s Right to Critique
Kenyans abroad, often referred to as the diaspora, play a vital role in the country’s economy. Despite being far from home, they remain deeply connected to Kenya, sending billions of shillings back annually to support their families and communities. This financial contribution makes them key stakeholders in national affairs. Passaris’s assertion that they should refrain from criticizing the president because they “probably have never even voted” or “don’t send taxes to Kenya” is not only inaccurate but also dismissive of their influence.
It’s worth noting that voting logistics for the diaspora remain challenging, limiting their participation in elections. However, this does not invalidate their right to voice their opinions. Democracy thrives on diverse perspectives, and the diaspora’s insights are shaped by their exposure to global governance standards. Instead of silencing their voices, leaders should listen and engage constructively.
Accountability is Not Negativity
Passaris’s plea for patience with the Kenya Kwanza government overlooks a fundamental principle of governance: accountability. Her claim that “no president had taken over during challenging times like him” may be true, but it should not shield the administration from scrutiny. Critiquing government policies is not equivalent to branding the president a liar; it is a call for better performance and transparency.
For example, the housing tax, which Passaris praised, has faced backlash because of its implementation and perceived inequity. While affordable housing is a noble goal, questions about transparency in fund utilization remain unanswered. Similarly, the restructuring of healthcare contributions has raised concerns about its fairness to low-income earners. These are legitimate concerns that deserve answers, not dismissal as noise from uninformed critics.
The Need for Honest Conversations
Passaris argues that “there is no one who can make a promise and deliver it when things beyond their control come into play.” While external factors like global economic challenges are valid, they do not excuse the government from its commitments. Leaders must communicate openly about obstacles and adjust expectations transparently, rather than expect blind faith.
Kenyans abroad, like those at home, demand tangible results. Housing projects and healthcare reforms are long-term initiatives, but their success depends on careful planning and execution. Criticism arises when citizens perceive gaps between promises and reality, such as delayed projects or lack of visible impact. Leaders should acknowledge these frustrations instead of dismissing them.
A Broader Perspective on Taxes
Passaris’s defense of increased taxes for housing and healthcare highlights a significant issue: the trust deficit between the government and citizens. Her statement that “a businessman earning a million shillings is morally wrong to pay Ksh500 for NHIF” oversimplifies a complex issue. While progressive taxation is essential for equity, the government must ensure that increased taxes translate into better services.
Critics of the housing tax argue that it disproportionately burdens middle- and low-income earners without addressing systemic inefficiencies. Similarly, the healthcare tax has sparked concerns about governance in the new Social Health Authority. These are valid points that demand attention, not dismissal as unpatriotic complaints.
Why Leaders Should Embrace Criticism
Instead of trying to silence critics, leaders like Passaris should view criticism as an opportunity to improve. Kenyans abroad offer a unique perspective, informed by their experiences in countries with more advanced infrastructure and governance systems. Their critique of policies is often aimed at ensuring Kenya’s growth aligns with global best practices.
Passaris’s claim that Ruto is “a hardworking and focused president” may hold merit, but hard work alone does not guarantee results. Effective governance requires listening to citizens, addressing their concerns, and adapting strategies. The diaspora’s input can enrich this process, provided leaders approach it with an open mind.
Esther Passaris’s remarks reflect a growing tendency among some leaders to conflate criticism with disloyalty. This approach risks alienating Kenyans abroad, whose contributions to the nation’s development are undeniable. Instead of dictating how the diaspora should view the government, leaders should focus on building trust and delivering tangible results.
Democracy flourishes when citizens, both at home and abroad, are free to express their views without fear of dismissal or ridicule. Constructive criticism is not an attack; it is a call for accountability and progress. Passaris and other leaders should recognize this and engage in honest, inclusive dialogue with all Kenyans.
This inclusive approach will not only foster unity but also ensure that policies truly address the needs of all citizens, paving the way for a stronger, more prosperous Kenya.
