Churches in EPAs debate: Why Not?
East African, Kenya
Churches in EPAs debate: Why Not?
Opinion
11 June 2007
Felix Okatch (“Churches’ stand on EPAs look suspicious,” The EastAfrican, May 28-June 3) wondered why churches should take a stand on a “complex matter” such as the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the European Union and the countries of Africa, Caribbean and the Pacific.
Churches represent a great majority of the Kenyan population (almost 80 per cent of Kenyans are Christians). As such, Church leaders and representatives have a moral responsibility to speak on important issues such as justice. This mandate is the core of, and the answer to the legitimacy question posed by Mr Okatch.
Churches and other faith based organisations and initiatives have been at the centre of service delivery in Kenya. Hundreds, if not thousands of health, education, rehabilitation, and other social services institutions are sponsored and run by churches. They are, therefore, relevant and intimately aware of the plight of the majority who are poor and excluded in our communities. Besides, churches represent the credible and ethical voice of morality and justice, in a society that is bedeviled by wanton injustices such as corruption and violation of human rights. Their membership is not incapable of dealing with ‘complex issues’, as the writer inferred.
As members of the Christian faith and citizens of this country, we have a right and a duty to ensure that justice is upheld in all spheres including trade policy.
The church subscribes to the principles of fairness and justice in trade. Trade therefore must serve the people and should not only be for profit. We do not think that EPAs represent these principles; instead, they are a threat to the well-being of our people and our economic development. While the churches appreciate that the objective of EPAs is to enhance sustainable development and poverty reduction through regional integration and liberalised trade, we believe that EPAs have lost sight of this objective as the net result may be the flooding of our markets with imports that will have a detrimental effects on agriculture, food security, industrial development and revenue generation for economic growth.
And for these reasons, and many more, the church will speak.
