An Analysis of the Livestock Bill, 2024

Introduction

On 27^th June 2024, the leader of Majority at the National Assembly introduced the Livestock Bill 2024 (the Bill) to the National Assembly. However, the Bill was withdrawn by the legislator on 8^th August 2024 after there were uproars from members of the public about the contents of the Bill. Consequently, the National Assembly recommended that the State Department of Livestock to conduct comprehensive public participation on the Bill.

The proposed Bill sought to only apply to livestock, livestock inputs and livestock products, and other value chain actors within the livestock sector. It also excluded its application from veterinary medicines and dairy industry which are regulated under the Veterinary Surgeons and Veterinary Para-Professionals Act and the Dairy Industry Act respectively. Additionally, there is a proposed Veterinary Practice and Veterinary Medicines Bill, 2024 that is currently in Parliament.

This paper first discusses the legality of the Bill to address the questions raised by a section of citizens about it on social media. Thereafter, it highlights some of the proposals contained in the Bill and its implications. Lastly, the paper concludes by unearthing key legal issues in the Bill and proposing some amendments to the Bill to address the defects identified.

Constitutionality of the Bill

The constitutionality of the Bill originating from the National Assembly has been put to question. The Constitution of Kenya, 2010 (the Constitution), under Article 109 (4), provides that a Bill concerning county government may originate in the National Assembly or the Senate. This Bill originating from the National Assembly is well within the constitutional confines. However, to fully comply with constitutional requirements, the Bill will have to be taken to the Senate for consideration before it can be tabled to the President to be assented to.

In relation to the contents of the Bill; it acknowledges the role of the national government on agricultural policy formation as dictated by Article 186 of the Constitution as read with the First Schedule of the Constitution. Furthermore, the Bill embodies the provisions of Article 189 of the Constitution with the seamless linking of national and county government roles.

Key Proposals by the Bill

The Bill proposes the establishment of the Livestock Inputs and Products Regulatory Authority which is set to replace the National Livestock Development and Promotion Service. The Authority will be tasked to perform the following functions:

1. regulation of the production, manufacture, importation, exportation, distribution and sale of animal feedstuff;
2. regulation of animal breeding and genetic valuation;
3. protection and monitor of animal genetic resources;
4. regulate the use of equipment used in the livestock sector;
5. regulate production, processing, sale and importation of hive products;
6. set standards for livestock infrastructure;
7. keep a national record of livestock value chain actors such as breeders, breeder associations, animal feeds dealers, beekeepers and other livestock input and products service providers;
8. set standards for the rearing of draught and other domestic animals;
9. conduct inspections;
10. register and license dealers in livestock inputs and livestock products.

Additionally, there is a proposal calling for the CECs in charge of livestock in each county to recommend candidates for the position of Authority compliance officers. Accordingly, 49 compliance officers/inspectors who have been lawfully designated to each county will conduct inspections on behalf of the Authority. In addition, anyone who produces, preserves, packages, stores, or transports goods subject to its regulations may have compliance officers enter their property. However, the officers require the owner’s permission or to be in possession of a warrant that has been granted by a magistrate or judge to enter dwelling houses.

The compliance officers also have the authority to take samples for examination to the Authority’s laboratory or to seize any animal feed or livestock products. An analysis certificate shall be issued to that effect with the restriction that it should not be used for advertisement. The inspection also includes motor vehicles or aircraft carrying livestock inputs and goods. Further, the inspectors are authorised to examine any books, records, or papers pertaining to feeds or animal products. Failure to comply with the compliance officers’ demands is considered an infraction that, upon conviction, carries a maximum fine of Ksh50,000 a maximum sentence of 3 months in jail, or both.

The Bill introduces restrictions on mixing, compounding, manufacture, importation and sale of declared animal feedstuff with specified standards by the Authority. On conviction, an offence against these restrictions is Ksh 500,000 or at most 12 months imprisonment or both. Persons seeking to manufacture animal feedstuff for sale require a licence from the Authority.

The Bill also regulates the identification and commercial breeding of animals. Animals reared for local commercial purposes must be attached with specified identification codes prescribed in the Bill. There is also a requirement for licensing of reproductive and genetics technology service centres.

The Bill also proposes additional institutional bodies to further regulate and improve the livestock sector. These institutions include:

1. Kenya Livestock Research Organisation – research on livestock inputs, products, diseases and come up with technologies to improve the sector.
2. Livestock and Livestock Products Marketing Board – promote goods standards for production and marketing livestock products.
3. Kenya Veterinary Vaccines Institute – conduct research and production of efficacious and affordable veterinary vaccines.
4. Kenya Tsetse and Trypanosomiasis Eradication Council – ensure the eradication of tsetse and trypanosomiasis.
5. Kenya Animal Genetic Resources Centre – regulation, production, storage and management of animal genetic resources.
6. Kenya Leather Development Authority – promotion of good practice in the use of leather and marketing leather products.
7. Reinstatement of research institutes established under the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation Act which shall perform semi-autonomous functions while also conducting some responsibilities of the Research Organisation established by the Bill.

These new institutions replace the existing institutions in their respective fields and the staff in those institutions will be adopted in the news ones.

In addition to the new proposals, the Bill proposes amendments to other Acts of Parliament such as the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Act (Cap 319), Fertilizers and Animal Foodstuffs Act (Cap 345) and the Veterinary Surgeons and Veterinary Para-professionals Act (Cap 366). Further to the rules in the Bill, the Cabinet Secretary is mandated to formulate new regulations relating to animal breeding, feedstuffs, beekeeping and any other regulation relevant to give effect to the Bill.

Amendment Proposals to the Bill

First, the exclusion of veterinary medicine from the Bill’s application is to a fault. The rearing of livestock and production of livestock products is heavily dependent on the services of veterinary officers. Excluding them from implementing the Bill will significantly inhibit the impact of the new laws that have been introduced. It is also imperative to note that these officers are actively involved in control of movement of animals, disease surveillance and animal treatment.

To this effect, it is proposed that the compliance officers’ mandate be linked with the livestock health/veterinary officers under the county governments attached to every sub-county and wards. This ensures that the local experts in livestock production at the grassroot level are actively involved in improving the livestock sector. The infusion of the mandate of the compliance officers in the Bill and county livestock health officers will provide an effective implementation system at the core of the livestock sector.

Secondly, the Bill’s proposal to impose a fine of Ksh500,000 or 12 months imprisonment on violation of use of feedstuff that is not declared by the Authority is unreasonable. This is in the sense that it does not distinguish between domestic production and commercial production. It is unreasonable to fine such amount of fees on domestic production as it is on commercial production.

In the alternative, this paper proposes that the Bill introduces a separate fine of less amount on domestic production or do away with fining domestic production entirely. The rational for this is that local farmers who use cheaply available feedstuffs to feed their livestock do not have the capacity to pay such amounts of fines. Majority do not have the capacity to fully comply with the set standards as envisaged in the Bill and therefore they are set to suffer more from the punitive fines imposed.

Third, the Bill seeks to regulate commercial breeding and rearing of livestock for commercial purposes. These provisions are not alive to the realities in the country, especially amongst small-scale farmers. Most farmers rear livestock for domestic purposes primarily, however, on occurrence of emergency financial demands, these livestock provide an avenue to realise funds to offset their liabilities.

Consequently, such sale of livestock can be construed as commercial rearing of livestock within the framework of the Bill and as such small-scale farmers may be fined for violation of the regulations therein. To this end, the Bill needs to specifically define what commercial rearing of livestock entails not to prejudice small-scale domestic farmers who may need to make some money during emergencies.

Fourth, the Bill contains a number of blanket provisions that grant the Cabinet Secretary (CS) a lot of powers in formulating additional regulations. A clear indication of this is Section 97 on beekeeping which basically provides that the CS in consultation with the Council of Governors will provide regulations. This a blatant obfuscation of legislative procedure as it seeks to bypass pertinent constitutional requirements like public participation and stakeholder engagements. The Bill should therefore provide adequate provisions to fill the blanket provisions and only leave the additional regulations to provide procedural guidance.

Penultimately, the lack of security element in the Bill is to a fault. In the wake of cattle rustling and theft, the livestock sector has been significantly impacted. The issuing of movement permits by livestock health/veterinary officers has not been sufficient to curb theft of livestock. In many instances, such officers are unfairly accused of colluding with the livestock thieves just because of issuing movement permits.

This paper proposes that the Bill introduces a security element to the disease control and animal movement regulations. There needs to be a requirement requiring a farmer or livestock dealer to first obtain a letter or assurance from a security officer, either the police or local administration, before applying for animal movement permits. This will significantly curb animal theft and movement of stolen livestock in the country. It is worth noting that the proposal to brand animals is effective to curb theft, however, the same is only limited to livestock reared for commercial purpose.

Lastly, the blanket provisions such Section 93 on beehive keeping grants the Cabinet Secretary unfettered powers to provide Regulations. Whilst it is common for there to be additional regulations to an Act of parliament, such roles to Cabinet Secretaries should not be absolute. The provision of the Cabinet Secretary only consulting the Council of Governors, or the Authority is not enough. The Bill should include provisions to mandate the Cabinet Secretary to consult widely with relevant stakeholders and also conduct public participation before issuing regulations.

Conclusion

The introduction of the Livestock Bill to the laws regulating agriculture in Kenya will significantly improve the sector. The proposals in the Bill seek to provides standards and governmental support to livestock farmers to ensure improvement in production. However, the Bill has a number of provisions that are detrimental especially to small-scale livestock farmers. This paper has proposed amendments to the Bill to cushion such farmers from harsh laws that overshadow the intention of the Bill. With the Bill now returned to the State Department of Livestock for them to conduct public participation, it is imperative that the proposals herein are considered.