Read why those that brought the ‘Mitumba Menace” now own the problem

By Steve Umidha

Trade in second-hand clothes, popularly known as mitumba, is likely to persevere – at least for a long time, judging by the conferred interests surrounding the multibillion enterprise.

And if Raila Odinga’s logic is right – that the importation of mitumba clothes should be ‘studied’, those that brought the situation to this point, now own the problem.

Exactly 22 years ago, the US signed into law the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) whose reality has provided eligible sub-Saharan African countries like Kenya with duty-free access to the world’s most powerful market for over 1,800 products, including mitumba.

That deal – which has been in existence since May 18, 2000 is now at the heart of a crisis in Kenyan politics today.

On Monday, Mr Odinga – the presidential flag bearer of Azimio La Kenya-Oka alliance party, found himself in a tight corner over his remarks during the unveiling of the coalition’s Manifesto with suggestions that mitumba are ‘clothes from the dead.”

That contrast did not however, sit well with sector players and the opposing political outfit – Kenya Kwanza, another coalition being led by Deputy President William Ruto also eying the presidency, who defended the trade instead.

Stakeholders like Mitumba Consortium Association of Kenya (MCAK) among others have also opposed those pitches by the Azimio which is keen to ban the importation of mitumba should it ascend to power in the August 9 polls, as an effort to encourage local textile industry.

“It is very unlikely that measures to undermine the second-hand clothing industry would lead to any revival in the domestic production sector for textiles,” reacted MCAK’s Chairperson Teresia Wairimu Njenga who argued that the lobby supports over 2 million livelihoods and pays more than Sh15 billion to KRA in taxes and duties.

The mitumba business is highly lucrative because of the ever present demand – employing millions directly and indirectly, and most of whom who’d be opposed to its ban.

But of keen interest is the US preferential trade programme, AGOA, which was seen as a vital tool to bolster economic growth, promote economic and political relations between the US and member countries.

A chunk of what is consumed locally in mitumba clothing originates from America, Canada, Europe and Australia.

Loss of the Agoa textile-export deal, according to market changing aspects, would not only harm Kenya, but also US clothing manufacturers operating in the region.

But more disturbingly – any attempt to reverse the deal would create unwanted spat between the US and Kenya at a time the latter has been on the cusp of rejuvenating its bilateral affairs over concerns on the rising Chinese presence as a preferred trade partner with Africa.

The trade pact gives the region the most liberal access to the vast US market available to any country or region with which Washington does not have a free trade agreement.

Kenya’s exports to the US under Agoa have enabled the country to build a sizable textile and apparel export sector. In fact, as of 2016, Kenya had 111 firms in its export processing zones that produced most of its $634 million worth of exports.

Popular trademarks like Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger are some of the US brands that buy Kenyan apparel and clothing products.

Figures show that the sector employed over 52,000 workers and used over US$250 million in local resources and attracted in excess of US$710 million in total investments.

Those concerns were also shared by Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) CEO Kwame Owino who argued that ‘eliminating’ the multi-billion-shilling industry will not guarantee an immediate success for the domestic textile industries.

“The economics of it tells us that you can ban all mitumba but domestic industries will not necessarily thrive. People are often looking for complementary goods. People buy new clothes, such as school uniforms, but also buy the others when looking for alternative styling, said Owino in a local TV interview on Tuesday.

Such a move would also compel the government of the day to extend tax amnesties and tax incentives if the local textile industry is to thrive.

Prevailing market dynamics like the rising inflation, weakening shilling and other global threats like Covid-19, Russia-Ukraine war among others also pose serious threats to such endorsements.

Kenya, one of the largest importers of second-hand clothing in Sub-Saharan Africa, imported approximately 185,000 tonnes of second-hand clothing, approximately 8,000 containers in 2019.

Between 2015 and 2019, the country recorded a steady rise in second-hand “mitumba” imports, driven by demand for its use and exports to other countries.

Kenya is ranked the world’s largest importer of secondhand clothing, with the UK and USA among top 10 suppliers of mitumba in the country, only China delivers more such products to Kenyans. Most of such clothes are donated for charity but are sold for profit upon arrival.

According to a report by the Institute of Economic Affairs, import volumes rose from 111,000 tonnes in 2015 to 185,000 tonnes in 2019, reflecting the high demand for the goods in Kenya. In the same period, the nominal value of the imports rose by 80 percent to Sh18 billion.