Category Archives: Governance

The Hague imefika!

D-Day in the form of H-Day came calling for the junior half of the digital duo on September 11, 2013. Kenya’s Deputy President Mr. William Kipchirchir Samoei arap Ruto, stripped of his eagle-eyed Recce security guards and the trappings and reverence that comes with the second most powerful office in Kenya was paraded in front of a panel of stone-faced judges at The Hague (hence H-Day). Juxtaposed with this comeuppance of an occupant of a hitherto “untouchable” office was the futile and frankly simpletonic vote by the country’s legislature to pull the country out of the Rome Statute that formalized the International Criminal Court (ICC). A basic reading and understanding of the pull-out process by the Jubilee-controlled parliament would have informed this band, presumably of lawyers, that the process to pull out from the ICC takes at least one year from the time the UN SecGen receives the letter formalizing Kenya’s exit from the body. But even more pertinent to the raison d’etre for parliament’s desire to pull Kenya from the ICC is the rule that cases already being heard by the court are not affected by a country’s decision to pull out of the treaty! The charges facing Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto are already being heard by the ICC

For the 1300+ Kenyans who lost their loved ones and the close to one-half million who bore the brunt of the post-election violence of 2007, seeing Mr. Ruto (and Mr. Sang) being held accountable for the pain and suffering they are accused of fomenting and causing must be cathartic. It is something Kenyans have not witnessed since independence: the high and mighty, stripped of their self-importance and protection, being called to account for the crimes they are accused of.

I will forever say this: The impunity and wanton disregard for the human and civil rights of Kenyans that the country’s elite has acted with over the years finally landed them in trouble; with a force that has more power and deeper pockets than all of them combined; and I am glad!

I have to say that the cases against Mr. Ruto and Mr. Sang could have started out much smoother than they did. Ms. Bensouda appeared unprepared and in a moment that harkens back to the petition filed by Mr. Odinga’s CORD Party, as not helped by a tardy witness and an aggressive and bombastic all-foreign defense team headed by Mr. Karim Ahmed Khan. http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Why+Karim+Khan+stands+tall+among+his+peers+in+battle+/-/1056/1988990/-/143p2cgz/-/index.html Evidence from CORD, for those who care, was famously declared “time-barred” by Kenya’s highest court. And while the ruling was deemed within the guidelines established by the Constitution, it left a bitter taste in the mouths of supporters of CORD who felt let down, AGAIN, by a judiciary geared towards serving the rich and powerful and maintaining the status quo!

Fortunately for the victims of the post-election violence and in a sharp departure from the decision made by Chief Justice William Mutunga’s court re: CORD’s petition, the presiding judge at The Hague Nigerian Mr. Eboe Osuji, while admonishing the chief prosecutor Fatou Besouda for her lack of preparedness, decided to adjourn the proceedings and give Ms. Bensouda time to present her first witness rather than use their tardiness as an excuse to completely disallow their testimony. http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000093331&story_title=court-adjourns-in-ruto-sang-icc-case I would imagine that the decision by Mr. Osuji, who was the principal prosecution appeals counsel at the Special Court for Sierra Leone in the case of Charles Taylor, the former President of Liberia was based on the import of the case; something most CORDians would have wanted during the presidential petition, a case most, including myself, saw in similar light.

At the risk of sounding glib, given the argument hatched by Mr. Katwa Kigen that the case against his client KASS Radio DJ Julius Sang is an assault on the Kalenjin way of life, I am glad that the case is being tried by an African in a courtroom presided by yet another African! http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Kalenjin+way+of+life+on+trial+says+lawyer+Katwa+Kigen/-/1056/1989102/-/7rd3hcz/-/index.html. The infamous “they” say that justice is blind and that “one’s perception is their reality”. I would pay top dollars to hear the Gambian/Nigerian members of the team prosecuting the case against Mr. Sang call out the race-baiting bull&%@t of a fellow African Katwa Kigen! To quote my ten-year old son, that would be “sweet!”

For all the blustery, confrontational and inflammatory utterances by the two principal lawyers – Mr. Khan and Mr. Kigen – the cases against their clients Mr. Ruto and Mr. Sang will respectively run through their course unimpeded and unadulterated: In the case of the deputy president and his boss the president, the cases will be heard by a judicial body that is so far removed from the sphere of their (executive) influence that ordinary Kenyans could never have imagined.

As written in previous articles, the high-priced lawyers, especially the ones representing the two principals, paid for by the fortunes of the country’s richest family, may successfully argue dismissal or acquittal for both the president and his deputy. If that were to happen, I would not be happy. I would be disappointed because to date, no one would have been held accountable for the death and destruction wrought upon the weak and innocent in Kiambaa, Kibera, Kisumu, Nakuru, Naivasha etc. On the other hand and in a uniquely Kenyan meme, if no one was to be brought to account for the hate crimes that shocked the entire world in 2007/2008, I would most likely join fellow Kenyans who have this strange ability to “accept and move on” from one unpopular and grossly unjust decision to the next so long as their “sons and daughters” remain in power.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under 2013 Presidential Elections, Elections, Failed State, Governance, Governance - Kenya, IDPs, International Criminal Court - ICC, Justice, Kenya, Law & Order, The Hague, Tribalism, Tribe

Stop Politicizing the (fill in the blank)

President Uhuru Kenyatta has told his nemesis Raila Odinga to “stop politicizing” the land issue. http://www.news24.co.ke/National/News/Uhuru-tells-off-Raila-on-land-issue-20130902 The senior half of the digital duo also lambasted the vanquished head of CORD to stop politicizing the value-added Tax (VAT) recently implemented by Jubilee government. http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/business/2013/09/stop-politicizing-vat-law-uhuru-tells-raila/. And if that was not enough, The Hague-bound Son of Jomo may as well accuse Son of Jaramogi, his father’s chief rival, of engineering his summons, along with his deputy’s, to The Hague! http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/How+ICC+and+Raila+created+coalition+of+the+accused/-/1064/1634576/-/2r1hjxz/-/index.html Frankly I am waiting for Mr. Kenyatta and his sycophants to call on Mr. Odinga to “stop politicizing” the Syrian government’s alleged use of chemical weapons against the rebels!

The glaring irony is that the same man accusing his chief political enemy of politicizing land ownership, bread-and-butter/economic issues and the on-going trials at The Hague is in point of fact doing the very same thing: Talk about huevos or chutzpah!

Mr. Kenyatta recently “handed” out title deeds to folks in the voter-rich and CORD-leaning region of the Coast. http://standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000093358&story_title=disputes-stalk-president-uhuru-kenyatta-coast-title-deeds&pageNo=2 I am sure he did this out of the kindness of his heart and not because he was looking ahead to the 2018 elections. That Son of Jomo is incredibly altruistic!

The national budget delivered by Mr. Henry K. Rotich, President Kenyatta’s Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury on June 13, 2013 outlined the broad development policies of the Jubilee coalition including its commitment to seal “…leakages in our revenue collection…and extending the tax base while ensuring efficiency in public expenditure.”http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/The+full+Kenya+Budget+speech+2013/-/539546/1881852/-/view/printVersion/-/535sgq/-/index.html. I am neither an economist nor an expert on budgetary matters but I interpreted the line about “extending the tax base” to mean implementation of a policy along the lines of a value added tax (VAT) the two scions of Kenya’s political titans are wrangling over.

Finally, the one issue that I would bet my Man U jersey keeps Kenyatta Fils awake at night is the one issue he, Mr. Kenyatta, used as a vehicle to Kenya’s presidency! Upon being accused of crimes against humanity by the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC Mr. Ocampo, Mr. Kenyatta and co-suspect Mr. Ruto formed a “coalition of the accused” and with his mother, Kenya’s former first lady Ms. Ngina Kenyatta leading the various “prayer rallies” across the populous regions of Central and Rift Valley, the two accused transformed the summons to The Hague into a tyranny of numbers all the way to Kenya’s presidency; the ultimate politicization of the charges facing the digital duo. http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000032591&pageNo=1

UK is beginning to sound like George W. Bush and the Republicans, especially in the wake of the 9/11 tragedy when Son of Bush famously told those who decried his gun slinging response to the event and pursuant foreign policy that “they are with us or against us.”http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/11/06/gen.attack.on.terror/

 Anyone who questions Mr. Kenyatta’s policies or positions on issues of national import is either “a tool of the west,” “anti-development,” “un-patriotric,” “politicizing the issue” or engaging in some yet-to-be-named nefarious behavior.

Memo to Mr. Kenyatta:

As much as you and your supporters would love for him to go away, Raila Odinga is the face and voice of Kenya’s opposition. Like you, he is a politician and looks at most issues through a political lens. Mr. Odinga is as much a “patriot” and “development-minded” as you are. And incase y’all had forgotten, Mr. Odinga is also Kenyan!

Remind Kenyans again how you and William Ruto ended up winning the presidency, CJ Mutunga’s ruling notwithstanding?

What’s that?

You and Mr. Ruto had a “better vision for Kenya?”

Sure you did…and you were able to wrap that vision in an anti-ICC/anti-The Hague/Xenophobic shuka at the various “prayer rallies” held “throughout” the country all the way to the presidency. By running for the presidency despite the charges facing you and your running mate, you dared the criminal court to try (and convict) the president and deputy president of a member state. And while presidential campaigns are by “political”, you Mr. President have continued to wrap your presidency using the same shuka you used during the (political) campaign. You have continued to draw on the energy generated at the “prayer rallies” during the campaigns by continuing to politicize the issue.

“Jamba”, who recently took a position on charges facing him at The Hague…not as a “personal challenge”, but as the “duly elected president of the sovereign Republic of Kenya”? I will help you out: It is you. Mr. President, you famously said that the charges facing you at The Hague were “personal challenges” that will not spill over into your role if elected to the presidency. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/11/kenya-elections-presidential-debate

Well sir you are now the president of Kenya.

That Kenya, ‘ere the decision by The Hague not to run your trial and that of your digital twin Mr. Ruto simultaneously, run the risk of being rudderless were you and Mr. Ruto to face the “foreigners” at the ICC at the same time is the direct result of your politicization of your (collective) charges.

Bw. Rais, it is disingenuous and blatantly hypocritical to accuse Mr. Odinga of “politicizing” issues that matter to Kenya and Kenyans even as you and your sycophants do the same.

Fool me once, shame on you

Fool me twice, shame on me

Fool me thrice; I must be Kenyan!

Leave a comment

Filed under 2013 Presidential Elections, Democracy, Elections, Failed State, Governance, Governance - Kenya, International Criminal Court - ICC, Justice, Kenya, Land, Land Ownership, Politics, The Hague

Dadi Ameleta Peremende: Daddy has brought sweets!

In a previous piece titled “Kusema Na Kutenda – To Say and To Do”, I wrote that “Mr. Kenyatta also needs to deal with the internally-displaced persons (IDPs) AND the land issue without the platitudinous and perfunctory ‘land is a means of production but not something to always fight for. Let us work together in finding a permanent solution to this problem’ line from his stump speeches.”

https://thetwoninetyonetracker.com/2013/04/26/kusema-na-kutenda/

Recent decisions by POK (President of Kenya) point to Kenyatta Son indeed attempting to deal with the country’s seemingly intractable issue of land ownership and its corollary the internally-displaced persons (IDPs). The president recently issued title deeds to over 60,000 residents of the Coast and while the move was welcomed by some, indeed long overdue, the secrecy and haphazard nature of the process does not bode well for the long-term resolution of the land issue.

http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000092360&story_title=uhuru-issues-titles-as-jubilee-bets-on-land-to-woo-coast

On the surface, one can argue that the president “semad” and is now “tendaring” as in he campaigned on the issue of land and is now carrying out the (campaign) promise. While I give Mr. Kenyatta kudos for tackling Kenya’s problem of land ownership, I question the process he appears to be using to tackle the problem. To a lesser extent and not as vociferously, I also question his motives.

http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000092362&story_title=celebration-as-president-issues-land-papers

The process was reportedly secretive and in my opinion, harkened back to the days of Kenyatta Pere and his successor Mr. Moi when allocation of land and approval of the loans to buy said land was done in secrecy and benefitted a select few. Mr. Najib Shamsan of the Kenya Land Alliance was quoted as warning “…that the titles being issued could attract a court battle against the commission if there are reports of discrimination in giving land in settlement schemes.”  Mr. Shamsan went on to claim that “there were serious disputes in settlement schemes such as Mwembe Legeza and Ziwa la Ng’ombe in Mombasa and Kijipwa in Kilifi and we doubt whether this has been sorted out.

The perception of “political interference” and diktats by Mr. Kenyatta’s appointee and Lands Secretary Ms. Charity Ngilu runs the risk of creating the same outcome that Mr. Kenyatta’s father Jomo created when he and those close to him interfered with the distribution of land, especially in the Coastal region of the country and in the “white highlands” of the Rift Valley.

Demand for (and issuance of) free land contravened the agreements reached with the colonizers that private property should be protected not to mention the ideological sensibilities that land should be earned not granted.” The foregoing is a quote paraphrased from Daniel Branch’s book KENYA: Between hope and despair, 1963-2011 (Pge, 91). The quote speaks to the pitfalls surrounding ownership and issuance of land that faced Kenya shortly after she attained her independence.

The following quote is from the chairman of the Commission of inquiry on Illegal and Irregular Allocations of Public Lands (2003/2004) aka Ndungu Land Commission Mr. Paul Ndungu before he gave the presentation titled “Tackling land related corruption in Kenya”: Mr. Ndungu told those gathered that “The land laws inherited from the British had literally vested the whole Country in the President, and he and his advisors naturally felt that, just as the British Monarch had the power to alienate land as he pleased, it was perfectly in order for the President to use the same powers in favour of whoever he wished.”

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/RPDLPROGRAM/Resources/459596-1161903702549/S2_Ndungu.pdf

Mr. Uhuru Kenyatta runs the risk of repeating the errant ways of his father if he continues along the monarchical path of land issuance sans consultation with others in the government and by near-royal decree.

I will generously file the fact that the National Land Commission and the Cabinet Secretariat (of Land) do not appear to speak with a unified voice under the heading “growing pains” as a result of the New Constitution. Having said that, I will also point out that the disjointed voice between the two entities underscores the import Mr. Kenyatta should attach to ensuring that the handling of this most sensitive of issues, one at the center of the country’s numerous tribal clashes, be done so in a manner that is beyond reproach and with the sensitivity deserving of an issue that is critical to the stability of the country.

Finally, Mr. Uhuru Kenyatta studied Political Economics at the exclusive and expensive Amherst College in Amherst, Massachusetts; arguably one of the best liberal arts colleges in the United States. He is neither dumb nor naive. The man affectionately referred to as “Njamba” has also demonstrated a keen understanding of history, especially Kenya’s. It would be very unfortunate were he to repeat the mistakes of his father on this very issue of land ownership by allocating or granting land to people in a manner that may be construed as favoring political supporters and with an eye towards upcoming elections.

At the risk of repeating myself, it is this approach to governance that set Kenya on the path towards the tribal animus that erupted into full-scale violence in 2007 and landed Kenyatta Son in front of Ms. Fatou Bensouda on charges of crimes against humanity.

Leave a comment

Filed under Corruption, Failed State, Governance, IDPs, Justice, Kenya, Land, Land Ownership, Land-grabbing

Finally!

It has been a long and painful five-year journey with twists and turns that would make for a great who-done-it caper worthy of Sir Arthur Conan Doyles’ penmanship. Unfortunately for the family and friends of the 1200+ Kenyans who died, some in the most horrific of circumstances including being locked then set alight inside a place usually reserved for those seeking the calming grace of their deity, the horrors of their beloved country’s darkest moment live in infamy to this very day.

Starting off as the “Ocampo Six” charged, by then-Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Argentinean Luis Gabriel Moreno Ocampo, with crimes against humanity related to the post-election violence that engulfed Kenya in the wake of the disputed presidential elections of 2007, Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto, Francis Muthaura, Mohammed Ali, Henry Kosgey and Joshua Arap Sang became the “Ocampo Four” as the prosecution was unable to confirm charges against former police commissioner Mohammed Ali and former Industrialization Minister Henry Kosgey. The four soon became three as the ICC prosecution dropped charges against the former Cabinet Secretary Mr. Muthaura following the discrediting of a key witness.

Gambian Ms. Fatou Bensouda who took over from Mr. Moreno Ocampo has diligently worked through the legal labyrinth of obstacles – some valid and others deliberate – including allegations of bribery and intimidation of witnesses not to mention the election of two of the remaining three suspects to the presidency and deputy presidency of Kenya. It is the possible and eventual election of Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto as President and Deputy President that drew the much-derided and in equal parts applauded “choices have consequences” comment by then-US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Johnnie Carson.

http://elections.nation.co.ke/news/-/1631868/1687566/-/p86h8fz/-/index.html

I have a different take on the consequences Mr. Carson was alluding to.

That the 3 suspects are being tried at The Hague instead of Kenya or Arusha is the consequence of  an elite and ruling class that has repeatedly acted with impunity including detaining, torturing and murdering their opponents, perceived and otherwise. Mr. Kenyatta, Mr. Ruto and Mr. Sang have been tripped by a (Kenyan) legal system that has the reputation of being susceptible to manipulation and influence by the rich and powerful. As a consequence, they are now facing a legal system that is comparatively unforgiving and unyielding and very expensive!

Methinks that the accused, especially the president and his deputy, shot themselves in the foot with their intense lobbying to get the proceedings delayed and re-located locally; certainly away from The Hague. Said maneuvers played into the hands of those who believe that given Kenya’s past, it would be very difficult, almost impossible to try the two principals, Uhuru Kenyatta in particular, locally without interference and manipulation by the country’s political elites. All one has to do is pick up recent copies of local newspapers such as Daily Nation and they will see how incompetent and untrustworthy Kenya’s judiciary has been when faced with politically-charged cases:

Those responsible for the assassinations of JM Kariuki, Tom Mboya and Robert Ouko, allegedly at the behest of Presidents Kenyatta Pere and Moi respectively, have never been brought to justice, including the “big man” who was identified by the convicted assassin Nahashon Isaac Njenga Njoroge as the force behind the murder of Tom Mboya.

I also believe that the delaying tactics were designed to whittle down the number of victims willing to testify against the 3 suspects, sway public opinion against the proceedings and eventually compel the ICC to try the cases locally. Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto were indeed able to sway public opinion in their favor and ride the anti-ICC wave to the presidency and deputy presidency respectively. They were also successful in whittling down the number of those willing to testify against them, allegedly through bribery and intimidation. Fortunately, their efforts did not sway the required 2/3rds majority of judges to vote in favor of moving the cases from The Hague.

The guilty are afraid, so goes the title of one of Mr. René Lodge Brabazon Raymond aka James Hadley Chase’s books.

If the suspects have nothing to hide and enough evidence to sustain said claim of innocence, they should not worry about the venue of the trials. The president and his deputy also have services of the best legal teams money can buy. Mr. Kenyatta in particular has access to the Kenyatta fortune and given the coalition (with Mr. Ruto) of the suspects; a union of two person facing charges at The Hague, the two should have no problem funding their legal team(s) to fight Ms. Bensouda at The Hague

Consequences indeed!

Leave a comment

Filed under 2013 Presidential Elections, Corruption, Democracy, Elections, Failed State, Governance, Governance - Kenya, IDPs, International Criminal Court - ICC, Justice, Kenya, Law & Order, Politics, The Hague

Liaisons Dangereuse: Kenya’s new BFFs

In the article titled “Kirubi joins Uhuru’s business entourage in China” in the August 17, 2013 issue of Capital News, the publication’s owner Mr. Chris Kirubi contends that “…it was time for Africa to look for new development partners who will strive to ensure that all parties get a fair share of the cake”.

http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/2013/08/kirubi-joins-uhurus-business-entourage-in-china/

This is a very interesting perspective from a man whose business empire was built courtesy of a system that restricted enjoyment of “matundu ya uhuru” to a handful of those connected to Kenya’s presidencies: the very antithesis of what the article is advocating! The distribution of Kenya’s national cake has historically been unfair and slanted in favor of specific tribes and regions – those in power or proximal to the center of power. Additionally, Mr. Kirubi’s call for “partners” that “ensure that all parties get a fair share…” reeks of contrivance given some of the business deals that built his wealth. Regarding privatization of Kenya’s telecommunication sector in, Charles Hornsby writes in his book Kenya: A history since Independence that “(T)he resulting dirty tricks and bribery allegation….led to a single preferred bidder, the Mount Kenya Consortium including wealthy…insider Chris Kirubi”; a “favoured son” who made his money in the 1980s and 1990s because of his association with then-president Moi. (pges. 642, 655). So much for giving all parties a fair share!

The tycoon then goes on to say that the west “focus(es) more on problem solving rather than helping ‘us’ develop” which begs the question: Whose responsibility is it to develop “us”? Added to this question is the raison d’etre of the current presidential junket to China and Russia. Why is Mr. Kenyatta, Mr. Kirubi and the other “tycoons” visiting these two emerging markets if not to seek their help in “helping us (Kenya) develop”?

It is disturbingly disingenuous for Mr. Kirubi to claim that western companies “pitched camp in Kenya…but there was still little to show for it” when the very core of his business empire is an off-shoot of western companies. DJ CK, as the budding media mogul is also known, acquired Haco Industries from a western country – Holland – in 1998 and built it into the powerhouse that it is by expanding its product line, hitherto predominated by American and British brands, to include indigenous consumer brands such as TCB and Palmers. The trajectory of Mr. Kirubi’s crown jewel belies the claim that there is “little to show for...” the long history of western involvement in Kenya’s economy. It is also a claim that seeks to minimize the main reasons why Kenya’s economy has lagged despite the history of western involvement: Corruption, tribalism and impunity.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2011/11/16/meet-chris-kirubi-mr-kenya/

While I support the expansion of Kenya’s business relationships beyond the usual suspects i.e. western conglomerates, I think Mr. Kirubi is doing the country a disservice by pretending that the new relationships (with the Chinese and the Russians) are going to be different from the business relationships of yesteryears; deals between Kenya’s political elite and politically-connected and the west, especially Gt. Britain. The perspective that these new eastward looking unions are altruistic and will lead to fairer distribution of wealth and opportunities throughout Kenya is yet to be seen. These are liaisons dangereuse being pushed primarily by those trying to blunt the tough stance adopted by the west, USA and Gt. Britain in particular, with respect to the charges facing the president Mr. Kenyatta and his deputy Mr. Ruto at The Hague.

Mr. Kirubi’s conclusion that the new relationship with China is beneficial, presumably to Kenya, “(A)s long as it is equitable and Africa itself gains to the maximum…” is a perspective he should have applied in his stewardship of Uchumi, the supermarket chain he allegedly ran to the ground. It is a perspective belied by the analysis of Mr. Kirubi’s time as chairman of the board at the supermarket chain offered by Prof. Atieno Ndede Amadi in her book CHALLENGES OF THE DIGITAL AGE: An MIS Analysis Framework: The Case Study of a Retail Store Chain. Ms. Ndede Amadi writes that “Kirubi is pointed as the key to all the mess that led to the collapse of Uchumi.” (Pge. 34).

Finally and Mr. Kirubi’s personal ruminations notwithstanding, the call for an “equitable” relationship with China, not to mention one that allows “Africa itself to gain to the maximum” is a perspective that I hope will be reflected in the actual actions and policies of Mr. Kirubi and the country’s leadership as it fumbles and bumbles its way towards a second century of independence. 

Leave a comment

Filed under BRICs, China, Corruption, Democracy, Disparity - Income Distribution, Governance, Governance - Kenya, India, International Relations/Global Issues, Kenya, Politics, Russia, The Hague

Consequences re-visted

The Wednesday August 7 inferno that destroyed the arrival terminal at Kenya’s Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA), the country’s main airport, could have been prevented if not contained had some very basic mitigants been in place and (periodically) enforced. It is a very sad commentary on a country whose nationals, especially those who support the ruling elite, have so much pride, not to mention hubris, that its “international” airport has non-functioning fire hydrants and fire-fighting equipment, untrained or poorly trained and motivated personnel not to mention fire-suppression systems that would have detected the smoke…and fire…and at least mitigated the damage…if not doused the flames once the fire started.

I will say it again:

Consequences:

Of the continued embrace of a system of governance that rewards plum positions, including directorship/leadership positions in critical organizations such as the Kenya Airports Authority (KAA) without holding said leaders fully accountable for the performance of the organizations in their charge. That the fire hydrants were reportedly not working is a direct result of lack of maintenance – the director’s job – Yes, it is the director’s job to ensure that the organization in his/her charge adheres to all applicable international and national standards including maintenance of critical systems/equipment such as fire hydrants. It is also the job of the director to ensure that the organization has adequate resources – trained manpower and well-maintained and functioning equipment to perform the assigned tasks.

Of the continued culture of “kitu kidogo”; “something small” or bribery/bribes and impunity that Kenya and her leaders are known for all over the world; a culture that has allowed the construction of infrastructure/buildings such as the airport now reduced to rubbles, roads and bridges etc. that do not meet applicable local and international standards such as installation of fire-suppression systems, availability of functioning hydrants within the premises not mention use of sub-standard building material or material whose design-intent is mitigation of common occurrences such as fires, water leaks, wear-and-tear etc. The applicable standards would have been enforced during the building inspections prior to approval and final commission of said building. Subsequent follow-up audits and inspection would have ensured that the applicable standards had been met and if not, corrective action with due-dates and responsible person(s) would have been enacted. Unfortunately, the fore-going scenarios makes two deadly assumptions: that the building inspections and follow-up audits would actually occur and that they would be executed by incorruptible officials!

Of the very culture of “kitu kidogo” and impunity that has allowed a tipping point of employees who are hired, not because they have the requisite qualifications and experience, but because they are the relative of the hiring manager (or someone above the hiring manager) or as has always been the case in Kenya, because they are from the tribe of the hiring manager and those in power! While there is nothing wrong with hiring a qualified and competent relative or even a tribesman/woman, there is something absolutely unethical if said relative or tribesman is incompetent and unethical. This situation is compounded by the hubris and arrogance reflected in expressions such as “KANU itatawala milele na milele” or “KANU will rule for ever and ever” popularized during the reign of President Moi or that “the (Kenyan) presidency will never cross the Chania River” popularized after independence during the reign of President Jomo Kenyatta.

Consequences indeed!

Leave a comment

Filed under Corruption, Failed State, Governance, Governance - Kenya, Kenya, Law & Order, Life, Tribalism, Tribe