|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Read more on
|Kenya||Africa Politics & Human Rights||Africa Economy & Development| URL for this file: http://www.africafocus.org/docs05/ken0502.php
Print this page
Kenya: Corruption Fight Stalling
AfricaFocus Bulletin
Feb 11, 2005 (050211)
(Reposted from sources cited below)
Editor's Note
The resignation of respected anti-corruption campaigner John
Githongo from the Kenyan government has touched off new political
furor that seems certain to escalate in coming weeks. In its two
years in office, President Mwai Kibabi's government has initiated
numerous anti-corruption investigations. But there is widespread
skepticism that it has the will to deal with high-level corruption
within its own ranks.
In a speech in May 2000, Githongo, who was the head of the Kenyan
branch of Transparency International (TI), before joining the new
government in early 2003, distinguished between the petty
corruption of bribery among minor officials, grand corruption at
senior ranks, and "looting" - scams of such a scale that they have
macroeconomic impact. TI-Kenya's 2004 opinion survey on bribery
indicated that some progress was being made against petty
corruption. But Kenya still ranked 129 out of 146 countries in TI's
2004 global survey of perceptions of corruption. (Among African
countries, Botswana at 31 and South Africa at 44 ranked the most
free of corruption; among developed countries, Finland ranked first
and the United States in 17th place.)
The United States suspended assistance to Kenya's anti-corruption
program after Githongo's resignation, and other donors issued
strong statements. Foreign Minister Chirau Ali Mwakwere and Justice
Minister Kiraitu Murungi vociferously denounced the criticism as
foreign lies. But several other cabinet members, including Health
Minister Charity Ngilu and Planning Minister Peter Anyang' Nyong'o,
joined civil society critics in demanding that top officials
involved in corruption should resign.
This AfricaFocus Bulletin contains a February 8 statement from
Kenyan civil society and private sector organizations, a summary of
recent developments from the UN's Integrated Regional Information
Networks (IRIN), excerpts from the 2004 Kenya Bribery Index report,
and an extract from TI's 2004 Corruption Perceptions Index, with
data on African and selected other countries.
For additional background and news links on Kenya, see
http://www.africafocus.org/country/kenya.php,
http://www.africafocus.org/country/kenya_news.php,
and
http://www.africafocus.org/country/kenya_irin.php
++++++++++++++++++++++end editor's note+++++++++++++++++++++++
Civil Society and Private Sector Statement on the Resignation of
the Permanent Secretary, Governance and Ethics, Office of the
President
Press Release
Nairobi, 8 February 2005
[available on http://www.transparency.org]
We, the undersigned civil society and private sector associations
and organisations would like to express our anger and outrage at
the implications of the resignation of John Githongo from the
position of Permanent Secretary for Governance and Ethics under the
Office of the President.
As the founder of the Kenyan chapter of Transparency International
(TI), Githongo brought to the government ethical credibility and
legitimacy whose financial benefits can only be said to be
indisputable. Thus his resignation, despite already being framed by
the government as being the result of 'professional opportunism'
sounds the death knell on this government's purported
anti-corruption effort.
The implications of his resignation are many, however much this
government may try to dispute them:
First, his resignation makes it clear that the influence of
reform-minded civil society actors in government with respect to
accountability is over. We are particularly concerned about the
fate of other former civil society actors in anti-corruption
initiatives as well as in the Law Reform Commission and Kenya
National Human Rights Commission (KNHRC);
Second, his resignation makes it clear that of the two parallel
imperatives within this government-the first being ethical and
reform-minded and the second being corrupt and
politically-expedient-the latter is winning. We are especially
concerned about the future of the so-called 'war against
corruption' in this dynamic;
Third, his resignation makes it clear that the plethora of
so-called anti-corruption initiatives need harmonisation and legal
standing. We no longer believe in this government's commitment to
hold individuals and institutions accountable for corruption. The
Attorney-General's office, responsible for public prosecutions, has
failed to use its Constitutional powers and has hence become an
accomplice to corruption;
Fourth, Githongo's resignation from the position of advisor to the
President on matters of ethics and governance, makes its clear that
the President has lost interest in the anti-corruption effort in
this country. We no longer have faith that the President's personal
commitment to anti-corruption exists.
We therefore demand that:
- The President immediately dismisses all Cabinet ministers and
suspends all senior government officials against whom substantive
allegations of corruption have been made;
- The President immediately re-constitute his government on the
basis of competence and integrity rather than the ethnic/regional
considerations he clearly took into account in his last Cabinet
expansion;
- Parliament consider a vote of no confidence in this government
in the absence of Presidential action on the above;
- Parliament insist on the right to freedom of information and
demand to subject to public scrutiny the budget for anti-corruption
initiatives in this country and outcomes thereof;
- Civil society organisations, including the private sector,
re-consider its engagement in smokescreen reform efforts such as
the Governance, Justice and Law and Order Sector (GJLOS) programme
until such accountability measures are taken;
- Citizens, local businesses and other civil society organisations
halt the payment of all taxes until such accountability measures
are taken.
In addition, we demand that the President and the rest of the
Executive guarantee the personal safety of Githongo and that all
human rights and media organisations in this country and elsewhere
mobilise around his personal safety as a matter of urgency.
Date: February 8, 2005
Signed by the following civil society and private sector
associations/organisations:
- African Women's Development and Communication Network (FEMNET):
L. Muthoni Wanyeki, Executive Director
- Centre for Governance and Development (CGD): Kennedy Masime,
Executive Director
- Centre for Legal Advocacy and Research International (CLARION):
Winnie Mitullah, Executive Director
- Centre for Rights, Education and Awareness (CREAW): Ann Njogu,
Executive Director
- Children's Rights Advocacy, Documentation and Legal Education
(CRADLE): Millie Odhiambo, Executive Director
- Coalition on Violence Against Women (COVAW): Ms Kamau
- Constitutional Reform and Education Consortium (CRECO): Wambua
Kituku, Coordinator
- EcoNews Africa: Grace Githaiga, Executive Director
- Institute for Education in Democracy (IED): Koki Muli, Executive
Director
- International Commission of Jurists (ICJ): Philip Kichana,
Executive Director
- Kenya Association of Manufacturers (KAM): Betty Maina, Chief
Executive Officer
- Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC): Wanjiku Miano, Executive
Director
- Kituo cha Sheria: Harun Ndubi, Executive Director
- Legal Resources Foundation (LFF): Jedidah Wakonyo, Executive
Director
- Mazingira Institute: Davinder Lamba, Executive Director
- National Council Executive Committee (NCEC): Kepta Ombati,
Executive Director
- Release Political Prisoners (RPP): Kangethe Mungai, National
Coordinator
- Transparency International (TI)-Kenya: Gladwell Otieno,
Executive Director
- Urgent Action Fund: Betty Murungi, Regional Director
- Youth Agenda: Danny Irungu, Chief Executive Officer
For further information, please contact Gladwell Otieno, Executive
Director, TI-Kenya, Tel: 2727763/5
Kenya: Western donors urge action on reports of corruption and bad
governance
Thursday 10 February 2005
IRIN, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
http://www.irinnews.org
[This material may not necessarily reflect the views of the United
Nations or its agencies.]
NAIROBI, 10 Feb 2005 (IRIN) - Western donors on Thursday urged the
Kenyan government to act on reports of corruption and bad
governance. They said graft was hurting Kenya and affecting efforts
to put the East African country on track towards achieving
development goals.
"We share the deep concern felt by the Kenyan people about lack of
good governance and the damage it causes to the nation's welfare
and the effective operation of its institutions," the European
Union (EU) said in a statement signed by representatives of its
member states and the European Commission's delegation in the
Kenyan capital, Nairobi.
"The creation of the machinery to fight corruption was welcomed,"
it noted. "These institutions have been impeded in their operations
and this week's resignation of the PS in the Office of Governance
and Ethics has further emphasised the loss of credibility of the
government in its political will to fight corruption."
"The government of Kenya must take the lead by addressing
governance and especially corruption as part of an urgent effort to
try to put Kenya back on track towards achieving the Millennium
Development Goals," the statement added.
The statement followed a scathing attack on official corruption on
2 February by the UK ambassador in Nairobi, Sir Edward Clay, who
told reporters: "Corruption is the single biggest impediment to
good governance in Kenya [...] Many stones remain unturned ...
many, many stones."
Clay said he had given President Mwai Kibaki a dossier of 20 new
corruption cases expected to cost Kenyans millions of dollars.
Days after Clay's attack, John Githongo, the highest ranking
anti-corruption official in the government, resigned as Permanent
Secretary in the Office of the President in charge of Governance
and Ethics. In a message to Kibaki, sent from London on Monday,
Githongo said he was no longer able to carry out his duties.
On Tuesday, the US ambassador to Kenya, William Bellamy, told a
business meeting in Nairobi: "Corruption in Kenya isn't a matter of
'kitu kidogo' [literally 'something small' in Kiswahili; a
euphemism for 'bribe'], or of a few ministers skimming off
commissions. It is big enough to cause macro-economic distortions."
Bellamy said the US government would withhold US $2.5 million in
aid to Kenya's anti-corruption campaign until it "could gain a
clear picture of the government's true intentions".
Local NGOs and church leaders joined the fray, saying the
government was not doing enough to fight corruption. Twenty NGO
leaders called a news conference on Tuesday and insisted the
government needed to come clean on allegations that some senior
officials had been involved in corrupt acts.
Several cabinet ministers, however, told reporters in this week
that despite the attack by Clay and Githongo's resignation, the
will to contain corruption was still very strong within the
government.
Foreign Minister Ali Makwere told a news conference on Tuesday:
"Our audit reports show clearly that we are fighting corruption ...
the ambassador [Clay] seems to know more that what he is telling
us. The corruption fight is ours, not his."
Local Government Minister Musikari Kombo said the government would
"not give up the fight", while Labour Minister Newton Kulundu said
those making allegations of corruption against unnamed government
officials needed to provide evidence.
On Saturday, Vice President Moody Awori had urged "some western
envoys not to malign Kenya's name".
The current government came to power in 2003 after campaigning
against corruption and other perceived ills. It appointed Githongo,
who was working for the anti-corruption NGO, Transparency
International, to head a new department in the presidential office
that would advise Kibaki on how to fight corruption and declared
"zero tolerance" for graft.
However, in a report on global perceptions of corruption released
in December, Transparency International ranked Kenya 122nd out of
133 nations on a scale of least to most corrupt countries. It
estimated that corruption could have cost Kenya up to $ 975 million
in the last three years.
Kenya Bribery Index 2004
Transparency International-Kenya
[based on survey conducted in December 2003. Full survey report,
including tables and comparative data for different government
agencies and for urban and rural areas, available at
http://www.transparency.org/surveys]
Overview of the Findings
The survey indicates a very significant decrease of bribery from
2002. The percentage of encounters in which bribes were demanded or
offered declined from 65 to 40 percent. Rural respondents reported
a more significant reduction, from 67 percent to 36 percent, while
the urban respondents reported a reduction from 64 percent to 44
percent. The experience is reflected across all socio-economic
categories, that is across age, employment and income groups.
The survey indicates a very significant reduction in the cost of
bribery to citizens, as measured by the average expenditure
reported. This declined from an average of 3,905 shillings per
person per month reported in 2002, to 1,261 shillings per person
per month. Rural respondents reported a more significant reduction,
from 3,254 shillings to 612 shillings translating to an 80 percent
decrease. Urban residents reported a 56 percent decrease from 4,900
shillings to 1,960 shillings per person per month.
This reduction reflects reduced bribery activity, i.e., people are
paying fewer bribes, than before, as opposed to smaller bribes.
Indeed the average size of bribes rose from 2,300 to 3,960
shillings. The rural average bribe size increased more
significantly, by 56 percent, while the urban average increased by
44 percent. This trend, a reduction in the average cost alongside
an increase in the average size of bribes lends itself to two
interpretations. First, it suggests a significant reduction in
petty bribery. Second, it is also consistent with the perception of
increased likelihood of being punished if caught, hence officials
require bigger inducement to take the risk. The reduced bribery is
reflected in an improvement in the aggregate index by 7.6 points,
from an average 25.6 to 18. This in turn reflects a more
significant improvement in the rural index, from 24.5 to 15.6. The
urban index improved only marginally from 21.4 to 19.1.
Of the ten worst ranked organizations in 2002, the Ministry of
Health registered the most significant improvement with an index
score reduced from 34.6 to 12.7, a 63 percent improvement, followed
by Other Local Authorities (excluding Nairobi, Mombasa and Kisumu)
and the Immigration Department. Of the twenty worst ranked, the
Ministry of Health, Other Local Authorities, Immigration Department
and Public Hospitals retain the top positions, and are followed by
Public Hospitals, the Registrar of Persons and the Judiciary.
Respondents were also asked to indicate their perceptions of change
in the organizations that they dealt with as compared to the
previous year. The perception of significant improvement increased
from 5 to 14 percent of the responses, and perception of marginal
improvement from 9 to 18 percent of the responses. Perceptions of
significant deterioration declined from 23 percent to 9 percent and
marginal deterioration from 11 percent to 4 percent of the
responses. The percentage of responses citing no change did not
register significant alteration.
The survey also sought to gauge citizen's willingness to report
corruption to the authorities by asking respondents what kind of
action they took, if any, on encountering bribery. The results show
that in the majority of instances, the respondents bribed and kept
quiet about it (58 percent), while in 18 percent of the cases, they
declined to bribe and also kept quiet. In 14 percent of the cases,
respondents bribed and talked about it to people other than the
authorities, and in 5 percent of the instances, they declined and
discussed it with people other than the authorities.
The overall results provide strong indication that the Government's
campaign against corruption has had a
significant positive impact on the vulnerability of ordinary
citizens to corruption, and petty bribery in particular.
It is important to note however, that the survey does not
adequately capture corruption at the higher levels - for instance,
bribery in big public procurement projects. Similarly, a
representative sample of the population will not adequately capture
the bribery in an organization that affects a very specific, small
segment of the population, even though this may be systemic and
severe.
TI 2004 Corruption Perceptions Index
[African and selected other countries. For full index and additional data, see
http://www.transparency.org/surveys
CPI Score relates to perceptions of the degree of corruption asseen by business people and country analysts and ranges between 10
(highly clean) and 0 (highly corrupt).]
1. Finland 9.7
5. Singapore 9.3
11. United Kingdom 8.6
12. Canada 8.5
16. Hong Kong 8.0
17. USA 7.5
20. Chile 7.4
21. Barbados 7.3
24. Japan 6.9
31. Botswana 6.0
39. Tunisia 5.0
42. Italy 4.8
44. South Africa 4.6
48. Seychelles 4.4
54. Mauritius 4.1
54. Namibia 4.1
64. Ghana 3.6
64. Mexico 3.6
74. Gabon 3.3
77 Benin 3.2
77. Egypt 3.2
77. Mali 3.2
77. Morocco 3.2
82. Madagascar 3.1
85. Senegal 3.0
90. Gambia 2.8
90. Malawi 2.8
90. Mozambique 2.8
90. Russia 2.8
90. Tanzania 2.8
102. Algeria 2.7
102. Eritrea 2.6
102. Uganda 2.6
102. Zambia 2.6
108. Libya 2.5
114. Congo, Republic of 2.3
114. Ethiopia 2.3
114. Sierra Leone 2.3
114. Zimbabwe 2.3
122. Niger 2.2
122. Sudan 2.2
129. Cameroon 2.1
129. Kenya 2.1
133. Angola 2.0
133. Congo, Dem. Rep. 2.0
133. Cote d'Ivoire 2.0
142. Chad 1.7
144. Nigeria 1.6
AfricaFocus Bulletin is an independent electronic publication
providing reposted commentary and analysis on African issues, with
a particular focus on U.S. and international policies. AfricaFocus
Bulletin is edited by William Minter.
AfricaFocus Bulletin can be reached at [email protected]. Please
write to this address to subscribe or unsubscribe to the bulletin,
or to suggest material for inclusion. For more information about
reposted material, please contact directly the original source
mentioned. For a full archive and other resources, see
http://www.africafocus.org
|
