Published on 12/07/2008
By Barrack Muluka
The litmus test is on in earnest. Eventually, Mr Amos Kimunya quit the Ministry of Finance, despite his declamatory pronouncements in his Kipipiri backyard. Maybe it is true after all, that Kenya can never be the same again.
Perhaps President Kibaki’s inaugural words on December 2002 are finally coming alive. That the age of anything goes has come to an end. We might indeed be returning the culture of due process, accountability and transparency in public office. It is possible that Government will no longer be run on the whims of individuals.
For such was the thrust of President Kibaki’s inauguration speech, and whose wider relevance I shared with you in this column, last week.
Mr Alex Perry has written in this week’s Time Magazine: “If Africa is to be truly free, if – decades after throwing off colonial rule – it is now to escape poverty, corruption and autocracy, it needs a second, quiet revolution. The repression and electoral theft in Zimbabwe, the riots and civilian coup in Kenya in January, both suggest that the worst standards of governance persist.”
I see that Mr Perry is careful to introduce the adjective “quiet” before “revolution”. Something tells me that it was an afterthought.
He does not want to be accused of violent incitement. He plays it safe by urging Africa to embrace “quiet revolution”.
But social and political revolution is rarely quiet. It is often cataclysmic, bringing in its wake atrocious casualty.
It should please him to know that in our evolutionary style, Mr Kimunya has not only “asked the President to be allowed to step aside” but the President has also appointed a commission to inquire into the controversial sale of the Grand Regency Hotel. This is a “quiet revolution”, particularly seeing that Mr Kimunya had only a few hours ahead of “asking the President to be allowed to step aside” vowed that he would do no such thing, not even at the pain of death.
That he turned full circle and “asked to be allowed to step aside” is literally speaking a revolution.
Can commissions of enquiry nonetheless bring an end to the age of “ferocious dinosaurs” such as Mr Perry talks of in his commentary?
Numerous commissions
Kenya has had numerous commissions, which have yielded zero. Others have been discontinued midstream. What is the import of our commissions of enquiry? Are they at the very best safety values through which public tension is defused?
From the Mtongwe Ferry disaster in the 1990s, through various land and ethnic clashes enquiries all the way to devil worship, Goldenberg and sundry investigations, commissions of enquiry have failed the litmus test. They have, at the very best, only killed the pain of the moment.
Consider that when the Bosire Commission on Goldenberg was at work in 2003, some high-ranking Government officials would make pious pronouncements about themselves and wicked ones about others, in the morning.
In the afternoon, they would be in their Government offices, driving Anglo Leasing at the command of newly arrived Narc bosses. In point of fact, commissions of inquiry are corruption recruitment forums. It seems new graft players come through them.
When the report is complete, those who have not been part of the game now know “how it is done, where it is done and with whom.” The report is shelved.
When the next scandal rocks the country, you read of the same names from the past.
Would the latest commission not make more sense if its mandate was wider enough to look not just into the sale of Grand Regency Hotel, but – in fact – the goings on in the Ministry of Finance?
vote of no confidence
When Parliament passed a vote of no confidence in Mr Kimunya, the Grand Regency affair was only the last straw that broke the camel’s back. Parliament had a whole raft of accusations against Mr Kimunya. It would make sense to broaden the investigation. And is it fair that Mr Kimunya alone should “ask to be allowed to step aside.” Where are the people who allegedly worked with him?
Whether a “quiet revolution” is possible or not, depends so much on whether Mr Kimunya’s “stepping aside” and the inquiry will go beyond the borders of palliative window dressing.
It also depends on whether ODM names we are beginning to read of in the Press, like Immigration Minister Otieno Kajwang’ can also “ask to be allowed to step aside” to be investigated.
—The writer is a publishing editor and media consultant with Mvule Publishers.
Monday, 14 July 2008
Of Julius Nyerere, African Politics and myself
Published on 13/07/2008
By Ali Mazrui
When he was President of the United Republic of Tanzania, Julius K Nyerere’s vision was bigger than his victories, his perception was deeper than his performance. In global terms, he was one of the giants of the 20th century. And like all giants, he had both great insights and great blind spots. While his vision did indeed outpace his victories, and his profundity outweigh his performance, he did bestride this narrow world like an African colossus.
It is also the ironies of my life, that Julius Nyerere and I first met neither in his country (Tanzania) nor mine (Kenya) but in Uganda. I first met Mwalimu Nyerere at what was then Makerere University College in Uganda. That was more than 30 years ago.
Long before I became a professor at Makerere. Nyerere had himself been a student there. He later went to the University of Edinburgh for his masters’degree. Makerere and Edinburgh prepared him for the title of mwalimu which he was subsequently to carry for the rest of his life. Young Julius Nyerere entered the gates of Edinburgh in October 1949.
Being influenced by Makerere were not the only bonds that Julius Nyerere and I shared. After our first encounter at the Makerere campus, a complicated relationship developed.
Politician cum scholar
As personalities, what did Julius Nyerere and I have in common? He was a politician who was sometimes a scholar. I was a scholar who was sometimes a politician. Indeed President Obote once asked me in exasperation whether I knew the difference between being a political scientist and being a politician. Some of my public pronouncements in Uganda during Obote’s first administration amounted to direct participation in the politics of Uganda. Nyerere shared some of Obote’s exasperation with my political intrusion into matters of public policy.
Nyerere and I had other areas of shared concern. He translated into Kiswahili two of Shakespeare’s plays—Julius Caesar and the Merchant of Venice. By so doing, he was making available to Africa the genius of another civilisation.
“Edmund Burke and Reflections on the Revolution in the
In another scholarly article, I also ‘Africanised’ the French Philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) by applying his ideas to African affairs. Nyerere and I were trying to build bridges between Africa and great minds of Western civilisations. While Nyerere Swahilised Shakespeare, I Africanised Burke and Rousseau.
With his concept of Ujamaa, Nyerere also attempted to build bridges between indigenous African thought and modern political ideas. Ujamaa was turned by Nyerere into a foundation for African socialism. Ujamaa became the organising principle of the entire economic experiment in Tanzania from the Arusha Declaration to the mid-1980s.
Ujamaa
Nyerere’s relations with the Kenyan political elite deteriorated steadily. He found the then Attorney-General Charles Njonjo particularly distasteful and arrogant as a person and reckless in his attitudes towards Kenya’s neighbours. Nyerere was fond of Mzee Kenyatta, but he thought that Njonjo exercised disproportionate influence on the old Man.
Nyerere was not sure whether to be amused or outraged when Njonjo turned any discussion of Kenyatta’s mortality into something close to a capital punishment! Nyerere was against turning rulers into gods, “like the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt.” Making Kenyatta immortal was to turn him into a god.
Nyerere and I remembered the proposal which was made in 1964 to celebrate annually the day of Kenyatta’s arrest by the British as ‘the Last Supper.’ But there was such a strong negative reaction from the Christian community in Kenya against using the concept of the ‘Last Supper’ in this way that the idea was dropped.
My strongest disagreement with Nyerere concerned Zanzibar and Nigeria. Did Tanganyika unite with Zanzibar to form Tanzania under pressure from President Lyndon Johnson of the United States and Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home of Britain who did not want Zanzibar to become another communist Cuba? Nyerere bristled when it was suggested that the union with Zanzibar was part of the Cold War and not a case of Pan-Africanism.
Nyerere’s recognition of Biafra in the middle of the Nigerian civil war was another hot subject. I personally did not share the suspicion that Nyerere recognised Biafra because the Igbo were fellow Roman Catholics claiming to be threatened by Muslim Northerners in Nigeria. But I did believe in one Nigeria and therefore disagreed with Nyerere’s policies. Nyerere also bristled if it was suggested that he was ungrateful to Nigeria which had helped him with his own army in 1964, and wanted to create a new force.
—The writer is chancellor at Jomo Kenyatta University
By Ali Mazrui
When he was President of the United Republic of Tanzania, Julius K Nyerere’s vision was bigger than his victories, his perception was deeper than his performance. In global terms, he was one of the giants of the 20th century. And like all giants, he had both great insights and great blind spots. While his vision did indeed outpace his victories, and his profundity outweigh his performance, he did bestride this narrow world like an African colossus.
It is also the ironies of my life, that Julius Nyerere and I first met neither in his country (Tanzania) nor mine (Kenya) but in Uganda. I first met Mwalimu Nyerere at what was then Makerere University College in Uganda. That was more than 30 years ago.
Long before I became a professor at Makerere. Nyerere had himself been a student there. He later went to the University of Edinburgh for his masters’degree. Makerere and Edinburgh prepared him for the title of mwalimu which he was subsequently to carry for the rest of his life. Young Julius Nyerere entered the gates of Edinburgh in October 1949.
Being influenced by Makerere were not the only bonds that Julius Nyerere and I shared. After our first encounter at the Makerere campus, a complicated relationship developed.
Politician cum scholar
As personalities, what did Julius Nyerere and I have in common? He was a politician who was sometimes a scholar. I was a scholar who was sometimes a politician. Indeed President Obote once asked me in exasperation whether I knew the difference between being a political scientist and being a politician. Some of my public pronouncements in Uganda during Obote’s first administration amounted to direct participation in the politics of Uganda. Nyerere shared some of Obote’s exasperation with my political intrusion into matters of public policy.
Nyerere and I had other areas of shared concern. He translated into Kiswahili two of Shakespeare’s plays—Julius Caesar and the Merchant of Venice. By so doing, he was making available to Africa the genius of another civilisation.
“Edmund Burke and Reflections on the Revolution in the
In another scholarly article, I also ‘Africanised’ the French Philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) by applying his ideas to African affairs. Nyerere and I were trying to build bridges between Africa and great minds of Western civilisations. While Nyerere Swahilised Shakespeare, I Africanised Burke and Rousseau.
With his concept of Ujamaa, Nyerere also attempted to build bridges between indigenous African thought and modern political ideas. Ujamaa was turned by Nyerere into a foundation for African socialism. Ujamaa became the organising principle of the entire economic experiment in Tanzania from the Arusha Declaration to the mid-1980s.
Ujamaa
Nyerere’s relations with the Kenyan political elite deteriorated steadily. He found the then Attorney-General Charles Njonjo particularly distasteful and arrogant as a person and reckless in his attitudes towards Kenya’s neighbours. Nyerere was fond of Mzee Kenyatta, but he thought that Njonjo exercised disproportionate influence on the old Man.
Nyerere was not sure whether to be amused or outraged when Njonjo turned any discussion of Kenyatta’s mortality into something close to a capital punishment! Nyerere was against turning rulers into gods, “like the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt.” Making Kenyatta immortal was to turn him into a god.
Nyerere and I remembered the proposal which was made in 1964 to celebrate annually the day of Kenyatta’s arrest by the British as ‘the Last Supper.’ But there was such a strong negative reaction from the Christian community in Kenya against using the concept of the ‘Last Supper’ in this way that the idea was dropped.
My strongest disagreement with Nyerere concerned Zanzibar and Nigeria. Did Tanganyika unite with Zanzibar to form Tanzania under pressure from President Lyndon Johnson of the United States and Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home of Britain who did not want Zanzibar to become another communist Cuba? Nyerere bristled when it was suggested that the union with Zanzibar was part of the Cold War and not a case of Pan-Africanism.
Nyerere’s recognition of Biafra in the middle of the Nigerian civil war was another hot subject. I personally did not share the suspicion that Nyerere recognised Biafra because the Igbo were fellow Roman Catholics claiming to be threatened by Muslim Northerners in Nigeria. But I did believe in one Nigeria and therefore disagreed with Nyerere’s policies. Nyerere also bristled if it was suggested that he was ungrateful to Nigeria which had helped him with his own army in 1964, and wanted to create a new force.
—The writer is chancellor at Jomo Kenyatta University
Like Yelsin, Kibaki has no respect for parliament’s sovereignty
Published on 13/07/2008
By Ahmednasir Abdulahi
In 1993, Russia’s former President Boris Yelsin ordered tank and artillery assault on his country’s Duma and about 140 people died. A victorious Yelsin overwhelmed parliament, quickly dissolved it and ordered fresh elections. The Duma attracted the late Yelsin’s wrath when it refused to yield to his demands.
Kibaki and Yelsin have many similarities. Both assumed power at fairly old age. They have similar health conditions brought about by similar behavioural conditions. They are both not known for strong democratic conviction. In assuming power, both were presented with golden opportunities brought about by certain historic conditionality. Both regimes are defined by grand corruption and stealing of public funds.
On Thursday, Kibaki, in appointing a friendly committee headed by retired Justice Majid Cockar to investigate the fraudulent sale of the Grand Regency Hotel, assaulted the sovereignty of Parliament with equal might as Yelsin, but without a single bullet being fired. Kibaki’s manipulative skill would have impressed Yelsin! Just like Yelsin, Kibaki is unhappy with the audacity of parliament to pass a vote of no confidence against his blue-eyed boy, Amos Kimunya.
The appointment of the Cockar committee in so far as the investigations touch on the conduct of Kimunya is in fragrant breach of the Constitution. It provides if any more testimony is required; of this regime’s profane abuse of constitution and its distaste for decency. The Cockar committee can investigate the sale of the hotel and role played by the other players mentioned. But Kimunya is an entirely different proposition. Cockar and his committee cannot and should not touch Kimunya, despite being the fulcrum around which the hotel saga rotates.
The reasons, despite the President and his advisers’ pretences, are rather simple. In democratic governance, there is cardinal concept of separation of powers between the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. The exercise of power by the three arms of government within their respective areas of jurisdiction provides what is called institutional checks and balances. This separation of power provides the necessary condition for the rule of law, and epitomise essence of the democratic government itself.
Parliament in its sovereign wisdom has taken Kimunya through a process duly recognised in democratic systems. He was censured and a vote of no confidence passed.
The process of censure and vote of no confidence is a tool used by Parliament either to flex its muscle vis-‡-vis the Executive or show its displeasure with regard to a certain conduct of the Executive. A charge was drawn against Kimunya in the form of a motion. The same was precise and set out in clear terms what the former minister was accused of. Ikolomani MP Boniface Khalwale assisted by Budalang’i MP Ababu Namwamba led the prosecution of the charges. Many members tendered corroborative evidence in support. The Deputy Speaker then allowed Kimunya to put up his defence. Kimunya advanced a spirited defence. Unfortunately, there were no witnesses to corroborate his assertions. That not one MP put forward a persuasive defence in favour of the minister showed how true and persuasive the charges were.
Faced with this quandary, Kimunya engaged in some shameful theatrics. When his shocking declaration that he will rather die than resign failed to shock Kenyans, Kibaki had to work overdrive to address the suicidal signals coming from Kipipiri.
The idea of appointing a friendly probe team with a predetermined verdict was muted and the usual homeboys assembled. It is right at this juncture that both the President and Kimunya make the wrong turn.
They must appreciate that in so far as the conduct of the minister in relation to Grand Regency is concerned, his condemnation by his peers in Parliament is eternal and no other organ can ever exonerate him.
The conduct of the President to appoint a committee of his liking to investigate an issue the full House made a decision on, constitutes unacceptable assault on the sovereign supremacy of Parliament.
Kibaki’s habitual appointment of government-friendly commissioners whenever his associates are caught up in scandalous affairs is documented. Just like the disgraceful finding of the commission charged to investigate the Armenian mercenary saga, do we need to appoint another commission when Parliament has addressed the issue and its committee is receiving final hearings? For Kibaki, the answer is yes. Cockar’s sole task is to give him a tailor made answer, the known truth notwithstanding.
By Ahmednasir Abdulahi
In 1993, Russia’s former President Boris Yelsin ordered tank and artillery assault on his country’s Duma and about 140 people died. A victorious Yelsin overwhelmed parliament, quickly dissolved it and ordered fresh elections. The Duma attracted the late Yelsin’s wrath when it refused to yield to his demands.
Kibaki and Yelsin have many similarities. Both assumed power at fairly old age. They have similar health conditions brought about by similar behavioural conditions. They are both not known for strong democratic conviction. In assuming power, both were presented with golden opportunities brought about by certain historic conditionality. Both regimes are defined by grand corruption and stealing of public funds.
On Thursday, Kibaki, in appointing a friendly committee headed by retired Justice Majid Cockar to investigate the fraudulent sale of the Grand Regency Hotel, assaulted the sovereignty of Parliament with equal might as Yelsin, but without a single bullet being fired. Kibaki’s manipulative skill would have impressed Yelsin! Just like Yelsin, Kibaki is unhappy with the audacity of parliament to pass a vote of no confidence against his blue-eyed boy, Amos Kimunya.
The appointment of the Cockar committee in so far as the investigations touch on the conduct of Kimunya is in fragrant breach of the Constitution. It provides if any more testimony is required; of this regime’s profane abuse of constitution and its distaste for decency. The Cockar committee can investigate the sale of the hotel and role played by the other players mentioned. But Kimunya is an entirely different proposition. Cockar and his committee cannot and should not touch Kimunya, despite being the fulcrum around which the hotel saga rotates.
The reasons, despite the President and his advisers’ pretences, are rather simple. In democratic governance, there is cardinal concept of separation of powers between the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. The exercise of power by the three arms of government within their respective areas of jurisdiction provides what is called institutional checks and balances. This separation of power provides the necessary condition for the rule of law, and epitomise essence of the democratic government itself.
Parliament in its sovereign wisdom has taken Kimunya through a process duly recognised in democratic systems. He was censured and a vote of no confidence passed.
The process of censure and vote of no confidence is a tool used by Parliament either to flex its muscle vis-‡-vis the Executive or show its displeasure with regard to a certain conduct of the Executive. A charge was drawn against Kimunya in the form of a motion. The same was precise and set out in clear terms what the former minister was accused of. Ikolomani MP Boniface Khalwale assisted by Budalang’i MP Ababu Namwamba led the prosecution of the charges. Many members tendered corroborative evidence in support. The Deputy Speaker then allowed Kimunya to put up his defence. Kimunya advanced a spirited defence. Unfortunately, there were no witnesses to corroborate his assertions. That not one MP put forward a persuasive defence in favour of the minister showed how true and persuasive the charges were.
Faced with this quandary, Kimunya engaged in some shameful theatrics. When his shocking declaration that he will rather die than resign failed to shock Kenyans, Kibaki had to work overdrive to address the suicidal signals coming from Kipipiri.
The idea of appointing a friendly probe team with a predetermined verdict was muted and the usual homeboys assembled. It is right at this juncture that both the President and Kimunya make the wrong turn.
They must appreciate that in so far as the conduct of the minister in relation to Grand Regency is concerned, his condemnation by his peers in Parliament is eternal and no other organ can ever exonerate him.
The conduct of the President to appoint a committee of his liking to investigate an issue the full House made a decision on, constitutes unacceptable assault on the sovereign supremacy of Parliament.
Kibaki’s habitual appointment of government-friendly commissioners whenever his associates are caught up in scandalous affairs is documented. Just like the disgraceful finding of the commission charged to investigate the Armenian mercenary saga, do we need to appoint another commission when Parliament has addressed the issue and its committee is receiving final hearings? For Kibaki, the answer is yes. Cockar’s sole task is to give him a tailor made answer, the known truth notwithstanding.
Saturday, 5 July 2008
PRESIDENT KIBAKI WELCOMES SIGNING OF KEY AGREEMENTS
Date Posted: 7/6/2007
President Mwai Kibaki has welcomed the signing of key agreements that will pave the way for closer cooperation between Kenya and Libya.
In a statement issued at the end of his three-day official visit to Sirte Libya, President Kibaki expressed satisfaction that his visit culminated in the signing of the agreements on cooperation on trade and investments, higher education and bilateral air services.
"I am encouraged to inform Kenyans that my visit to Libya at the invitation of Brother Leader Muammar Gaddafi was very successful and has opened a new chapter of mutually beneficial relations between our two countries," President Kibaki said.
During the visit President Kibaki held lengthy talks with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, where agreement was reached on the need to deepen relations between the two countries, through signing of the various agreements.
The Libyan leader hailed President Kibaki's foresight in providing leadership for Kenya; that was now the pillar of economic growth for other regional economies that were reliant on Kenya as the gateway to the East and Central Africa region.
President Kibaki pointed out that his visit to Libya was a follow up to a wide range of consultations that have been going on between Kenya and Libya aimed at enabling the two countries to tap the existing huge unexploited potential for mutually beneficial cooperation.
President Kibaki noted that in January this year his Government dispatched senior officials from the Ministry of Energy to discuss with their counterparts in Libya leading to the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with Tamoil Africa Holdings Ltd, where it was agreed that Libya would provide Kenya with petroleum products at concessional rates.
Said President Kibaki: "This initiative was informed by the realization that our economy is growing rapidly and this has resulted in a huge increase in the demand for oil."
He added: "In view of the prohibitive cost of oil and its impact on the continued growth of our economy, my Government has been particularly keen on seeking a cheaper source of oil."
In this connection, President Kibaki said he was encouraged that during his consultations with Libyan Leader Gaddafi they agreed that the Memorandum of Understanding should be implemented expeditiously.
The President pointed out that the availability of petroleum products at concessional rates would not only sustain and inject additional impetus to the Kenyan economy but also have a direct positive impact on the lives of Kenyans.
He observed that Tamoil has also expressed interest in undertaking the upgrading of the Kenya Oil Refinery and construction of a Liquefied Petroleum Gas import storage and distribution facility in Mombasa, as Kenya prepares to invite tenders for this process.
Besides oil, President Kibaki expressed satisfaction that during his visit Kenya and Libya concluded a framework Agreement establishing a Joint Commission for Bilateral Cooperation between the two countries that will oversee a wide range of collaboration in various areas of common interest.
He said Kenya and Libya also signed a Trade Agreement in which the two countries undertook to grant each other most favored nation treatment in all matters relating to customs duties and all other charges and taxes applicable to the importation and exportation of goods.
To further strengthen trade relations between the two countries, President Kibaki said the two countries agreed to encourage and facilitate visits by business persons and trade delegations, actively facilitate each other's participation in trade fairs organized by either party and organize trade exhibitions by either party in the territory of the other.
The Head of State added that the two countries also reached agreement on Promotion, Guarantee and Protection of Investment under which Kenya and Libya shall provide investors of either party with treatment of more favoured country.
"Each contracting party shall create convenient conditions for investors of the other contracting party, to carry out investments in its territory legally. This agreement will promote foreign investments in the country and generate more employment for our people," he said.
The President pointed out that already Libyan investors have expressed interest of investing in Kenya, saying the Libyan African Arab Investment Company is now in the process of setting up a 5-6 Star hotel in Nairobi and a Conference Centre in Mombasa.
"We also expect investments in the real estate sector in our capital city Nairobi. We welcome other Libyan investors to invest in Kenya in the area of their choice,' the President said.
He expounded that the scope of the bilateral cooperation envisaged in the Agreement shall also include, but not limited to infrastructure development, including road construction, water, power and telecommunications.
The President added that the bilateral cooperation will also cover security, safety and law enforcement; health and nutrition; trade and investment; transport and communication, including air, road and marine transport networks among other important areas.
President Kibaki said under the Kenya/Libya Bilateral Air Services Agreement, the two countries granted each other various rights in regard to air transport.
"I am confident that this agreement will enable businessmen and tourists from the two countries to travel easily in a mutually beneficial two-way traffic," the Head of State said.
Under the Agreement on Co-operation in Higher Education, President Kibaki said both countries agreed to exchange experiences fields that contribute to the promotion of higher education areas such as informatics and computer technologies.
On international relations, President Kibaki said Kenya and Libya agreed to continue working together in the search for peace in troubled regions in the continent and to promote the agenda of the African Union.
"As Members of the African Union and other International Organizations, we agreed to continue working closely in advocating for matters of common concern such as the reform of the United Nations," he said.
Earlier, President Kibaki held lengthy discussions with Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi in Sirte on issues of mutual interest including the signing of the agreements.
During the meeting, the Libyan Leader said Kenya and Libya had opened a new chapter of cooperation that has never been witnessed before.
He said Libya and Kenya should combine their potential for the benefit of the people of the two countries and wished President Kibaki victory in the coming elections as that would enhance the growing cooperation between the two countries.
President Kibaki concluded his official visit to Libya with a meeting with Libyan Leader Gaddafi and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega.
During the meeting, the three leaders called for close cooperation among developing countries.
The President's delegation to Libya included Ministers Raphael Tuju, Dr. Mukhisa Kituyi and Kiraitu Murungi among others
Courtesy: PPS
Published by:
Office of Government Spokesperson
KICC Building, 3rd Floor
8 Harambee Avenue
P.O.Box 45617-00100
Nairobi - Kenya
Tel: +254-020-240488
+254-020-2223521
Fax: +254-020-240600
Email: comms@comms.go.ke
SMS (Celtel/Safaricom): 2888
President Mwai Kibaki has welcomed the signing of key agreements that will pave the way for closer cooperation between Kenya and Libya.
In a statement issued at the end of his three-day official visit to Sirte Libya, President Kibaki expressed satisfaction that his visit culminated in the signing of the agreements on cooperation on trade and investments, higher education and bilateral air services.
"I am encouraged to inform Kenyans that my visit to Libya at the invitation of Brother Leader Muammar Gaddafi was very successful and has opened a new chapter of mutually beneficial relations between our two countries," President Kibaki said.
During the visit President Kibaki held lengthy talks with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, where agreement was reached on the need to deepen relations between the two countries, through signing of the various agreements.
The Libyan leader hailed President Kibaki's foresight in providing leadership for Kenya; that was now the pillar of economic growth for other regional economies that were reliant on Kenya as the gateway to the East and Central Africa region.
President Kibaki pointed out that his visit to Libya was a follow up to a wide range of consultations that have been going on between Kenya and Libya aimed at enabling the two countries to tap the existing huge unexploited potential for mutually beneficial cooperation.
President Kibaki noted that in January this year his Government dispatched senior officials from the Ministry of Energy to discuss with their counterparts in Libya leading to the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with Tamoil Africa Holdings Ltd, where it was agreed that Libya would provide Kenya with petroleum products at concessional rates.
Said President Kibaki: "This initiative was informed by the realization that our economy is growing rapidly and this has resulted in a huge increase in the demand for oil."
He added: "In view of the prohibitive cost of oil and its impact on the continued growth of our economy, my Government has been particularly keen on seeking a cheaper source of oil."
In this connection, President Kibaki said he was encouraged that during his consultations with Libyan Leader Gaddafi they agreed that the Memorandum of Understanding should be implemented expeditiously.
The President pointed out that the availability of petroleum products at concessional rates would not only sustain and inject additional impetus to the Kenyan economy but also have a direct positive impact on the lives of Kenyans.
He observed that Tamoil has also expressed interest in undertaking the upgrading of the Kenya Oil Refinery and construction of a Liquefied Petroleum Gas import storage and distribution facility in Mombasa, as Kenya prepares to invite tenders for this process.
Besides oil, President Kibaki expressed satisfaction that during his visit Kenya and Libya concluded a framework Agreement establishing a Joint Commission for Bilateral Cooperation between the two countries that will oversee a wide range of collaboration in various areas of common interest.
He said Kenya and Libya also signed a Trade Agreement in which the two countries undertook to grant each other most favored nation treatment in all matters relating to customs duties and all other charges and taxes applicable to the importation and exportation of goods.
To further strengthen trade relations between the two countries, President Kibaki said the two countries agreed to encourage and facilitate visits by business persons and trade delegations, actively facilitate each other's participation in trade fairs organized by either party and organize trade exhibitions by either party in the territory of the other.
The Head of State added that the two countries also reached agreement on Promotion, Guarantee and Protection of Investment under which Kenya and Libya shall provide investors of either party with treatment of more favoured country.
"Each contracting party shall create convenient conditions for investors of the other contracting party, to carry out investments in its territory legally. This agreement will promote foreign investments in the country and generate more employment for our people," he said.
The President pointed out that already Libyan investors have expressed interest of investing in Kenya, saying the Libyan African Arab Investment Company is now in the process of setting up a 5-6 Star hotel in Nairobi and a Conference Centre in Mombasa.
"We also expect investments in the real estate sector in our capital city Nairobi. We welcome other Libyan investors to invest in Kenya in the area of their choice,' the President said.
He expounded that the scope of the bilateral cooperation envisaged in the Agreement shall also include, but not limited to infrastructure development, including road construction, water, power and telecommunications.
The President added that the bilateral cooperation will also cover security, safety and law enforcement; health and nutrition; trade and investment; transport and communication, including air, road and marine transport networks among other important areas.
President Kibaki said under the Kenya/Libya Bilateral Air Services Agreement, the two countries granted each other various rights in regard to air transport.
"I am confident that this agreement will enable businessmen and tourists from the two countries to travel easily in a mutually beneficial two-way traffic," the Head of State said.
Under the Agreement on Co-operation in Higher Education, President Kibaki said both countries agreed to exchange experiences fields that contribute to the promotion of higher education areas such as informatics and computer technologies.
On international relations, President Kibaki said Kenya and Libya agreed to continue working together in the search for peace in troubled regions in the continent and to promote the agenda of the African Union.
"As Members of the African Union and other International Organizations, we agreed to continue working closely in advocating for matters of common concern such as the reform of the United Nations," he said.
Earlier, President Kibaki held lengthy discussions with Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi in Sirte on issues of mutual interest including the signing of the agreements.
During the meeting, the Libyan Leader said Kenya and Libya had opened a new chapter of cooperation that has never been witnessed before.
He said Libya and Kenya should combine their potential for the benefit of the people of the two countries and wished President Kibaki victory in the coming elections as that would enhance the growing cooperation between the two countries.
President Kibaki concluded his official visit to Libya with a meeting with Libyan Leader Gaddafi and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega.
During the meeting, the three leaders called for close cooperation among developing countries.
The President's delegation to Libya included Ministers Raphael Tuju, Dr. Mukhisa Kituyi and Kiraitu Murungi among others
Courtesy: PPS
Published by:
Office of Government Spokesperson
KICC Building, 3rd Floor
8 Harambee Avenue
P.O.Box 45617-00100
Nairobi - Kenya
Tel: +254-020-240488
+254-020-2223521
Fax: +254-020-240600
Email: comms@comms.go.ke
SMS (Celtel/Safaricom): 2888
Kibaki-Gadaffi Deal That Sealed the Sale of Grand Regency
The controversial sale of the Grand Regency Hotel to Libyans was part of a bilateral trade agreement that President Kibaki and the Libyan leader Muammar Gadaffi signed a year ago, it has emerged.
A confidential memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by the two leaders and seen by the Business Daily indicates that Libya had expressed interest in six key deals most of which had been sealed by the time the row over the hotel sale broke out last week.
Analysts said the structure of the agreement on promotion and protection of investment, which also granted Libya the most favoured trading partner status, offers the Arab nation a head-start in any competition for investment opportunities in Kenya.
Sovereign fund
A large fraction of Libya's investment in Kenya has come through Libya Africa Portfolio for Investments (LAP) - a five billion dollars sovereign fund set up in 2006 and whose subsidiaries include the Oil Libya Holdings Company (formerly Tamoil Africa), the Libyan Arab Company for African investments, Afriqiyah Airlines, and LAP Green Holding Company.
The value of Libya's investments in Kenya has in the past three years grown steadily to hit the Sh9.33 billion.
It is under the bilateral agreement that the Libyans recently acquired a large stake in Mombasa-based Kenya Petroleum Refineries Limited (KPRL) despite having failed to take part in the competitive tendering for the sale of a 50 per cent stake owned by the exiting private oil companies.
India's Essar Oil and Gas Limited finished top of the list of contenders but were forced to split the stake equally with Tamoil Africa Holdings Limited.
Essar paid $10 million for the 50 per cent stake in May but ended up with half of it after Treasury negotiated a compromise deal that saw the Libyans become shareholders in the factory.
Essar also paid an additional $1 million to the Government to renounce its pre-emptive rights to acquire the stake as the owner of the remaining 50 per cent.
When it was signed last year, the Grand Regency Hotel topped the sale list of companies that the Libyans wanted to buy. The MoU also paved the way for Tamoil's involvement in the $60 million (about Sh4.5 billion) Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) project, $430 million (about Sh25 billion) upgrading of the refinery as well as its participation in the monthly Open Tender System (OTS) for the supply of petroleum products. All the deals were approved by the Cabinet.
Under Article 4 of the MoU, Tamoil was to get a 50 per cent stake in the Kenya Petroleum Oil Refinery and a majority stake in the state-driven LPG project.
"Tamoil expresses its interest in taking equity and will provide funds for the above mentioned projects, which demonstrate economic viability," the memorandum signed by the then Trade minister Mukhisa Kituyi and Mr Ali Elisaue, the secretary general of Libya's General People's Committee for the Economy and Investment, said.
The secret sale of the Grand Regency Hotel may have been done as part of the Kibaki government's delivery of a promise it made to the Libyans under the agreement.
Finance minister Amos Kimunya last week confirmed that the five-star hotel had been sold to the Libyans for Sh2.9 billion. The revelation has thrown the country into its biggest political storm since the Grand Coalition Government was formed in April.
Public outrage
And though Mr Kimunya insists that the deal was fair, there has been an outpouring of public outrage that has seen the sale described as yet another chapter in the Goldenberg scandal.
The Institute of Certified Public Accountants yesterday called for full disclosure over the matter and demanded the resignation of Mr Kimunya - its former chairman.
A group of MPs who have been pushing for the formation of a grand opposition alliance have called for a demonstration over the matter but the police have declared it illegal, setting the stage for confrontation. The Grand Regency hotel has been under statutory management since 1999.
Mr Kimunya told journalists at his briefing on Friday, that the hotel sale "has helped deepen the Kenya-Libyan bilateral ties," and that the offer by the Libyans was the best, with the second highest having been Sh1.8 billion.
The minister said it was a Central Bank decision to sell the hotel quickly because the bank did not want to be dragged back to court or engage in the hotel business.
Public outrage has been mainly centred on the secrecy that surrounded the sale and its pricing. Some valuers have put the hotel price at Sh7.5 billion as some reports indicated that Korean investors had offered Sh6.1 billion for it.
A confidential memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed by the two leaders and seen by the Business Daily indicates that Libya had expressed interest in six key deals most of which had been sealed by the time the row over the hotel sale broke out last week.
Analysts said the structure of the agreement on promotion and protection of investment, which also granted Libya the most favoured trading partner status, offers the Arab nation a head-start in any competition for investment opportunities in Kenya.
Sovereign fund
A large fraction of Libya's investment in Kenya has come through Libya Africa Portfolio for Investments (LAP) - a five billion dollars sovereign fund set up in 2006 and whose subsidiaries include the Oil Libya Holdings Company (formerly Tamoil Africa), the Libyan Arab Company for African investments, Afriqiyah Airlines, and LAP Green Holding Company.
The value of Libya's investments in Kenya has in the past three years grown steadily to hit the Sh9.33 billion.
It is under the bilateral agreement that the Libyans recently acquired a large stake in Mombasa-based Kenya Petroleum Refineries Limited (KPRL) despite having failed to take part in the competitive tendering for the sale of a 50 per cent stake owned by the exiting private oil companies.
India's Essar Oil and Gas Limited finished top of the list of contenders but were forced to split the stake equally with Tamoil Africa Holdings Limited.
Essar paid $10 million for the 50 per cent stake in May but ended up with half of it after Treasury negotiated a compromise deal that saw the Libyans become shareholders in the factory.
Essar also paid an additional $1 million to the Government to renounce its pre-emptive rights to acquire the stake as the owner of the remaining 50 per cent.
When it was signed last year, the Grand Regency Hotel topped the sale list of companies that the Libyans wanted to buy. The MoU also paved the way for Tamoil's involvement in the $60 million (about Sh4.5 billion) Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) project, $430 million (about Sh25 billion) upgrading of the refinery as well as its participation in the monthly Open Tender System (OTS) for the supply of petroleum products. All the deals were approved by the Cabinet.
Under Article 4 of the MoU, Tamoil was to get a 50 per cent stake in the Kenya Petroleum Oil Refinery and a majority stake in the state-driven LPG project.
"Tamoil expresses its interest in taking equity and will provide funds for the above mentioned projects, which demonstrate economic viability," the memorandum signed by the then Trade minister Mukhisa Kituyi and Mr Ali Elisaue, the secretary general of Libya's General People's Committee for the Economy and Investment, said.
The secret sale of the Grand Regency Hotel may have been done as part of the Kibaki government's delivery of a promise it made to the Libyans under the agreement.
Finance minister Amos Kimunya last week confirmed that the five-star hotel had been sold to the Libyans for Sh2.9 billion. The revelation has thrown the country into its biggest political storm since the Grand Coalition Government was formed in April.
Public outrage
And though Mr Kimunya insists that the deal was fair, there has been an outpouring of public outrage that has seen the sale described as yet another chapter in the Goldenberg scandal.
The Institute of Certified Public Accountants yesterday called for full disclosure over the matter and demanded the resignation of Mr Kimunya - its former chairman.
A group of MPs who have been pushing for the formation of a grand opposition alliance have called for a demonstration over the matter but the police have declared it illegal, setting the stage for confrontation. The Grand Regency hotel has been under statutory management since 1999.
Mr Kimunya told journalists at his briefing on Friday, that the hotel sale "has helped deepen the Kenya-Libyan bilateral ties," and that the offer by the Libyans was the best, with the second highest having been Sh1.8 billion.
The minister said it was a Central Bank decision to sell the hotel quickly because the bank did not want to be dragged back to court or engage in the hotel business.
Public outrage has been mainly centred on the secrecy that surrounded the sale and its pricing. Some valuers have put the hotel price at Sh7.5 billion as some reports indicated that Korean investors had offered Sh6.1 billion for it.
Wednesday, 2 July 2008
Kenya's back to its normal state of denial
By Edmund Sanders, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 2, 2008
NAIROBI, KENYA -- Six months after postelection clashes brought this country to its knees, life in Kenya appears back to normal -- for better and for worse.
Ethnic fighting that killed more than 1,000 people has subsided. Political enemies are working together in a coalition government. Kenyans have returned to work and school.But in the push to get the country back on a path of peace and prosperity, critics charge, Kenya's leaders are papering over deep-seated social and economic problems exposed by the Dec. 27 presidential vote, and reverting to old patterns of denial, political payoffs and short-term fixes.
"We're slipping back into trivia while the central issues are not being addressed," said Richard Leakey, chairman of the Kenya branch of Transparency International, a government watchdog group. "We have not gone very far in addressing the fundamental problems. The government isn't showing any realism."
A fragile coalition government, cobbled together by former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, has inspired little confidence. The bloated 93-member Cabinet is the most expensive in Kenyan history, and critics accuse parliament members of being more concerned with preserving their tax-free $10,000-a-month pay packages than the plight of their constituents.
Frosty ties
Relations between President Mwai Kibaki and his rival, Prime Minister Raila Odinga, are sometimes so frosty that their security guards nearly came to blows at a government rally in June. Meanwhile, Odinga and the vice president are fighting over which man comes second to Kibaki in the pecking order, resulting in tiffs over who should speak first in public and whose motorcade gets right of way.
Hopes that the painful clashes might usher in overdue reforms and encourage Kenyans to tackle long-standing historical grievances and tribal tensions are fading.
"It would seem, then, that these politicians had finally got what they wanted: power, or, to be precise, a share of it," read a recent front-page editorial in the Standard newspaper. "Other matters were quickly relegated to the bottom of their priorities agenda."
Even the controversial electoral commission, which was widely criticized by local and international observers for failing to prevent vote fraud, remains intact and recently oversaw another round of polling for parliament members.
The government's first test was coping with an estimated 350,000 displaced people living in squalid camps after postelection violence drove them from their homes. Riots engulfed much of the country after the electoral commission, handpicked by Kibaki, ignored evidence of tallying fraud after the election and hastily declared him the victor. Violence quickly turned into ethnic warfare as Kenya's tribes vented long-standing frustrations over competition for land, jobs and political power. Entire villages were burned to the ground.
In May, the government announced a campaign to resettle Kenyans, sometimes by force, in their villages. Government officials say nearly 200,000 people returned home.
But in reality, very few have returned to the homes they fled, aid workers say. Most have simply shifted to new, smaller camps, moved in with relatives, returned to ancestral homelands or are squatting on empty land or church grounds.
"It wasn't really a resettlement -- it was just a transfer," said Charles Kariuki, who leads a group of displaced people in central Kenya.
Critics say the government not only failed to provide the promised monetary compensation to help victims rebuild homes, but it also ignored the most crucial component: reconciliation. Legislation to create a national reconciliation commission is tied up in parliament.
As a result, many displaced people say they remain too afraid or too angry to go home.
Virginia Wangari, 62, a divorced mother of eight, said she was persuaded by government officials to leave a displacement camp in May and return to her Rift Valley village. She said she was promised tents, food and other supplies, and told that local officials would be waiting to welcome her.
Instead, she and other returnees found no one to greet them and spent their first night on a bus by the side of the road. In the morning, local officials told her she was on her own, suggesting that she pitch a tent on the charred remains of her house.
She quickly learned that going home was not an option. The same rival tribe members who had chased her away six months earlier were attacking and raping women who attempted to return. Not far away, returnees were greeted with threatening leaflets, making it clear they were not welcome.
"I'm not going to take my neck to the butcher," Wangari said. "If I went home now, I'd be killed." She returned to the displacement camp.
Humanitarian aid experts say the government needs to lay the groundwork for resettlement by bringing tribes together to vent their frustrations and forgive one another.
"You have to have reconciliation before resettlement," said Daniel Were, a peace activist in the city of Eldoret. "The government wants to be seen as doing something, but they are only doing part of the job."
U.S. Ambassador Michael E. Ranneberger expressed optimism that the new government would produce results in coming months, saying Kibaki and Odinga are committed to the process.
"People need to keep their eye on the president and prime minister, and listen to what they are saying," Ranneberger said. "They realize they need each other to fulfill their agendas."
But others say Kenya's leaders may be reluctant to tackle the most controversial issues, such as land reform and constitutional review, because they worry that a debate could rekindle tensions, possibly leading to a collapse of the coalition or renewed fighting.
Perils for politicians
Many politicians now serving in top posts also may find themselves implicated in investigations of corruption, election fraud and postelection violence, creating another disincentive, experts said.
"Most of the people in this government are the product of 40 years of corruption, violence and impunity," said Ben Rawlence, a Kenya researcher for Human Rights Watch.
"They are all involved. The coalition government itself is what needs to be brought to book."
He expressed pessimism that government officials would push for reforms or prosecutions that might curtail their powers, hit their pocketbooks or implicate their supporters.
Odinga, for example, recently called for amnesty for jailed supporters accused of participating in riots. Kibaki is insisting that they be tried in court.
"If this is the face of the 'new' Kenya," Rawlence said, "it's worrying."
July 2, 2008
NAIROBI, KENYA -- Six months after postelection clashes brought this country to its knees, life in Kenya appears back to normal -- for better and for worse.
Ethnic fighting that killed more than 1,000 people has subsided. Political enemies are working together in a coalition government. Kenyans have returned to work and school.But in the push to get the country back on a path of peace and prosperity, critics charge, Kenya's leaders are papering over deep-seated social and economic problems exposed by the Dec. 27 presidential vote, and reverting to old patterns of denial, political payoffs and short-term fixes.
"We're slipping back into trivia while the central issues are not being addressed," said Richard Leakey, chairman of the Kenya branch of Transparency International, a government watchdog group. "We have not gone very far in addressing the fundamental problems. The government isn't showing any realism."
A fragile coalition government, cobbled together by former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, has inspired little confidence. The bloated 93-member Cabinet is the most expensive in Kenyan history, and critics accuse parliament members of being more concerned with preserving their tax-free $10,000-a-month pay packages than the plight of their constituents.
Frosty ties
Relations between President Mwai Kibaki and his rival, Prime Minister Raila Odinga, are sometimes so frosty that their security guards nearly came to blows at a government rally in June. Meanwhile, Odinga and the vice president are fighting over which man comes second to Kibaki in the pecking order, resulting in tiffs over who should speak first in public and whose motorcade gets right of way.
Hopes that the painful clashes might usher in overdue reforms and encourage Kenyans to tackle long-standing historical grievances and tribal tensions are fading.
"It would seem, then, that these politicians had finally got what they wanted: power, or, to be precise, a share of it," read a recent front-page editorial in the Standard newspaper. "Other matters were quickly relegated to the bottom of their priorities agenda."
Even the controversial electoral commission, which was widely criticized by local and international observers for failing to prevent vote fraud, remains intact and recently oversaw another round of polling for parliament members.
The government's first test was coping with an estimated 350,000 displaced people living in squalid camps after postelection violence drove them from their homes. Riots engulfed much of the country after the electoral commission, handpicked by Kibaki, ignored evidence of tallying fraud after the election and hastily declared him the victor. Violence quickly turned into ethnic warfare as Kenya's tribes vented long-standing frustrations over competition for land, jobs and political power. Entire villages were burned to the ground.
In May, the government announced a campaign to resettle Kenyans, sometimes by force, in their villages. Government officials say nearly 200,000 people returned home.
But in reality, very few have returned to the homes they fled, aid workers say. Most have simply shifted to new, smaller camps, moved in with relatives, returned to ancestral homelands or are squatting on empty land or church grounds.
"It wasn't really a resettlement -- it was just a transfer," said Charles Kariuki, who leads a group of displaced people in central Kenya.
Critics say the government not only failed to provide the promised monetary compensation to help victims rebuild homes, but it also ignored the most crucial component: reconciliation. Legislation to create a national reconciliation commission is tied up in parliament.
As a result, many displaced people say they remain too afraid or too angry to go home.
Virginia Wangari, 62, a divorced mother of eight, said she was persuaded by government officials to leave a displacement camp in May and return to her Rift Valley village. She said she was promised tents, food and other supplies, and told that local officials would be waiting to welcome her.
Instead, she and other returnees found no one to greet them and spent their first night on a bus by the side of the road. In the morning, local officials told her she was on her own, suggesting that she pitch a tent on the charred remains of her house.
She quickly learned that going home was not an option. The same rival tribe members who had chased her away six months earlier were attacking and raping women who attempted to return. Not far away, returnees were greeted with threatening leaflets, making it clear they were not welcome.
"I'm not going to take my neck to the butcher," Wangari said. "If I went home now, I'd be killed." She returned to the displacement camp.
Humanitarian aid experts say the government needs to lay the groundwork for resettlement by bringing tribes together to vent their frustrations and forgive one another.
"You have to have reconciliation before resettlement," said Daniel Were, a peace activist in the city of Eldoret. "The government wants to be seen as doing something, but they are only doing part of the job."
U.S. Ambassador Michael E. Ranneberger expressed optimism that the new government would produce results in coming months, saying Kibaki and Odinga are committed to the process.
"People need to keep their eye on the president and prime minister, and listen to what they are saying," Ranneberger said. "They realize they need each other to fulfill their agendas."
But others say Kenya's leaders may be reluctant to tackle the most controversial issues, such as land reform and constitutional review, because they worry that a debate could rekindle tensions, possibly leading to a collapse of the coalition or renewed fighting.
Perils for politicians
Many politicians now serving in top posts also may find themselves implicated in investigations of corruption, election fraud and postelection violence, creating another disincentive, experts said.
"Most of the people in this government are the product of 40 years of corruption, violence and impunity," said Ben Rawlence, a Kenya researcher for Human Rights Watch.
"They are all involved. The coalition government itself is what needs to be brought to book."
He expressed pessimism that government officials would push for reforms or prosecutions that might curtail their powers, hit their pocketbooks or implicate their supporters.
Odinga, for example, recently called for amnesty for jailed supporters accused of participating in riots. Kibaki is insisting that they be tried in court.
"If this is the face of the 'new' Kenya," Rawlence said, "it's worrying."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)