People,
The Coalition Government leadership should know better that their evidential failure to lead has been confirmed from going ons of present case-scenario. This confirms even further about their full participation and engagement on 2007/8 deadly massacre and distability in their conflict of interest scramble to leadership power.
Kenya has been on the spotlight before the world leadership who has confirmed their failed ability to lead peacefully and safely; thus the instruction for heads up, as a good gesture which they loath and thereby retaliated through their agents gun for hire.
To openly abuse and insult President Obama's Administration Secretary of State is naive and completely unacceptable. The Coalition Government Leadership of President Kibaki and PM Raila must be put to task to explain to the world; as this behavior must not be left to pass by the wind. It is a serious embarrassment that must not be tolerated and as a result, it must not be taken lightly.......
It will not be business as usual and it is about time, a measure of bold action to set some discipline and order must take effect urgently before things fall apart. This is serious abuse of corrupted power that, pressure must be exerted immediately to close up this nonsensical behavior and attitude.........
On behalf of the voice of reason with voiceless majority from victim of circumstances, I call upon President Obama to act firmly and swiftly so order and discipline can begin to take shape urgently.
Sad to say........ Leaders behaving badly in public should not be taken lighly........
Thank you all for sharing.......
Crossfire_Part 1 Crossfire_Part 2 Crossfire_Part 3 Published on Aug 8, 2012 by K24TV Join Fred as he engages panelists on Clinton's Visit Crossfire_Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSNZTn4KoLo Published on Aug 8, 2012 by K24TV Join Fred as he engages panelists on Clinton's Visit
Why Uhuru and Ruto are uneasy with Clinton visitBy EMEKA-MAYAKA GEKARA gmayaka@ke.nationmedia.co.ke Posted Saturday, August 11 2012 at 23:30 In Summary
The visit by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton last week has rattled Mr Uhuru Kenyatta's and Mr William Ruto's presidential campaigns.
This follows remarks attributed to her in media reports that the US was not ready to work with Deputy Prime Minister Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP Ruto should either of them be elected president next year. There is also the fear that her comments may provide fodder for some politicians once a court ruling is made on the eligibility of the two to run for president. If the decision is not in Mr Kenyatta's and Mr Ruto's favour, their allies may blame the decision on Mrs Clinton's influence. Civil society groups have moved to court seeking a declaration on whether the two, who are fighting crimes against humanity charges at the International Criminal Court, should be allowed to vie for the presidency in the March 4, 2013 election.
Made it clear Ahead of the visit, the State Department had made it clear that Mrs Clinton's agenda was to discuss Kenya's next elections. At a meeting with US embassy staff and families last Saturday, the Obama administration's top diplomat described the March 4 polls as "critical elections". "Because of the violence in 2007, Kenya lost more than a billion dollars in investment. The GDP dropped significantly," she said. Mrs Clinton said that whenever Kenya Government leaders ask her to help them attract more business and investment, she always has a ready response.
"Do your part to make sure this election is free, fair and transparent and that all Kenyans accept the results, and do your part to speak out against divisiveness," she said. The US official met President Kibaki, Prime Minister Odinga, Chief Justice Mutunga, and other government officials to push for a transparent, credible and non-violent election. But it is the subject of the meeting between Mrs Clinton and Dr Mutunga that is generating the most heat. On Thursday, Nairobi-based lawyer Harrison Kinyanjui wrote to the CJ asking him whether they discussed "the conduct or direction of Kenyan judicial proceedings". This was an apparent reference to the Uhuru-Ruto eligibility case. What is going largely unarticulated is the fear that Mrs Clinton was in some way trying to influence the decision, which could put the independence of the Judiciary to the test. Mr Ruto, who wants to vie for the presidency on a United Republican Party ticket, on Monday accused Mrs Clinton of plotting to lock him and Mr Kenyatta out of the State House race. "The US Secretary of State has told the government that Mr Kenyatta and I are not supposed to run. She has also hinted that America will impose sanctions on us if we participate in the polls and win. This is dictatorship," he said. Mr Ruto was reacting to reports that Mrs Clinton was concerned that the two may be planning to use the presidency to frustrate the ICC. And on Friday, Mr Kenyatta, who has been building his platform — The National Alliance — told off those opposed to his candidature over his ICC case. "It is not for foreigners nor for the courts to decide who should vie for the presidency; it is up to the over 40 million Kenyans."
Mr Onyango Oloo, the TNA secretary, yesterday said that America was not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the document that led to the establishment of The Hague-based court. Mr Oloo argued that Mr Kenyatta has not been found guilty of anything before the ICC. "It is only charges that have been confirmed against him. Kenya has a sovereign right to choose its leaders and the Constitution spells out who can or cannot run for the presidency. The Constitution and the ICC do not bar Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto from vying," he said. In his response to Mr Kinyanjui, Dr Mutunga is said to have denied discussing any judicial proceedings with Mrs Clinton. He said they discussed the preparations the judiciary was making to support efforts to hold a credible, free and fair election. A source at the judiciary familiar with the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity said the two also discussed issues related to post-election violence and support for judicial reforms.
Public confidence "She asked the judiciary to play its role to inspire public confidence and ensure that the outcome of the next election is respected by all Kenyans." According to the source, Mrs Clinton emphasised that the outcome of the next election should "bring dignity and honour to Kenya and the international community".
Dr John Khaminwa, a Senior Counsel, added that there was "absolutely nothing wrong" with Mrs Clinton calling on the CJ. "It is normal for politicians to call on people who wield power. The CJ wields a lot of power. Sometimes it's given publicity and sometimes not," said Dr Khaminwa. "A CJ knows what his role is, and there's nothing wrong in having tea and talking about university days or other matters of society." If Mrs Clinton commented on the Kenyan cases at The Hague-based court and the aftermath of the post-election violence, she is not the first high-ranking American official to do so. Her boss, President Barack Obama, has already asked the government to cooperate with the court set to try four Kenyans suspected to have perpetrated the violence. "No community should be singled out for shame or held collectively responsible. Let the accused carry their own burdens, and let us keep in mind that under the ICC process, they are innocent until proven guilty," said President Obama when the suspects' names were made public. Prof Macharia Munene of the United States International University says that owing to his heritage as the son of a Kenyan, President Obama has a personal interest in local issues. But if Mrs Clinton did say the US would impose sanctions if either Mr Ruto or Mr Kenyatta becomes president, her statements could re-ignite questions over the US's interest in the ICC cases. "They may reinforce the public perception that the ICC proceedings are orchestrated by certain forces," said the scholar, who teaches diplomacy. He added that a peaceful Kenya after the next elections was critical for America's geo-political strategy because of its position in East Africa and the Horn of Africa.
Special relationship
Mr Herbert Kerre, a lecturer at Kabianga University College, said Mrs Clinton's position must be seen in light of President Obama's special relationship with Kenya, and described Mr Ruto as a politician in "permanent war mode". "President Obama ... has a special interest in what goes on here. Kenya should accommodate views of friendly countries." Statements by US or British officials about Kenyan polls often elicit emotional debate, with the overriding accusation that they want to determine the outcome.
Since the ICC intervention in Kenya, the two countries have found themselves having to clarify that they have no intention of determining President Kibaki's successor. But foreign nations that were actively involved in efforts to bring an end to the violence following the 2007 elections have been categorical that everything must be done to prevent a repeat of the bloodshed.
Why Judiciary is Kenya's last hopeRelated NewsSHARE THIS STORYUpdated 1 hrs 27 mins ago By Peter Opiyo and Alex Ndegwa With Parliament and Cabinet slowly but unwaveringly relaxing measures that could have raised the bar for those elective offices, attention is slowly shifting to the Judiciary. This is because despite it being a separate arm of government, the Judiciary enjoys a growing reputation that it is finally firmly on the reform path and is the bastion of progressiveness. But even more importantly, it is the neutral arbiter set out by the Constitution if and when the spirit and letter of the laws promulgated in the 2010 national referendum are betrayed. Already, outrage has greeted the Cabinet's deliberate and systematic removal of stringent measures that should have raised the bar for those seeking leadership positions. Members of Parliament have removed clauses in several Acts of Parliament ostensibly to shield those with questionable records and it appears only the Judiciary can save the country when the country's protests turn to it for interpretation and direction. The MPs have systematically removed provisions in the Elections and Political Parties Act, the latest being an attempt to lower the integrity thresh-hold requiring that all public office seekers be vetted. Instead of undergoing vetting by established institutions, the MPs now want the threshold to be lowered so that they can only tick 'Yes' or 'No' on declaration forms to affirm if they have been involved in any malpractice. In the new order, brought about by the current Constitution, Kenyans expected a watertight law that would herald a new breed of leadership, high on moral standards and clean on the criminality gauge, but the Cabinet has flushed this dream down the drain. It doesn't make matters better, for the same politicians whom the law targets, are the ones on whose shoulders the public has heaped their hope of salvation from the watered down Leadership and Integrity Bill (2012) when it comes up for debate in Parliament. The Bill, tabled in Parliament last week, fails to establish a vetting process for persons seeking election to public office required to enforce ethical and moral requirements spelt in Chapter Six of the Constitution. Law Society of Kenya (LSK), Transparency International-Kenya (TI-Kenya) and the Commission for Implementation of the Constitution (CIC) have lashed out at the Executive for watering down the Bill and urged MPs and the public to resist this move. Other avenues LSK Chairman Eric Mutua explains that the only other avenues to reverse the trend MPs have taken would be resorting to the Judiciary and "people's power". "The public can exert pressure on Parliament to reject the Bill on Integrity, but it would be a tall order because the MPs have a vested interest in the Bill. However, people can still resort to court action," Mutua advised. Even though MPs have a chance to amend the Bill to reinstate thorough vetting mechanisms, it is unlikely the MPs would yield to public pressure given their record, especially where their interests are involved. Further, CIC says the Bill excludes public participation in the vetting process for persons seeking election or appointment to State office and warned these omissions defeat the Bill's objective to provide "a minimum threshold of election based on personal integrity, competence and suitability." LSK argues the Bill has completely been watered down and that it gives blackout to how those facing charges on international crimes can be dealt with. "It says nothing about international crimes and how those facing such charges can be dealt with. It gives a blackout on this aspect," Mutua says. On its part, TI-Kenya says the Bill as drafted by the Cabinet fails to outline mechanisms for gauging high integrity amongst State Officers, and calls on Parliament to stand up to the occasion and amend the Bill, in line with the CIC's copy. TI-Kenya says the Bill ignored the input by the public and other stakeholders and bears provisions that are fertile grounds for judicial challenge. "This Bill carries with it provisions that are unconstitutional and therefore open to challenge before the High Court," says TI-Kenya. Calculated attempt This move by the Cabinet appears to be a calculated attempt to have politicians evade vetting ahead of the polls. Last year, MPs made useless the law that established the Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission. Then, MPs expunged provisions granting teeth to EACC, including powers to prosecute, before sacking the five directors, which plunged the commission in limbo. Ironically, in the latest Bill Cabinet removed a mechanism to allow the EACC to prosecute cases related to integrity violations where the Director of Public Prosecutions refuses to prosecute without good cause. EACC is meant to be a bigger player in the vetting of public officers. CIC says the published Bill is a far cry to the one it forwarded to the Attorney General on July 31 and has urged the public to pile pressure on the Executive and Parliament. The Bill fails to establish transparent procedures and mechanisms for the effective administration of Chapter Six on Leadership and Integrity. The Bill processed by CIC contained such measures, tasked EACC as the primary entity for ensuring compliance and emphasized on the need for those seeking elective posts to meet moral and ethical requirements. "The CIC, having considered the published Bill on Leadership and Integrity, is of the opinion that the proposed law is ineffective in implementing Chapter Six of the Constitution and contains clauses that are unconstitutional," CIC warns. The team led by Mr Charles Nyachae branded the Bill in its current form "a statement of intent" with no real mechanism of realising that intent. "It is important to note that in the absence of a legislative mechanism for vetting persons seeking State office, Kenyans will be forced to resort to the Courts for appropriate declarations, a process that will be costly, time consuming and which should only be a last resort," CIC says in its advisory. The Bill cleared by CIC compelled any person seeking an appointment or election to a State office to obtain from the commission a certificate of compliance with Chapter Six of the Constitution. The Leadership and Integrity Bill was considered the next major obstacle for MPs ahead of polls. Kenya faces sanctions over failure to enact laws against terrorismBy PATRICK MAYOYO pmayoyo@ke.nationmedia.com Posted Sunday, August 12 2012 at 23:30 In Summary
Kenya risks being blacklisted by an international coalition fighting terrorism due to lack of laws to curb money laundering and terrorism financing. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global standard setting body for anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT), says in a report that although Kenya has shown high-level political commitment to work with it and the Eastern and Southern Africa Anti-Money Laundering Group to address its deficiencies in the two areas, it has not made sufficient progress in implementing its action plan. Now the body warns that if Kenya does not take significant actions by October 2012, it will call upon its members to apply countermeasures "proportionate to the risks associated with Kenya" in its June 2012 report. These concerns are also said to have been raised by the US State Department just before the recent visit by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. According to a State Department statement, before Mrs Clinton's visit, the US had raised concerns over lack of an adequate legal regime to fight money laundering and specifically laws criminalizing terrorism financing. Ahead of Mrs Clinton's visit, the US Department of Treasury official in charge of Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes Luke Bronin was in the country and met with various leaders including the late Internal Security minister George Saitoti, his Finance counterpart Njeru Githae and the Central Bank Governor Njuguna Ndung'u. It was Mr Bronin's opinion that Kenya needed to put in place proper legislation. Finance minister Njeru Githae, told the Daily Nation in an interview that Kenya had put in place the legal framework to fight money laundering. "We have the Anti-Money Laundering Act in place and we have also taken other administrative measures like "know your customer" rules which make it mandatory for banks to monitor unusual activities in an account," he said. Mr Githae said the government had also established an anti-money laundering unit and seconded staff from different key departments to it. "The only thing missing is the law criminalizing terrorism financing but the Cabinet has already approved the Suppression of Terrorism Bill and this law will be in place once Parliament approves the Bill," he said. Mr Githae said even in the absence of the law criminalizing terrorism financing, the government had put in place measures to curb the vice. "We are 99 per cent compliant with criminalizing terrorism financing," he said. Kenya has been in the recent past on the spot over money laundering activities. The assets of three Kenyans, Mr Abubaker Shariff Ahmed, Mr Omar Awadh Omar and Mr Aboud Rogo Mohammed were frozen after they were listed in a United States government report over alleged links to Somalia's militia group Al-Shabaab. The three were blacklisted in an "executive order" signed by President Barack Obama. It means the individuals cannot access their property in the US including bank accounts and real estate, among others. Recently, it was revealed that money launders may have used the bank accounts of Kenya Planters Cooperative Union (KPCU) to bring in more than Sh210 billion. KPCU accounts dating as far back as 2003, a period when the country was yet to tighten surveillance on money laundering, show that a group of well-connected individuals manipulated the union's account to clean dirty money entering the country. For instance, an unexplained transaction on February 13, 2004, shows that the union overdrew its account by Sh210 billion ($2.53 billion) from the bank. Recent reports by the Central Bank of Switzerland and Transparency International show that Kenyans have stashed away Sh72 billion and Sh700 billion respectively in foreign accounts. Who is against a free and fair General Election?By MAKAU MUTUA Posted Saturday, August 11 2012 at 19:43 In Summary
I have a startling revelation – a true bombshell. Guess what? There are some malignant Kenyans who don't want a free and fair election. I don't mean "Wanjiku," or the hoi polloi. I mean prominent, powerful, and wealthy people. Call them the "owners" of Kenya. You know them. That's why we won't name any names. But they are against the "little people" – you and me. Methinks I know why they oppose a truly democratic election. And it's not just my crystal ball that's been "seeing". Nor must you be a genius to "divine" why "they" want to scuttle the election. Think about it – all the evidence is "hidden" in plain sight. Nothing's more dangerous than a wounded lion. A curious thing happened this past week. America's Secretary of State Hillary Clinton breezed into town. Powerful Kenyans The third most powerful American had one singular message for the four most powerful Kenyans. She told President Mwai Kibaki, Prime Minister Raila Odinga, Chief Justice Willy Mutunga, and Speaker Kenneth Marende the same thing – don't mess up the upcoming election. The unequivocal message was delivered point blank. It wasn't crude or blunt, but neither was it sugar-coated. Does Madam Secretary know something we don't? I don't think so – she was simply confirming what we already know. There are some people who are very – extremely – unhappy about the elections. These people – forces – believe that the next elections will be akin to a "political guillotine". I will tell you why. The "old Kenya" is on its deathbed. I know, I know – it isn't dead yet.
But mark my words – it's dying. The "old Kenya" has been ruled by a feckless elite. It sees no evil, hears no evil, speaks no evil, and does no evil. It's been a thieving elite. It's surname is "impunity". It's a fat, out-of-shape elite – literally and metaphorically. That's because it eats too much red meat, drinks too much alcohol, and doesn't exercise. It doesn't apply its mind to the national interest. There's only one problem. While death is certain, it may take a long time. Remember this – the kicks of a dying horse are the most wicked. It's people within this "old elite" that don't want a free election. They see the next election as a death warrant. They fear extinction. I am afraid they are right. That's because the "new Kenya" will bury the old.
Political class
But deaths are painful. So are births. That's why on March 4, 2013 there will be a funeral of one political class, and the birth of another. But only if we have a free and fair election. The history of "modern Kenya" may start then in earnest.
If the stars align, Kenya will finally be liberated on that fateful day. The true potential of our people will be freed and let loose. The blood-sucking elite will have their comeuppance. What am I talking about? The new Constitution is the "coffin of the old order". It's also the "cradle of the new order". But this isn't news to the Dracula-like elite. That's why they tried to kill the adoption of the new Constitution. They failed, but are determined to despoil it – by preventing its implementation. However, there've only one sure way to bring the new Constitution to naught – by either winning the next election, or making it unfree and unfair. In a word, scuttling it. It's going to be a "battle royale".
The future of Kenya will hinge on it. It will be a contest between the people (David) and the looting elite (Goliath). It will be titanic.
Just how did we get here? Good political science will tell you how. It's been through the sweat – and blood – of people who believed in the "idea of Kenya". They eschewed their individual gain for the greater public good.
I am talking about Dedan Kimathi, the Mau Mau, and all the anti-colonialists, Pio Gama Pinto, Oginga Odinga, MeKatilili, Muindi Mbingu, JM Kariuki – and all the unsung heroes and heroines who perished in the struggle so that we may one day breathe free.
Post-colonial Kenya
I am talking about those who were detained, tortured, exiled, and persecuted by a brutal post-colonial Kenya.
These are the men and women who have brought us here. It's their spirit that must triumph on March 4.
This brings me to the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission. I am worried – very worried – about what I perceive as either incompetence or sabotage of the commission. Chairman Issack Hassan used to inspire confidence. I am afraid that seems to be no longer the case. I hope I am wrong.
We know that the electoral commission has been the bane of Kenyan elections. We also know that as the "chairman goes, so does the commission". Similarly, I am very concerned about the commission's secretariat.
The chief executive James Oswago is long on words and short on action. We are in deep trouble if the two top officials don't have the public's confidence.
Critical question
This is the critical question: Is the electoral commission free of all political machinations and manipulation?
If the commission, or any of its officials is tainted, or partisan, then we must move quickly to purge them.
If not, we will not have a free and fair election on March 4. That's what the merchants of impunity want – either they manipulate the election to their advantage, or discredit the commission so as to render the election unacceptable.
Perhaps that was Secretary Clinton's worry.
Makau Mutua is Dean and SUNY Distinguished Professor at SUNY Buffalo Law School and Chair of the KHRC.
Kimunya at the centre of a row over a Sh55bn airport tenderBy MUGUMO MUNENE mmunene@ke.nationmedia.com Posted Saturday, August 11 2012 at 23:30 In Summary
Transport minister Amos Kimunya is at the centre of a new controversy involving the construction of a new airport terminal in Nairobi at an estimated cost of Sh55 billion. The proposed facility, to be built on land next to Jomo Kenyatta International Airport, is one of Vision 2030 flagship projects — second in size only to Lamu Port. It is designed to decongest JKIA and affirm Nairobi's position as the leading aviation hub in the eastern Africa region. The proposed airport, known in government circles as the Greenfield Project, will have a state-of-the-art terminal and a new runway. It is not part of the ongoing expansion of JKIA. Intrigues about the project have sucked in top officials in the Office of the President, the Prime Minister's office and the Cabinet.
The Kenya Airports Authority (KAA), which falls in Mr Kimunya's docket, is the implementing agency and its board and management have been mandated to identify a competent contractor to deliver the project. It is Mr Kimunya's role in the cancellation of a tender award to Chinese company Anhui Construction Engineering Group that has thrust the minister into the centre of the current controversy.
According to confidential documents seen by the Sunday Nation, Mr Kimunya had in January, through Permanent Secretary Dr Cyrus Njiru, instructed the KAA board to cancel the tender in controversial circumstances and restart the process afresh.
The Chinese firm has gone to the Public Procurement Oversight Authority seeking a review of the termination. The company argues that the purported cancellation is in breach of the law and the Transport minister and PS and KAA should be restrained. On Friday, the KAA board was holding a crisis meeting most of the day as the push and pull in government circles over the project continues.
But even as Mr Kimunya pushed for cancellation, KAA received communication from the acting Head of Public Service, Mr Francis Kimemia, directing the corporation to provide the Office of the President with a ground-breaking schedule for the project, expected to be done by the end of November.
Major infrastructure projects have been high on President Kibaki's agenda and his handlers appear keen that the Head of State signs off the project before his exit from office. Speaking during the Kenya Airways Rights Issue ceremony on March 20, 2012, President Kibaki said: "I would like to see the expansion project move faster. Any delays are costly to the country. I, therefore, challenge Kenya Airports Authority to hasten the expansion of our airports."
Projects of Greenfield's magnitude routinely attract big political and financial lobbying locally and internationally. The Sunday Nation has been told that people with influence in government are supporting different companies interested in the project, sparking a vicious battle for the ultimate prize.
Currently, JKIA faces stiff competition from Ethiopia, Rwanda and South Africa in modernising air transport.
Addis Ababa is in the process of constructing a second major airport outside the capital while Kigali plans to build a $700 million (Sh56 billion) airport in the hope of establishing an alternative aviation hub in the region.
In an interview on Friday, Mr Kimunya said the procurement process was flawed and vowed to ensure the award to the Chinese firm is reversed. "The process has to be restarted. It doesn't matter to me who will break ground as long as we get it right," Mr Kimunya said.
He added unequivocally: "Kama ni mbaya ni mbaya. Let's move on to what will deliver." At first, Mr Kimunya was reluctant to comment on the project because it was under consideration in the Cabinet but he changed his mind and responded to a series of questions in a telephone interview lasting 31 minutes. According to him, Kenya Airways is expected to make great use of the new facility and "they were not involved in the design. You cannot build without consulting them". However, according to documents in our possession, Kenya Airways was involved in the design of the master plan. In March 2010, KAA board papers show the design was changed to accommodate input by KQ and the Ministry of Transport. Funds to start off the project preliminaries were included in the KAA budget for the current financial year.
Kenya Airways Managing Director Titus Naikuni could not be reached for comment as he is out of the country on official duty.
Mr Kimunya was at pains to justify his reasons for the cancellation given that the reasons he gave the Sunday Nation differed from what he had told the KAA board in January. At the time, he had, in the letter written by his PS, questioned the procurement process and not Kenya Airways' involvement.
In any event, Mr Naikuni has long pushed for expansion and modernisation of the airport. Kenya Airways' expansion plan, in which the airline will increase aircraft from the current 34 to 107, requires urgent construction of new facilities.
In a letter to the KAA Managing Director Stephen Gichuki on January 10 this year directing that the tendering process be restarted, the PS, Dr Njiru, said he had been instructed to order a retendering by Mr Kimunya because there was an "unacceptable number" of technical and financial proposals to be considered, the bidders did not provide finance, and that bidders should not have competed on the financial aspect of the project. KAA wrote back, explaining that contrary to Dr Njiru's letter, bidders were not supposed to finance the project but to identify a capable financier who KAA would directly negotiate with.
Mr Gichuki said that procedure had been followed "to the letter" and responded to every point raised by the PS. But a month later on February 10, Dr Njiru responded with new instructions to cancel the tender.
Three days later, Mr Kimunya and Dr Njiru summoned the KAA board and management and asked the board to cancel the tender and restart the process.
After the meeting, KAA wrote to Attorney-General Githu Muigai and external lawyers, seeking legal opinion on termination. Prof Muigai advised against cancellation and said due process had been followed. Cancelling the contract would "undermine the integrity and fairness of the procurement process".
"We are of the considered opinion that termination of the procurement proceedings after award is tantamount to termination of the contract in the sense that a binding legal relationship already exists between the parties.
"Such termination will prompt the successful bidder to enforce rights under the contract in the form of claim for damages and specific performance," the AG warned.
On Friday, Mr Kimunya told the Sunday Nation that he had not seen the AG's advice. "In any event, he's only a government lawyer".
The move to cancel the award did not escape attention of the President's office, where it attracted a dressing down.
"It is in bad taste and disrespectful to the Cabinet to attempt to compel the managing director to undertake such action behind the Cabinet Committee and the Cabinet itself. The board should give time to the Minister for Transport to appraise the Cabinet Committee and thereafter the Cabinet in its next meeting," Mr Kimemia wrote. According to Mr Kimemia, the same advice had been given to Dr Njiru during at meeting at the OP. The Greenfield project, which will see the airport handle an extra 12 million travellers annually, was approved by the KAA board on March 9, 2011 after it presented a master plan to the Transport ministry.
The now controversial tender was advertised on June 24, 2011 and attracted three Kenyan companies, 12 Chinese firms, four European and three from other countries in Africa. The number was limited by the stringent requirements; that they had to have constructed at least one similar airport in the previous 10 years, designed one in the previous five years, constructed a similar size facility in the previous five years and have a minimum business turnover of $200 million in the previous five years. They were also required to present a bid bond of Sh300 million, a form of assurance from a bank that they were capable of executing the contract.
KAA estimated that putting together the engineering and architectural drawings would cost no less than Sh30 million.
Documents seen by the Sunday Nation show that by October 3, 2011, the ministry of Transport had no issues with the procurement process. On November 18 last year, a day after contractors submitted their bids, the Office of the Prime Minister wrote to KAA requesting a brief on the status of the project and to seek Cabinet approval.
The KAA board followed up a response with a visit to Prime Minister Raila Odinga's office and was granted permission to proceed. A Cabinet paper was prepared and forwarded to the ministry of Transport.
After the tenders were received, five companies made it to the shortlist from which Anhui Construction Group, a Chinese company who partnered with UK firm Pascall + Watson Architects, were declared winners. The award was done on December 16, 2011. No bidder appealed the decision.
On January 11, 2012, China Development Bank forwarded formal terms to KAA on financing the project. It was about the same time that the Transport ministry started an earnest effort to have the tender cancelled. In the meantime, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission had received a complaint that the tendering process was flawed. They sent their officers on January 20 to collect the documents on the tender. A month later, they wrote back and said the project was in the clear and could proceed.
Seems Kimunya features in lead roles in so many horror movies.... Is he a one-man demolition crew of Kenya's economy?
I am not a fan of Kimunya but I agree with him on this one. The Chinese, from what we have seen of their airport construction in Kisumu should not get that tender. Visit Kisumu international airport and you will realise what I mean (shoddier than this does not exist). We need a JKI Airport having world standards of Amsterdam Schipol, Charles de Gaulle and not Pekin nor Shanghai. The Chinese showcase airport of Kisumu is an eyesore with a runway that will need lengthening in the future. The adage that "when we build let us build forever" is not Chinese.
|
Karibu Jukwaa la www.mwanabidii.com
Pata nafasi mpya za Kazi www.kazibongo.blogspot.com
Blogu ya Habari na Picha www.patahabari.blogspot.com
Kujiondoa Tuma Email kwenda
wanabidii+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com Utapata Email ya kudhibitisha ukishatuma
Disclaimer:
Everyone posting to this Forum bears the sole responsibility for any legal consequences of his or her postings, and hence statements and facts must be presented responsibly. Your continued membership signifies that you agree to this disclaimer and pledge to abide by our Rules and Guidelines.
0 comments:
Post a Comment