Washington Imposes an Awful Bill on Kenya

This is the first time I am hearing that the IMF and World Bank can draft a bill for a country and send it with an accompanying letter dictating that not an iota of the draft be changed. The penalty is further with-holding of much needed funds. President Moi of Kenya is headed for parliament to impresss upon the Members of Parliament the need to comply with the orders from Washington. Here is the full story (the relevant paragraphs are in bold).

News
Tuesday, August 14, 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Passing the anti-graft Bill will be a monumental task even as President Moi goes to Parliament this afternoon to cast his vote.

The President is expected to have wooed 33 additional MPs in addition to 112 who voted for the Constitution of Kenya (Amendment) Bill last Thursday when it failed to get 65 per cent or 145 of 222 MPs to change the Constitution.

The Opposition need not raise 78 or 35 per cent of MPs to block the Bill because this is only required in the first round of voting.

If it fails to get 65 per cent support, the Speaker will announce that it has failed and the government has to wait for six months to bring back the Bill.

One reason why Parliament is against the Bill has to do with the United States, which is pressurising the House and government to pass it into law as it is.

On his part, the Attorney-General, Mr Amos Wako, is not telling the public of a letter from the donors he has in his drawer.

It is in the public domain that the World Bank and International Monetary Fund drew up the Bill.

When the draft reached Sheria House, it had an accompanying letter stating that not a single line or word should be changed.

The AG explained this to the Cabinet, and it appears that the government was intimidated by Washington. It did not want to go against donor conditions by changing the draft.

MPs – from both sides of the House – who are opposed to the Bill may not be aware of this letter.

Although the Constitution forbids amendments at any stage on such a Bill, this is one law the government will be reluctant to withdraw or incorporate suggestions from MPs and the public.

There are two options open to the government to save the Bill. It can withdraw or publish it afresh, including suggestions at the floor of the House and the public.

Alternatively, parliamentary Standing Order 102 can be invoked for the House to fix a date when the Bill can be returned. This will allow consensus-building.

When President Moi goes to the House to vote – the first time a Kenyan President will be voting on a Bill – he is probably under obligation from donors to show he has done his best.

Last year, a court outlawed the Kenya Anti-Corruption Authority on the basis that the Constitution vests powers to investigate and prosecute in the AG.

The matter was complicated later when Parliament rejected the Public Service (Code of Conduct and Ethics) Bill arguing that it contravened separation of powers between the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. MPs arrived at this conclusion based on an earlier clause which set up a committee that would interview all public office holders - including the president, speaker and chief justice - where they would be required to declare their wealth before taking office.

Although the issue of providing amnesty for corruption cases prior to December 1997 is not in this Bill, its enactment will nevertheless pave way for other two Bills which seek to provide it.

In pointing out flaws in the Bill MPs argued that it creates a parallel AG in KACA and that it provides for only public officers - not members of the public - for whom the law will apply.

They also argued that instead of relying on Kenyan legal experts, the AG made a mistake by soliciting consultancy from South Africa to draw up the Bills.

If the president and the National Development Party of Energy Minister Raila Odinga succeed today, this would pave way for the Ethics Bill and the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Bill which are pending before the House.

It means the controversy is not over for the two Bills are the ones which are intended to give amnesty.

The reinstatement of KACA remains a donor condition and Kenyans will be waiting anxiously this afternoon to see if President Moi's presence would bear fruits.