Human rights groups in Kenya have called on the government to set up an independent truth and reconciliation commission that will, among other things, try judges who were suspended last year on charges of corruption.
At present, a special tribunal is dealing with these allegations. Certain activists have little faith in the body, however.
“The corruption war is selective and seeks to weed out anti-Kibaki men,” says Kamanda Mucheke, Programmes Director of People Against Torture: a pressure group based in Nairobi.
“Government has put its allies as members of the tribunal so that they can push government’s interests. This is an exhibition that the executive is trying to control the judiciary for its own expediency.”
Various critics fear that President Mwai Kibaki’s administration might make use of the tribunal to exact revenge on judges who frustrated his two earlier attempts to become head of state.
Kibaki vied for the presidency in 1992 and 1997, but was beaten by former Kenyan leader Daniel Arap Moi. Although Kibaki contested the two results, citing election rigging, he received an unfavourable verdict from certain members of the bench -‒ some of whom are now before the tribunal.
Government flatly denies the charges by Mucheke and others.
“The government is delivering its promise of dealing with corrupt personalities. There is no bias, and nobody is being victimised. The human rights people can shout all they can: they are enjoying freedom of expression,” said an official within the justice ministry who requested anonymity.
Twenty-three judges were suspended last October. Only eight are appearing before the tribunal -‒ the rest chose to resign. The suspension followed the release of a report by the Integrity and Anti-Corruption Committee in September 2003, which accused the legal officials of altering their rulings in exchange for sexual favours and bribes of up to $20 000 -‒ or more.
The report also alleged that certain judges had concealed evidence in their cases. As a result of the committee’s findings, government appointed the special tribunal to try judges accused of corrupt activities.
The five-person tribunal conducted its first public hearings this week, with Appeal Court judge Philip Waki taking the stand. Appellate judge Moijo ole Keiwua, and High Court judges Daniel Aganyanya, Roselyne Nambuye, Tom Mbaluto, Kasanga Mulwa, Msagha Mbogholi and Vitalis Juma are also in the line-up.
High levels of corruption in Kenya were a key factor in the 1997 decision by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to freeze funding for the East African nation. This aid has since been resumed.
The Goldenberg scandal is perhaps the best-known example of the problem. It concerns the dubious export of gold and diamonds from Kenya between 1990 and 1993, in which the country lost about $600-million dollars -‒ more than 10% of its annual gross domestic product.
Goldenberg International, a company owned by millionaire Kamlesh Pattni, was at the heart of the scandal -‒ which allegedly involved top officials from the Moi government. A number of personalities in the current administration are also said to have been named in the investigations.
Last year, President Kibaki set up a commission to probe the Goldenberg exports. But, rights groups say a more comprehensive approach should be taken to addressing past sins -‒ and one that is demonstrably free of any government influence.
“We support tribunals because for a long time, (officials) have not been accountable to the public. But instead of government putting up these small hearings, doing things in piecemeal, it needs to establish one big truth commission that will address all ills committed against Kenyans,” says Steve Ouma of the Kenya Human Rights Commission.
“It will focus on all sorts of injustices including political, social and economic.”
A Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission was also recommended last August by a government-appointed task force that looked into whether such a body was viable.
However, certain political commentators have come out in support of the government’s current approach -‒ as evidenced by the tribunal appointed to try judges.
“This shows political will of the authorities to stamp out corruption,” notes Maina Muiruri, a senior political analyst for a local newspaper. But, he adds, “To display further commitment, the government should take seriously (the) outcome from such a tribunal.” -IPS