Dr Christopher Ndarathi

Dr Christopher Ndarathi "Chris" Murungaru (born August 19, 1954, Nyeri, Kenya) is a Kenyan politician, a former Member of Parliament for Kieni Constituency in Nyeri District and a former Minister of Transport.Before being appointed Minister of Transport, he had been the Minister of National Security. He was transferred to the Ministry of Transport following revelations of the Anglo Leasing Scandal. When President Mwai Kibaki reconstituted the cabinet following a humiliating defeat in the November 21, 2005 constitutional Referendum, he was dropped from the cabinet. A close ally of Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki. when the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) Government took power from Kenya African National Union (KANU) in 2003, Dr Murungaru was named to the powerful docket of Minister of Internal Security. He was later transferred to the Ministry of Transport though a cabinet reshuffle. Recently, Dr Murungaru has been embroiled in a conflict with the British Government following cancellation of his Visa to enter the United Kingdom, due to allegations of corruption in the Anglo-Leasing scandal. He has taken the British Government to court challenging the cancellation of his visa. He has hired prominent Kenyan lawyer Paul Muite and a group of British lawyers, Mr Rabinder Singh, a Queen's Counsel of Matrix Chambers, London, Mr Richard Stein, a senior partner in Leigh, Day and Company and Ms Tessa Hetherington, a junior counsel of Matrix to represent him.On November 23, 2005, President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya dissolved his cabinet following a humiliating defeat on a referendum on the proposed constitution of Kenya. The president and his key allies, including Murungaru were campaigning for a Yes vote on the constitution, which they lost, forcing the president to reconstitute his cabinet. On January 22, 2006, John Githongo named Murungaru as one of three top politicians (along with Kiraitu Murungi, former Justice Minister and present Energy Minister, and Finance Minister David Mwiraria) as being involved in a financial scam involving up to worth $600M [1] On February 1, 2006, Finance Minister David Mwiraria announced that he was stepping down as a minister and a member of cabinet to pave way for investigation. The news were received with joy by many Kenyans, though some saw him as a scapegoat who has been sacrificed to protect a president whose support has been waning. On January 16, 2006, President Kibaki allowed anti-corruption chief Aaron Ringera to request Murungaru to declare and account for his wealth.[2] Murungaru has since moved to court to prevent the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission from investigating, saying fulfilling the commission's request would amount to self-incrimination. Vice President Moody Awori announced on February 2, 2006 that he would not step down despite being adversely mentioned in the Anglo Leasing Scandal. He has insisted that he is innocent, and that nothing short of due process will make him resign his post. He has criticized by many people for defending those involved in the scandal before Parliament.Court battles. On February 17, 2006, the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACA) arraigned Dr. Murungaru in a Nairobi court charging him without failing to declare and account for his wealth. The Commission believes that Dr. Murungaru has become too rich too quickly and has been investigating the source of his wealth, especially in relation to the Anglo Leasing Scandal. He denied refusing to declare his wealth, and was released on a bond of KES 200,000.On December 1, 2006, the Kenyan High Court determined that KACA's notice to Murungaru was not carried out according the laid down law that subsequently led to the High Court quashing KACA's case against Murungaru. The court did not however stop KACA from investigating Murungaru or anyone else for corruption but insisted that any orders issued by

the Commission be done so in a legal manner.A society in Kenya under the banner of the Name and Shame Corruption Network (NASCON) held a demonstration in the streets of Nairobi to push for the resignation of more senior people in President Mwai Kibaki's administration. Key among them is civil service boss Francis Muthaura and Vice President Moody Awori.In what was considered an upset, Murungaru was defeated by a comparatively obscure candidate in the Party of National Unity's primary elections for its parliamentary candidates in November 2007. Emilio Mwai Kibaki (born November 15, 1931) is the current and third President of the republic of Kenya.Kibaki was previously Vice President of Kenya for ten years from 1978±1988 and also held cabinet ministerial positions, including a widely acclaimed stint as Minister for Finance (1969±1981), Minister for Home Affairs (1982±1988) and Minister for Health (1988±1991). After resigning as a cabinet minister in 1991, Kibaki served as an opposition Member of Parliament from 1991 up to his election as Kenya's third president in 2002 after two unsuccessful bids for the Kenyan presidency in 1992 and 1997. He was sworn in on the night of 30 December 2007 for his second term as president after controversially emerging as the 'winner' of a bitterly contested election that was marked by accusations of fraud and widespread irregularities that led to civil unrest. In preparation for the 2002 elections, Kibaki's Democratic Party affiliated with several other opposition parties to form National Alliance Party of Kenya (NAK). A group of disappointed KANU presidential aspirants then quit KANU in protest after being overlooked by outgoing President Moi when Moi had founding Father Jomo Kenyatta's son, Uhuru Kenyatta, nominated to be the KANU presidential candidate, and hurriedly formed the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). NAK later combined with the LDP,to form the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC). On October 14, 2002, at a large opposition rally in Uhuru Park, Nairobi, Kibaki was nominated the NARC opposition alliance presidential candidate after Raila Odinga made the famous declaration, Kibaki Tosha![14] On 3 December 2002, Kibaki was injured in a road accident while on his way back to Nairobi from a campaign meeting at Machakos junction 40km From Nairobi. He was subsequently hospitalized in Nairobi , then London, after sustaining fracture injuries in the accident.[15] He still walks rather awkwardly as a result of those injuries.The rest of his presidential campaign was thus conducted by his NARC colleagues in his absence, led by Raila Odinga who campaigned tirelessly for Kibaki after stating that"The captain has been injured in the field... but the rest of the team shall continue." [15] On 27 December 2002, Kibaki and NARC won a landslide victory over KANU, with Kibaki getting 62% of the votes in the presidential elections, against only 31% for the KANU candidate Uhuru Kenyatta.[16]

[edit] Presidency
[edit] 2002 Swearing In, End of KANU Rule Moi Retirement

On 29 December 2002, still nursing injuries from the motor vehicle accident and in a wheel chair, Mwai Kibaki was sworn-in as the third President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Kenya in a boisterous, chaotic and jubilant ceremony held at the open grounds of Uhuru Park, Nairobi.. "I am inheriting a country which has been badly ravaged by years of misrule and ineptitude," he stated at his swearing-in, as quoted by Andrew England of the Associated Press. With Moi looking on, Kibaki reiterated his pledge to end government corruption. "The era of anything goes is now gone forever," he was quoted

by Marc Lacey of the New York Times as having said. "Government will no longer be run on the whims of individuals".[17] Thus ended four decades of KANU rule, KANU having hitherto ruled Kenya since independence. President Daniel Arap Moi, who had been Kenya's second president for 24 years since 1978, also began his retirement.
[edit] 2003-2005: Reviving The Economy and Ill Health

President Kibaki's first term was about reviving and turning round the Kenyan economy after years of economic mis-management during the Moi years[18]- a feat that was largely attained in the face of great challenges,including the President's ill health at the time, and political tension culminating in the break-up of the NARC coalition.The introduction of free primary education, was a great milestone. In late January 2003, it was announced that the President had been admitted to Nairobi Hospital to have a blood clot ± the after-effect of his car accident ± removed from his leg. He came out of hospital and addressed the public outside the hospital on TV in a visibly incoherent manner,and speculation since then is that he had suffered a stroke, his second, the first being said to have occurred sometimes in the 70s.[19] His subsequent ill health greatly diminished his performance during his first term and the affairs of government during that time are said to have been largely run by a group of loyal aides, both in and out of government, most of whom were his Kikuyu and Meru buddies.[19][20] Kibaki did not look good, for instance, when he appeared live on TV on 25 September 2003 to appoint Moody Awori Vice President after the death [21] in office of Vice President, Michael Wamalwa Kijana. In November 2004, in an ABC Prime Time interview with Peter Jennings, former US President Bill Clinton identified Kibaki as the one living person he would most like to meet "because of the Kenyan government's decision to abolish school fees for primary education".[22] Clinton added that, by providing free and compulsory primary education, what Kibaki had done would affect more lives than any president had done or would ever do by the end of the year. The free education programme saw nearly 1.7 million more pupils enroll in school by the end of that year. Clinton's wish was granted when he visited Kenya in the summer of 2005 and finally met president Kibaki on 22 July.
[edit] 2005-2007-Constitutional Referendum and the NARC Fallout

The 2005 Kenyan constitutional referendum was held on 21 November 2005.The main issue of contention in the Constitution review process was how much power should be vested in the Kenyan Presidency. In previous drafts, those who feared a concentration of power in the president added provisions for European-style power-sharing between a ceremonial President elected via universal suffrage and an executive Prime Minister elected by Parliament. The draft presented by the Attorney General Amos Wako for the referendum retained sweeping powers for the Presidency. [23] Though supported by Kibaki, some members of his own cabinet, mainly from the LDP wing led by Raila Odinga, and the main opposition party KANU, mobilised a powerful NO campaign that resulted in a majority of 58% Kenyan voters rejecting the draft.[24]

As a consequence of,and immediately after, the referendum loss,on 23 November 2005,Kibaki dismissed his entire cabinet in the middle of his administration's term, the aim being to purge all Raila allied ministers from the cabinet. [25] About his decision Kibaki said, ³Following the results of the Referendum, it has become necessary for me, as the President of the Republic, to re-organise my Government to make it more cohesive and better able to serve the people of Kenya". The only members of the cabinet office to be spared a midterm exit were the Vice President and Minister of Home Affairs, Moody Awori, and the Attorney General whose position is constitutionally protected. A new cabinet of Kibaki loyalists, including MPs from the opposition, termed the Government of National Unity (GNU), was thereafter appointed, but some MPs who were offered ministerial positions declined to take up posts.[26] A recent report by a Kenyan Commission of Inquiry, the Waki Commission, contextualizes the issues and events on page 30 as follows:The attempt to reduce the personal power [of the Presidency] that had been accumulated by former President Moi initially was the reason opposition forces sought to introduce the post of Prime Minister. This culminated in an informal Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) before the 2002 election between the then opposition coalition under which the coalition agreed to introduce the post of Prime Minister after the election. Once elected, however, President Kibaki reneged on the MoU. Discussions continued concerning constitutional change and the devolution of power. The Kibaki Government then came up with a draft Constitution put forward by Attorney General, Amos Wako watering down some of the provisions in the draft agreed to during the ³Bomas´ discussions. The Wako draft was put to the public at a referendum in 2005, where voters rejected it. [...] As soon as the MoU was scuttled, a group led by Raila Odinga left the NARC coalition Government. President¶s Kibaki Government was perceived as being unwilling to abide by its pre-election agreement with its partners and as retreating into an ethnic enclave. This was criticized by the public and was seen as an attempt by the so-called ³Mount Kenya Mafia´ to keep power to itself rather than share it. Even though the MoU was not a legal agreement, the Kibaki Government¶s turning away from it and removing from government the group of Ministers associated to Odinga had the effect of increasing the polarization of politics along ethnic lines. Even though the 2005 referendum was peaceful and the results were accepted rather than contested, the parameters were nevertheless drawn. With the ethnic political fault lines clearly drawn after 2005, and the need to win the presidency seen as paramount, tensions began to mount. [27]
[edit] 2007 Elections

On 26 January 2007, President Kibaki declared his intention of running for re-election in the 2007 presidential election.[28] On 16 September 2007, Kibaki announced that he would stand as the candidate of a new alliance incorporating all the parties who supported his re-election, called the Party of National Unity. The parties in his alliance included the much diminished former ruling KANU.[29][30] DP, Narc-Kenya, Ford-Kenya, Ford People, and Shirikisho.[30] Kibaki's main opponent, Raila Odinga, had used the referendum victory to launch the ODM, which nominated him as its presidential Candidate for the 2007 elections. On 30 September 2007, a robust and much healthier President Kibaki launched his presidential campaign at Nyayo Stadium, Nairobi.[31]

Kalonzo Musyoka then broke away from Raila's ODM to mount his own fringe bid for the presidency,thus narrowing down the contest between the main candidates, Kibaki, the incumbent, and Odinga.[32] Opinion polls up to election day showed Kibaki behind Raila Odinga nationally, but closing. On regional analysis, the polls showed him behind Raila in all regions of the country except Central Province, Embu and Meru,where he was projected to take most of the votes, and behind Kalonzo Musyoka in Kalonzo's native Ukambani.[33][34] It was thus projected to be a close election between Kibaki and Raila. After intense, expensive and vigorous campaigns, the election was held on 27 December 2007, and went on peacefully and orderly.
[edit] 2007 Elections:Disputed Win

Three days later, after a protracted count which saw presidential results in Kibaki's Central Kenya come in last, allegedly inflated,in a cloud of suspicion and rising tensions, amid vehement protests by Raila's ODM,overnight re-tallying of results and chaotic scenes, all beamed live on TV, at the national tallying center at the Kenyatta International Conference Center in Nairobi ,riot police eventually sealed off the tallying Center ahead of the result announcement, evicted party agents, observers and the media,[35] and moved the Chairman of the Electoral Commission, Samuel Kivuitu,to another room where Kivuitu went on to declare Kibaki the winner by 4,584,721 votes to Odinga's 4,352,993,[36] placing Kibaki ahead of Odinga by about 232,000 votes in the hotly contested election with Kalonzo Musyoka a distant third.[37] One hour later, in a hastily convened dusk ceremony, Kibaki was furtively sworn in at the grounds of State House Nairobi for his second term, defiantly calling for the "verdict of the people" to be respected and for "healing and reconciliation" to begin.[38][39][40] Immediately the results were announced, Odinga bitterly accused Kibaki of electoral fraud.[41] Odinga's allegations scored with his supporters, and seemed meritorious since the results had defied pre-election polls and expectations [42] and election day exit polls.[43] Furthermore,Odinga, who had run an anti±Kikuyu campaign,[44][45] had won the votes of most of the other Kenyan tribes and regions,[46] with Kibaki's victory being attained only with the near exclusive support of the populous Kikuyu, Meru and Embu communities-who had turned up to vote for Kibaki in large numbers after feeling ,in reaction to the Odinga campaign, and with the covert encouragement of the Kibaki campaign, increasingly besieged and threatened by the pro-Odinga tribes. Moreover, ODM had won the most parliamentary and local authority seats by a wide margin.[47] A joint statement by the British Foreign Office and Department for International Development cited "real concerns" over irregularities, while international observers refused to declare the election free and fair. The European Union chief observer, Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, cited one constituency where his monitors saw official results for Kibaki that were 25,000 votes lower than the figure subsequently announced by the Electoral Commission."Because of this and other observed irregularities, doubt remains as to the accuracy of the result of the presidential election as announced today," he said.[48] It was a low point in Kibaki's political career, during which he also showed a hitherto unknown harder side of him. The media captured the events and reactions at the time thus:"Previously regarded as a gentlemanly leader with a passion for golf, Kibaki has revealed a steely side.[49] ...With a reputation as a mild-mannered, old-school

gentleman,...[50] Kibaki, 76, showed a steely core by swearing himself in within an hour of being pronounced victor in an election denounced as fraudulent by opposition challenger Raila Odinga and questioned by international and Kenyan observers.Odinga's supporters said he would be declared president at a rival ceremony on Monday, but police banned the event [and hundreds of riot police sealed off the proposed venue, Uhuru Park for several days]."This is the saddest day in the history of democracy in this country. It is a coup d'etat," said Koki Muli, head of respected local watchdog, the Institute of Education in Democracy.[51] " In truth,the election was more of a draw, so close that the official inquiry of the election concluded it was impossible to conclusively establish who between Kibaki and Raila won.
y

[When the election was eventually investigated by the Independent Review Commission (IREC) on the 2007 Elections chaired by Justice Johann Kriegler, it was found that there were too many electoral malpractices from several regions perpetrated by all the contesting parties to conclusively establish which candidate won the December 2007 Presidential elections. Such malpractices included widespread bribery, vote buying, intimidation and ballot-stuffing by both sides, as well as incompetence from the Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK)(which was shortly thereafter disbanded by Parliament).[52]]

[edit] Post 2007 Elections Violence

Main Article: The 2007±2008 Kenyan crisis "It's not that we don't like Kikuyus -- it's because they think they have a right to rule this country forever, even if it means stealing votes.[53] " Opposition supporters saw the result as a plot by Kibaki's Kikuyu tribe, Kenya's largest, to keep power by any means.Feeling cheated and extremely bitter,[54] and also fueled by other long standing perceived grievances,[45][55] the tribes that lost the election could not contemplate five years without political power and anti-Kikuyu sentiment swelled.[44][56] Thus began the 2007±2008 Kenyan crisis, as violence broke out in several places in the country, started by the ODM supporters protesting the "stealing" of their "victory", and subsequently escalating as the targeted Kikuyus retaliated.[57][58][59] As unrest spread, television and radio stations were instructed to stop all live broadcasts. There was a major breakdown of law an order in several cities and regions, and the situation threatened to escalate into a cataclysmic disintegration of the country as whole areas began to be ethnically cleansed amidst threats of regions seceding from the country and leaving central Kenya "an Island like Lesotho". There was also widespread theft,vandalism, looting and destruction of property, and a significant number of atrocities,killings[60] and sexual violence were reported. A subsequent United Nations report stated that more than 1,200 Kenyans were reported killed, thousands more injured, over 300,000 people displaced and around 42,000 houses,farms and many businesses,looted or destroyed.[61] The violence continued for more than two months, as Kibaki ruled with "half" a cabinet he had appointed,[62] with Odinga and ODM refusing to recognize him as president.[63]

[edit] National Accord and Grand Coalition Government

The Country was only saved by the mediation of former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan with a Panel of ³Eminent African Personalities´ backed by the African Union, the United States and the United Kingdom. Following the mediation, a deal, called the national accord, was signed in February 2008 between Raila Odinga and Kibaki,now referred to as the "two Principals". The accord, later passed by the Kenyan Parliament as the National Accord and Reconciliation Act 2008 provided inter alia for power-sharing, with Kibaki remaining President and Raila Odinga taking a newly re-created post of Prime Minister. On April 17, 2008, Raila Odinga was sworn in as Prime Minister, along with a power-sharing Cabinet, with 42 ministers and 50 assistant ministers, Kenya's largest ever. The cabinet is fifty percent Kibaki appointed ministers and fifty percent Raila appointed ministers, and is in reality a carefully balanced ethnic coalition. The arrangement, which also includes Kalonzo Musyoka as Vice President, is known as the "Grand Coalition Government".[64]

[edit] Highpoints
President Kibaki, the economist whose term as Finance minister in the 1970s is widely celebrated as outstanding, has done much to repair the damage to the country¶s economy during the 24-year reign of his predecessor, President Moi. The country, compared to the Moi years, is much better managed, and has by far more competent personnel, and is already much transformed.[65] The improved management of the economy during the Kibaki presidency has seen continued Kenya GDP growth from a low 0.6% (real -1.6%) in 2002 to 3% in 2003, 4.9% in 2004, 5.8% in 2005 , 6% in 2006 and 7% 2007, [66] a very significant recovery from the preceding near total economic collapse and decay . The President has also overseen the coming into being of the Vision 2030, a development plan aimed at raising GDP growth to 10% annually and transforming Kenya into a middle income country, which he unveiled on 30 October 2006.[67][68] Many sectors of the economy have recovered from total collapse pre-2003. [69] Numerous state corporations that had collapsed during the Moi years have been revived and are performing profitably.[70] The telecommunications sector is booming. Rebuilding, modernization and expansion of infrastructure has been going on in earnest, with several ambitious infrastructural and other projects, which would have been seen as unattainable pipe dreams during the bland and largely stagnant Moi years, planned or ongoing.[70][71][72] The country's cities and towns are also being positively renewed and transformed.[73] Development is also ongoing in all areas of the country including Kenya's hitherto neglected and thus largely undeveloped semi-arid or arid north.[74][75] Further, it was during the Kibaki presidency that the Constituency Development Fund, CDF, was introduced in 2003. The fund was designed to support constituency-level, grass-root development projects.[76] It was aimed to achieve equitable distribution of development resources across regions and to control imbalances in regional development brought about by partisan politics.[77] It targeted all

constituency-level development projects, particularly those aiming to combat poverty at the grassroots.[78] The CDF program has facilitated the putting up of new water, health and education facilities in all parts of the country including remote areas that were usually overlooked during funds allocation in national budgets. [79] The president has also overseen a reduction of Kenya's dependence on aid by western donors(which still remains significant though),with the country being increasingly funded by internally generated resources,tax revenue collection having grown tremendously during his term,[80][81][82] and also by increasing investment,grants and loans by non-western countries, mainly Japan, People's Republic of China[83][84][85][86] and the Middle East, and to a lessor extent investment by South African,Libyan and Nigerian corporations, and even Iran.[87][88][89] President Kibaki's style is that of a competent technocrat, as opposed to the populist buffoonery, or strongman dictatorship, so common in Africa.[90] He,unlike his predecessors,has not tried to establish a personality cult.[91] He has not had his portrait on every unit of Kenya's currency, neither has he had all manner of streets, places and institutions named after him.[91] He has not had state sanctioned praise songs composed in his honour, does not seek to dominate and lead all news bulletins with reports of his presidential activities, and does not engage in the populist sloganeering of his predecessors.[90] Kenya is also much more democratic and freer in the Kibaki era than it was during the Kenyatta and Moi eras.[92][93]

[edit] Shortcomings
The shortcomings of the Kibaki presidency include the president's not so stellar performance in the areas of political reform; constitutional reform;containment of Corruption in Kenya;addressing the fundamental problem of the country's wealth, income and development inequalities;[94][95] eliminating tribalism,and fostering national unity and cohesion;reduction of youth unemployment and crime; and facilitating generational change- as elaborated below. Tribalism and corruption still remain major tools of acquiring and maintaining political power in Kenya.[96] As a result,all the good work the president has done remains at risk of being all undone, as it was to a significant extent by the post - 2007 election violence, and Kenya remains at risk of becoming a failed state.[97][98][99][100] The President has been criticized for poor political management of the country, and apparent failure to unite, and amply manage the competing interests of, Kenya's various tribes.[96] As a result, the country remains at the risk of tearing apart,[101] and the President and his allies need to do more to prevent the country's balkanization into ethnic enclaves especially after benefiting from tribalism during elections. [102][103][104] He has also been accused of ruling with a small group of his elderly peers,mainly from the educated side of the Kikuyu elite that emerged in the Kenyatta years,usually referred to as the "Kitchen Cabinet" [90] or the "Mount Kenya Mafia".[105] There is therefore the perception that his is a Kikuyu presidency . This perception was reinforced when the President was seen to have trashed the pre- 2002 election Memorandum of Understanding with the Raila Odinga led Liberal Democratic Party,[106] and was further reinforced by his disputed 2007 election victory over the Raila Odinga led ODM Party being achieved nearly exclusively with the votes of the populous Mt. Kenya Kikuyu, Meru and Embu communities.[107]

The Commission of Inquiry Into Post Election Violence [CIPEV]put it thus :The post election violence [in early 2008]therefore is, in part, a consequence of the failure of President Kibaki and his first Government to exert political control over the country or to maintain sufficient legitimacy as would have allowed a civilized contest with him at the polls to be possible. Kibaki¶s regime failed to unite the country, and allowed feelings of marginalization to fester into what became the post election violence. He and his then Government were complacent in the support they considered they would receive in any election from the majority Kikuyu community and failed to heed the views of the legitimate leaders of other communities.The President, who was elected in 2002 on a reform platform, is also yet to deliver long clamored for fundamental reforms and a new constitution,[109] instead maintaining the status quo ante which he helped to establish and was a major part of, and thus keeping the overwhelming presidential powers granted by Kenya's current constitution.[110] It does also seem that his template is the presidency of Kenya's first president, Jomo Kenyatta, and that a major aim of his presidency is the preservation of the elite that emerged during the Kenyatta years, which he is part of, along with the system that made that elite and so much preserves and favours it.[90][111] The general feeling of disappointed Kenyans, so optimistic after the 2002 ³revolution´ is amply captured by the following quote from T.E. Lawrence, Seven Pillars of Wisdom ³... when we achieved and the new world dawned, the old men came out again and took our victory to re -make in the likeness of the former world they knew. Though the President has never personally been accused of corruption,[113] and has managed to virtually end the grabbing of public land rampant in the Moi and Kenyatta eras, he is yet to adequately contain Kenya's endemic corruption.[114][115][116] Elected on an anti-corruption platform, one of President Kibaki's first acts a president was to appoint John Githongo, a prominent anti-corruption activist, as Permanent Secretary for Governance and Ethics, reporting directly to him. Three years later, a frustrated Githongo resigned this position, citing the impossibility of his position in a situation of such widespread and high level corruption, and went into exile in London.[117] In the Anglo-Leasing scandal, which Githongo played a major role in uncovering, senior politicians including several Ministers and the Vice President Moody Awori were alleged to be closely involved. Githongo has also highlighted the unwillingness of President Ki baki to address these allegations, suggesting that Kibaki himself is therefore personally implicated.[117] To date despite the efforts of John Githongo and the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) through numerous investigations and prosecution of cases, no highprofile figures have been convicted in court on corruption charges.[118] On 15 November 2006 Kiraitu Murungi, who had "stepped aside"to allow for independent investigations of corruption allegations in the Anglo-Leasing scandal, was reappointed as Energy Minister, and George Saitoti, who had been previously accused in connection with the Goldenberg scandal, was reinstated as Education Minister.Both ministers were said to have been exonerated in the resultant investigations.[119] Author MICHELA WRONG, in her book on Githogo, describes the situation thus: Whether expressed in the petty bribes the average Kenyan had to pay each week to fat-bellied policemen and local councillors, the jobs for the boys doled out by civil servants and politicians on strictly tribal lines, or the massive scams perpetrated by the country¶s ruling elite, sleaze had become endemic. µEating¶, as Kenyans dubbed the gorging on state resources by the well-connected, had crippled the nation. In the corruption indices drawn up by the anti-graft organisation Transparency International, Kenya routinely trail[s] near the bottom ..., viewed as only slightly less sleazy than Nigeria or Pakistan..."The President's style of a seemingly aloof withdrawn technocrat or intellectual makes him come across as a seemingly snobbish upper class urbanite who is out of touch with the ordinary Kenyan.[112] The President's aloof "delegation style" also makes his governments,especially at

cabinet level, seem dysfunctional and chaotic.[120]Another major problem that the President is only just beginning [121] to adequately address youth unemployment, and soaring crime mainly perpetrated by frustrated youth on the wrong side of the wide poor-rich divide in the country.[122]The president has from time to time addressed the above issues, as he did for instance, in his Madaraka Day speech delivered to the nation on June 1, 2009. Dr Christopher Ndarathi "Chris" Murungaru (born August 19, 1954, Nyeri, Kenya) is a Kenyan politician, a former Member of Parliament for Kieni Constituency in Nyeri District and a former Minister of Transport. Before being appointed Minister of Transport, he had been the Minister of National Security. He was transferred to the Ministry of Transport following revelations of the Anglo Leasing Scandal. When President Mwai Kibaki reconstituted the cabinet following a humiliating defeat in the November 21, 2005 constitutional Referendum, he was dropped from the cabinet. A close ally of Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki. when the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) Government took power from Kenya African National Union (KANU) in 2003, Dr Murungaru was named to the powerful docket of Minister of Internal Security. He was later transferred to the Ministry of Transport though a cabinet reshuffle. Recently, Dr Murungaru has been embroiled in a conflict with the British Government following cancellation of his Visa to enter the United Kingdom, due to allegations of corruption in the Anglo-Leasing scandal. He has taken the British Government to court challenging the cancellation of his visa. He has hired prominent Kenyan lawyer Paul Muite and a group of British lawyers, Mr Rabinder Singh, a Queen's Counsel of Matrix Chambers, London, Mr Richard Stein, a senior partner in Leigh, Day and Company and Ms Tessa Hetherington, a junior counsel of Matrix to represent him. On November 23, 2005, President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya dissolved his cabinet following a humiliating defeat on a referendum on the proposed constitution of Kenya. The president and his key allies, including Murungaru were campaigning for a Yes vote on the constitution, which they lost, forcing the president to reconstitute his cabinet. The scandal is alleged to have started when the Kenyan government wanted to replace its passport printing system, in the year 1997, but came to light after revelation by a government officer, in 2002. It was among the many corrupt deals that were inherited from KANU Government, that had ruled Kenya for 24 years. Even though the new NARK Government came to power with a promise to fight corruption, which some effort was put but completely watered-down by the magnitude of the Anglo-Leasing Scandal. Some corrupt civil servants and cabinet ministers happily inherited graft projects and nurtured them to super pet-projects. Former Internal Security Minister Christopher Ndarathi Murungaru and former vice president Moody Awori were said to have been the biggest beneficiaries of this particular scandal. Sophisticated passport equipment system was sourced from France and forensic science laboratories for the police were sourced from Britain. The transaction was originally quoted at 6 million euros from a French firm, but was awarded to a British firm, Anglo Leasing Finance, at 30 million euros, who would have sub-contracted the same French firm to do the work. The tender was not publicly advertised, and its details were leaked to the media by a junior civil servant. The Anglo-Leasing sales agent was Sudha Ruparell, a 48 year old woman who is the daughter of Chamanlal Kamani and sister of Rashmikant Chamanlal Kamani & Deepak Kamani. The Kamani family has been involved in various security supplies scandals in the past. In January 2006, the Anglo Leasing Scandal was given fresh impetus through the publication of John Githongo' s report. The new revelations indicate that Anglo Leasing

Finance was just one of a plethora of phantom entities, including some UK companies, used to perpetrate fraud on the Kenyan taxpayer through non-delivery of goods and services and massive overpricing.

[edit] Impact
The then-British envoy to Kenya, Sir Edward Clay, publicly raised the issue of AngloLeasing at a dinner in Nairobi (see the Guardian Newspaper article). He subsequently came under pressure from Kenyan politicians to make public his evidence, and was reported to have provided the President, Mwai Kibaki, with a dossier containing details of corruption in the government. However, no one was punished and the case slipped from the public eye. Kenyan government has a well oiled law machine The system, which has a tendency to derail major corruption cases, in many ways protecting the culprits, who happen to be senior civil servants and politicians, the so called Big Fish. When put under media scrutiny, the government sites on-going investigations. The On-going investigation, is a commonly used term in Kenya, especially by the authority, it has literally replaced Moi's commission of enquiry. For this reason corruption, Kibaki's government came to near topple in the last general election. Even though He had done well in lifting the Kenyan economy, introducing free primary education and developing new infrastructure, Kenyans still faced corrupt officers daily. The very thing they though will be past tense, was there to stay, the fact that corruption affects them in their daily life, it was always a constant reminder of NO Change. And the opposition knew best, they rode on that issue, ""corruption"". Kenya's minister in charge of the project, Chris Murungaru, was later on banned by the UK government from travelling to Britain, on the grounds that it would not be in the public good. It was widely reported that the ban was due to corruption by Mr Murungaru involving, among others, the Anglo-Leasing scam.[1] On January 22, 2006, John Githongo named Vice-President Moody Awori as one of four top politicians (with Kiraitu Murungi, former justice minister and later energy minister; finance minister David Mwiraria and former transport minister Chris Murungaru) as being involved. Public sympathy for Githongo reached its peak when he released audio recordings of an incriminating conversation with David Mwiraria on the internet. He also claimed that President Mwai Kibaki was complicit in the affair. Githongo claimed that the money raised would have funded the then government's forthcoming 2005 Constitutional Referendum and 2007 Election campaign. Githongo's report can be read here. These allegations were denied by Awori and Murunguru and an investigation was promised. In February, in an interview with the BBC, Githongo told of his meeting with Kiraitu, during which the then Justice minister tried to blackmail him over a loan his (Githongo's) father is said to owe businessman Anura Pereira. "The minister of Justice was telling me that if I eased off my inquiries, then my father's loan matter would be made to go away," Githongo said. He had an audiotape, which was played on the BBC.

[edit] Githongo's Exile

In an interview with Fergal Keane for the BBC's Newsnight programme on 8 February 2006, Githongo revealed [2] what he claims is taped evidence proving that Kiraitu Murungi attempted to impede his inquiries.[3] Murungi suggested that a 30M Shilling loan to his father by a lawyer A.H. Malik had been bought by Anura Pereira, and might be forgiven in exchange for 'going slow' on the Anglo Leasing investigation. He reveals that at the end of his investigations, he came to the inescapeable conclusion that the Anglo Leasing scandal went all the way to the top, and as a consequence his life was in danger. Anglo Leasing, and many other similar deals, were, in part, back-door financing to pay for NARC's election bid in 2007.

[edit] Dismissals and Resignations
y

y

y

y

On November 23, 2005, President Mwai Kibaki dissolved his cabinet following a humiliating defeat on a referendum on the proposed constitution of Kenya. In the resulting re-shuffle, Chris Murungaru was not re-appointed. On February 1 David Mwiraria became the first of those implicated in the report to resign, doing so live on television. He maintained his innocence and claimed that he was resigning in order to clear his name.[4] A day later, Moody Awori refused to resign, saying he saw no reason to.[5] A day later a group of 80 MPs called for the sacking of Awori, threatening street protests if their requests were not met.[6] On 13 February, President Mwai Kibaki announced that Kiraitu Murungi had resigned to allow full investigation into the allegations.[7] Murungi's resignation was announced in a television address by President Kibaki, though he too denies any wrongdoing.

Travel bans have been imposed on key players,[6] and Kenyan authorities will start freezing the assets of individuals suspected of being involved in corruption in a bid to recover looted state funds [8]

[edit] Response from Kenyans
The response of Kenyans has been critical of the Government, both from those who initially voted for it and those who did not. The president has been accused of adding to the problems he promised to solve and making Kenya an embarrassment in the eyes of the world. Most responses have also praised the role played by John Githongo in bringing the scandal to light though a minority opinion has criticised him for holding a 'neo-colonial' attitude and not remaining in Kenya.[9] On 17 February anti-corruption protestors marched through Nairobi despite their demonstration being officially banned. The participants carried banners calling for a conclusion to the Anglo-Leasing scandal and chanted for the resignation of Vice-president Moody Awori.[10]

British enquiry
United Kingdom's Serious Fraud Office began its probe on July 2007, and was investigating offshore accounts in the British tax havens of Jersey and Guernsey, which were used to transfer more than $30m to a company called Apex Finance between April 2002 and

February 2004. The SFO said it decided to halt its probe after the Kenyan government failed to produce evidence that would enable the prosecution of suspects.

Finance
Anglo Leasing Finance is an entity associated to Deepak Kamani. The Controller & Auditor General of Kenya has published a report on single sourced security contracts where widespread fraud through non-delivery and overpricing are suspected. The entities used to carry out this fraud are linked:

Recently, Dr Murungaru has been embroiled in a conflict with the British Government following cancellation of his Visa to enter the United Kingdom, due to allegations of corruption in the Anglo-Leasing scandal. He has taken the British Government to court challenging the cancellation of his visa. He has hired prominent Kenyan lawyer Paul Muite and a group of British lawyers, Mr Rabinder Singh, a Queen's Counsel of Matrix Chambers, London, Mr Richard Stein, a senior partner in Leigh, Day and Company and Ms Tessa Hetherington, a junior counsel of Matrix to represent him. On November 23, 2005, President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya dissolved his cabinet following a humiliating defeat on a referendum on the proposed constitution of Kenya. The president and his key allies, including Murungaru were campaigning for a Yes vote on the constitution, which they lost, forcing the president to reconstitute his cabinet. Recently, Dr Murungaru has been embroiled in a conflict with the British Government following cancellation of his Visa to enter the United Kingdom, due to allegations of corruption in the Anglo-Leasing scandal. He has taken the British Government to court challenging the cancellation of his visa. He has hired prominent Kenyan lawyer Paul Muite and a group of British lawyers, Mr Rabinder Singh, a Queen's Counsel of Matrix Chambers,

London, Mr Richard Stein, a senior partner in Leigh, Day and Company and Ms Tessa Hetherington, a junior counsel of Matrix to represent him. On November 23, 2005, President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya dissolved his cabinet following a humiliating defeat on a referendum on the proposed constitution of Kenya. The president and his key allies, including Murungaru were campaigning for a Yes vote on the constitution, which they lost, forcing the president to reconstitute his cabinet.

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE MATTER OF THE MEDIA ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINTS COMMISSION OF THE MEDIA COUNCIL OF KENYA

COMPLAINT NO 068 OF 2009 Dr. CHRIS MURUNGARU««««««««««««««COMPLAINANT NATION TELEVISION..««««««««««««««««RESPONDENT

ARBITRAL AWARD PANEL MEMBERS

KEN NYAUNDI PETER MWAURA

(CHAIRMAN) (MEMBER)

MUREJ MAKOCHIENG (MEMBER)

RULING On 18 February 2009, the Hon Dr. Chris Murungaru, former MP Kieni constituency, wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Media Council of Kenya complaining against Nation Television with respect to an article carried on air on Thursday 5 th February 2009 at 9 p.m., prime news time. The news item complained of carried a report on a statement attributed, to the Director of the Serious Fraud Office of Britain and a press conference by the then British High Commissioner to Kenya. The news item further stated that the Director of the Serious Fraud Office alleged that he had stopped investigations into the infamous AngloLeasing contracts because he was not receiving the requisite co -operation from the Kenyan Authorities. Whilst this was a re-count of events not entirely relevant to the present complaint, Dr. Murungaru took exceptiona l issue with the words of the news reporter, Mr. Robert Nagila, who made the following comment: Interestingly a former internal security minister who has been facing a legal battle over the scandal, -Dr. Chris Murungaru, has alleged President Kibaki was kept informed of every step of the Anglo Leasing deal before making an about turn.(emphasis supplied) Dr. Murungaru complains that the comments made about and against him were directed at portraying him as the culprit in the Anglo -Leasing scandal and that the words of the report suggested that he had cases instituted against him by the KACC. Dr. Murungaru also complains that the words alleging that 'President Kibaki was kept informed of every step of the Anglo leasing deal before making an about turn'were at no time uttered by him.

Dr. Murungaru suggested that the airing of the Anglo-Leasing item was part of an agenda against his person and is evidence of unprofessional, vindictive, malicious and irresponsible journalism. In his letter to the Chairman of the Media Council, Dr. Murungaru made a demand for a retraction of the story and an appropriate apology from NTV. He further demanded an undertaking that such reporting against him will not be repeated in future. Finally Dr. Murungaru sought that action should be taken against the reporter and editor who dealt with the news item.

In his letter of 3 March 2009, the Chairman of the Council requested Dr. Murungaru to reduce the complaint to a formal petition in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Complaints Commission of the Media council of Kenya. On 11 th March 2009 Dr. Murungaru submitted Form 1 together with a CD of the footage complained of. Accordingly, on 16 March 2009, the Council wrote to Mr. Wangethi Mwangi, the Editorial Director of the Nation Media Group requesting for a response to the protest by Dr. Murungaru. A follow up of correspondence did not meet Dr. Murungaru's suggested demands culminating in Dr. Murungaru filing a petition on 11 March 2009. The formal complaint in form of a petition does not differ in any material factual manner from the contents of the letter of February 18 2009 and we need not reiterate the details. Briefly however, the petition crystallizes Dr. Murungaru's grievance to the effect that the NTV's news item was calculated to perpetuate a perception that he has been investigated and indicted for the now famously labelled Aglo-Leasing scandal. The respondent was served with Dr. Murungaru's complaint but did not file a defence to it.

After two false starts in which Dr. Murungaru appeared without his Counsel Mr. Kioko Kilukumi the hearing of this matter eventually commenced on 22nd July 2009 under a panel consisting of Ken Nyaundi (Chairman of the Media Complaints Commission), Murej MakOchieng "and Peter Mwaura (members of the Commission). The Nation was represented by Mr. Owino. Mr. Kioko Kilukumi appeared for the complainant. The viva-voce evidence of the petitioner reiterates the grievance contained in both the letter of 18 February 2009 and the formal complaint filed on 11 March 2009. It is the petitioner's evidence that the news item which forms the subject of this protest was not accurate, not fair and was raced with considerable malice. The Commission had the advantage of viewing the copy of tape complained of and both counsels confirmed that it is a true copy of the alleged scandalous remarks. More importantly, both counsels confirmed that Dr. Murungaru did not utter the words ascribed to him by Mr. Robert Nagila. Dr. Murungaru served in the NARC government as a minister in charge of internal security. In that role he handled a number of security contracts amongst them the now public and much maligned Anglo -Leasing contracts. Whilst the history of the complaint is tied up with these contracts it is important to point out that the Commission is not sitting in trial of who was to blame in the obviously multi-faceted and multifarious string of indentures that have attracted much open disapproval and odium. The commission is not required to make a finding on and would in any event not be able to pronounce judgement of who was responsible for the alleged loss to the Kenyan tax payer. We are called upon to decide whether the news item aired at 9 p.m. on 5 February 2009 was an accurate statement of facts and whether the wo rds

attributed to Dr. Murungaru were actually his own. Further, it is crucial to come to a decision as to whether the story which NTV ran would have been different if the comments of Dr. Murungaru had been sought and obtained. Was the story actuated by malice and mischief as Dr. Murungaru alleges? Dr. Murungaru's evidence shows that he has spent considerable time and energy trying to distance himself from the failings that led to the loss of public funds, if at all, in the Anglo Leasing contracts. In these attempts, Dr. Murungaru has filed cases against a number of entities both within Kenya and out of jurisdiction. Dr. Murungaru has filed cases in the Civil Division of the High Court in Nairobi, the Constitutional Division of the High Court and the Court of Appeal in Nairobi. He has also instituted petitions in the High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, UK. Again the details of these cases are not entirely essential for the purposes of our decision in the matter before us except that in all the suits it is Dr. Murungaru who has petitioned the courts. In none of the cases is the complainant either an accused person or a respondent. This observation sits in line with Dr. Murungaru's snivel that while no prosecution authority has put him on the dock the media has tried and sentenced him in the Anglo-Leasing matter. It is not lost to the Commission that the picture of Dr. Murungaru used in the news item complained of showed him coming out of the High Court after attending a matter in which he had brought a challenge against the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission's demand for him to declare his wealth. It is not a picture of Dr. Murungaru walking out of Court after attending to answer charges brought against him by any prosecution authority. Who, the Commission sought to know from counsels, is facing a legal battle? Does the reference apply to a party who is, so to speak, on the receiving end or may it also apply to a party who has instituted the trial?

Dr. Murungaru suggests that the footage used to show him outside a courtroom was meant to suggest that he was in court as a culprit, an offender, a wrong doer and yet he had attended court to protect his lawful interests. In x-exam by Mr. Owino for the respondent, Dr. Murungaru stated that Mr. Nagila had 'put words in my mouth' reflecting perhaps on his evidence in chief that the words used by Mr. Nagila were not spoken by him. In good measure, Mr. Owino sought to get out a pound of flesh in Dr. Murungaru's refusal to answer a question as to whether the word Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission is used in the footage complained of. In his final submissions Mr. Owino made out an observation that because the complainant had declined to answer his question there would have been no need to seek his response to the Nagila story because he would have similarly refused to answer. I do not share this view. Under section 27 (1) of the Media Act, read together with Rule 20 of the Media (Complaints Commission) Rules 2009, the party against whom a complaint is made is required to respond in writing (by way of a defense) and to attend the Commission during the proceedings. The Commission has noted that although Mr. Linus Kaikai attended the proceedings on behalf of the respondents the respondents did not file a defense to the petition. No evidence was tendered to rebut the facts of this matter as set out by the complainant. This Commission is set up under section 23 of the Media Act. Under section 24(1) of the Act, the Commission is empowered to establish an Arbitration Panel consisting of not less than three members to deal with any matter before it. This panel, as presently constituted, is an arbitral panel in exercise of powers donated under section 24(2) of the Act.

The panel's jurisdiction is set out under section 26(1) of the Act. With respect to the present complaint we are limited to section 26(1) (a) of the Act. Under section 27(2) of the Act, the Commission (or any of its panels) may, [H]aving heard the matter in issue, make a report, issue any decision as it deems appropriate and give directions in connection with the complainant, and shall publish its findings if it considers it in the public interest to do so. The boundaries of the Commission's powers are further enlarged under section 29(1) which empowers the panel if it considers it appropriate, to order an offending party to publish an apology and correction in such a manner as the Council (emphasis added) may specify. It is instructive that the Act suggests that the mode and method to be followed by the apology is subject to the specifications of the council. We interpret this clause to mean that having heard a complaint the Commission may make an order for apology and correction in such terms as the council may stipulate or indicate. I shall return to this matter later in this ruling. What does the complainant require of this panel? He prays that the commission makes an order for a retraction of the story; an appropriate apology and undertaking that the same will not be repeated in future. The complainant's basis for his prayers is that the news item complained of violates section 1(a), 1(b) and 1 (c) of the Second Schedule to the Media Act and sections 3 and 20 of the same schedule (Code of Conduct for the Practice of Journalism). These sections deal with accuracy and fairness, as well as integrity and use of pictures and names in a story. I do not consider it necessary to set out the words of these sections herein. How does the complainant's evidence abide with the law on which he seeks to rely on for his prayers? It is the complainant's evidence that the respondent did not seek his comments before the story was aired; that he

was not treated with respect and dignity and that the respondent did not apply caution in the use of the photographs which accompanied the story complained of. The competing interests in this matter are freedom of the media (the right of the media to inform the public on a matter of general interest) and privacy of the citizen (right not to be projected in a negative light without justification). The right to privacy is invaded and violated when a complainant is given publicity that unreasonably places him in a false light before the public. This is why the code of conduct requires that journalists be objective and write stories that are fair, accurate and un-biased on matters of public interest. At the heart of the right to privacy is what America's Supreme Court Justice Louis Branders (before he became Judge) loosely referred to as "the right to be left alone/' We remind ourselves that the complaint before us is not one of defamation. Defamation falls on its face when only the complainanttestifies; for it is not to the complainant's opinion of himself which is at issue but that of the other persons. The requirement that a TV journalist presents an accurate and fair story is part of the historical developments in the free press. A journalist has to constrain himself against personal biases and prejudices. In the media profession, it is critical that a journalist presents un-biased information to the public. This is part of a contractual duty the media owe to the public. This duty is primary and in our view perhaps over-rides the complaint of any person such as the petitioner before us. For the journalist, the reputation and credibility of his news house rests on presentation of news without preconceived notions, partiality, favouritism

or prejudice. It is widely agreed that a reporter must differentiate fact from opinion. This Commission is awake to the need to grow, uphold and maintain a respect for media freedom. Freedom of the media is at the heart of a progressive society. It informs development in all spheres of public discourse. It checks the actions of public officers. It holds them back from un-restrained actions and waste. It is the public's safeguard to wanton bureaucratic behaviour. On the other hand, every citizen has a legitimate expectation that his privacy will not be violated without justification. The question before us is whether on the evidence the news item complained of though making comments on a matter of public interest strayed beyond the boundaries of permissive conduct and thereby contravened Dr. Murungaru's fundamental rights to privacy. With respect to the news item we ask; was the news item factual? With respect to the specific complaints raised by Dr. Murungaru; were the words attributed to Dr. Murungaru actually uttered by him? If the words ascribed to Dr. Murungaru had been uttered by him I would have had no hesitation in dismissing his complaint. I am in the present circumstances unable to do so because Mr. Nagila moved beyond acceptable limits of accurate and fair reporting. Further, I do not agree with him that Dr. Murungaru is facing a legal battle. I think he has waged a legal battle. The import of these two situations is different; in the former Dr. Murungaru is on his defence; in the latter, he is the aggressor. In the public eye, a person who has filed a suit occupies a different position from one who is charged. The perception is that the first is protecting a right, the other defending an accusation. In

the untrained eye, the first stands justified; the second walks on the brink of censure, even condemnation. I have no doubt that the public has a right to know who conceived, perpetuated and benefited from the Anglo leasing contracts. Such knowledge must be based on facts, not innuendo; truth, not pieces of information pieced together in an attempt to create reality. On the twin basis that the news report was not fair and accurate and that a citizen's right to privacy should not be violated on insinuation and allusions, I find for the complainant. I order and direct that the respondent retracts the story and offers an apology. I shall not make an order for an undertaking not to run similar stories in the future. Tomorrow shall govern itself. Accordingly I order that counsels for the parties do agree on a draft statement retracting the offending story and offering an apology to the complainant within 14 days of today's date and further to agree on a date for publication of the statement within 21 day's hereof. In the event of failure this matter to be mentioned before the Commission for further orders. Either party is at liberty to apply. It is so ordered.

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 1ST DAY OF MARCH, 2011 Nancy Baraza Chairperson

Peter Mwaura Member

Murej Mak¶Ochieng Member

In the presence of Ms. Tuge holding brief for Mr Kioko Kilukumi for the complainant Mr. Sekoue Owino for the respondents