Home » Media Centre » Blogs » On the Anglo-Leasing Payment
Anglo Leasing seems to be one of Kenya’s most convoluted and drawn out scandals to date. The scandal has been going on for over ten years, has spanned three Presidential administrations, and most recently has cost Kenyan taxpayers 1.4 billion shillings (this figure could be much higher if one considers payments which may have made in the past).
This most recent payment is a result of an order entered against the Kenyan government made in a London Court in December 2013. A case at which it turns out that the Kenya government case was inadequately defended. The order has resulting in buck passing between the current and former AG calling in to question their performance in the of role government principal legal advisor.
Since the order was entered, there has been varied response from different factions of the government as to whether Kenya should or should not the pay the court ordered Sh1.4 billion. The issue of whether the payment should be made is even more controversial because the Anglo Leasing companies seem not to exist, the procurement process was riddled with irregularities and allegations of corruption and bribery, and the Kenyan public is not completely abreast of what goods and services where procured and whether these have been delivered.
Prior to the payment the Deputy President fell on the side of not paying stating, “We have not paid any single cent and we are not intending to part with any single coin in payment for dubious projects whose origin we don’t know about. We know there is a court ruling that the government pays Sh1.4 billion but we have said Parliament will have the final say on the matter.”
Shortly after this statement was made there was a meeting between the Cabinet and the Budget and Finance Committees of the National Assembly, after which the two committees recommended the payment of the said contracts. A motion to this effect was later to be presented before the National Assembly but was subsequently withdrawn by the Budget and Appropriations Committee chairman, Mutava Musyimi, following opposition to the from both Jubilee and Cord MPs. The withdrawal effectively halted parliamentary debate on whether or not the country should pay.
In an oddly worded statement the President said that the Sh1.4 billion would have to be paid while simultaneously adding that he stood by the 2006 statement he made as the chair of Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee that the amounts should not be paid.
The Government’s decision to settle the payment is premised on: “protecting Kenya’s economy on account of rising interest rates occasioned by domestic borrowing due to constrained access to international borrowing, protecting Kenya’s reputation as a country that meets its contractual obligations and adheres to the rule of law, protecting Kenya’s assets abroad, and, maintaining and improving Kenya’s credit rating currently at B+.” (Read the government’s full statement on the settlementhere)
The President has also ordered the Ethics and Anti Corruption Commission to launch fresh investigations into Anglo Leasing. However questions still remain as to who the money is being paid to considering the Auditor General, Parliament, and the High Court have all previously declared the Anglo Leasing companies fictitious? The Presidential directive to pay the Sh1.4 billion also raises the larger question as to the implications of the by-passing of Parliament through a Presidential directive and whether this is the beginning of such a trend, as unconstitutional as it is?
Categories: No tags
You must login to comment
There are no comments.