Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 195703,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/195703/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 180,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. Kimunya",
    "speaker_title": "The Minister for Finance",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 174,
        "legal_name": "Amos Muhinga Kimunya",
        "slug": "amos-kimunya"
    },
    "content": " Mr. Speaker, Sir, if Mr. Jirongo had been a bit patient, I was coming to his clarification. For the record, the first clarification I want to make is that in 1999 the CBK-appointed receiver was removed by the courts. In 2004 the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) went to court, as part of recovering the public asset that was on the verge of disappearing, and managed to secure a joint receivership with the UHDL. It was not the CBK that went to court in 2004. The CBK has now come in and said: \"We are the ones who have this charge. Between the KACC and the UHDL, can we have our charge reinstated as we have the right to appoint our receiver?\" That explains the sequence. Mr. Speaker, Sir, coming to Mr. Jirongo's specific question, from 1999 to date the CBK has never been paid a single penny. I made that point very clear, that the last payment we received was in 1999, when we received up to Kshs460 million. As to what has happened between then and now, that is part of the issue that we are following to see who received what money and where the money is. I have explained the issue that was raised by Mr. K. Kilonzo on the KACC and the UHDL. I have said that no money has been received. As for the Attorney-General's involvement, this case has been going on for the last 15 years. The Government interest has always been represented. We have always sought advice from the Attorney-General's office. What the Attorney-General was referring to was this specific incident. I believe the issue that was raised was whether he has pardoned Mr. Kamlesh Pattni or not. He said he was not consulted on that. I have stated that, indeed, I am not aware of any pardon in that matter by the Attorney-General, because I have nothing about it on record. But if a specific question is asked to the Attorney-General, I am sure he has the competence to come here and respond to it on his own behalf. Mr. Speaker, Sir, on who registered the UHDL, I believe this is a matter of public record. Anyone can see the lawyers who registered that company. It had many lawyers acting for it. But I do not know what period hon. Members are talking about. But since the hon. Members seem to know, and I think they made some allegations, then I do not need to give what obviously is in their personal knowledge. Mr. Namwamba raised concerns on the absence of the Attorney-General. I have responded to that. In terms of the deal between the CBK and the UHDL, it is just as I have stated, basically that a consent order was entered into by which the management of the hotel was handed over to the CBK, so that we can then realise our charge and, at least, remove all the busy bodies who have 728 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES April 29, 2008 been acting within the hotel and siphoning money out of it without necessarily ploughing it back, and with the public not receiving anything. Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is important to address the issue of valuations that we are talking about. The last valuation was done in 1997 at Kshs2.1 billion. I believe that within this year we have had two valuations. Subsequent to that, we have had a third valuation that has been done on the hotel to make sure we are have as much professional advice as possible to be able to determine the realistic value of that hotel. It is in our interest to receive maximum value."
}