Entry Instance

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

{
    "id": 82461,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/82461/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 284,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Mr. C. Kilonzo",
    "speaker_title": "",
    "speaker": {
        "id": 46,
        "legal_name": "Charles Mutavi Kilonzo",
        "slug": "charles-kilonzo"
    },
    "content": "Mr. Speaker, Sir, that is a member of staff cautioning the Ministry that this person they are calling “a lawyer” is not a lawyer. This person is what we call a “registration clerk.” When we went to Japan, we actually interviewed the man on a one-to-one basis and one question that we asked him was: “Are you a lawyer” and he said “No.” What are you? Through a translator, he said that he is a clerk. Basically, the translation was that he is a clerk. Lawyers do know that there are clerks in their offices who assist in registration matters. Mr. Speaker, Sir, at this stage, lawyer Akijima says: “This transaction is very irregular and no experts will agree to step into the process.” He continued to say: “The Government seems to think – that is the Government of Kenya – that there is no need of annexation but to confirm the details. Negotiations are still in need.” At that stage, both lawyers withdrew. Reason number four why this transaction is irregular is that, no valuation by a reputable Japanese firm was done to date; not a single valuation! What we have is Ministry officials trying to justify why they paid Japanese Yen 1.7 billion by using computations, which I will come to when I come to the audit report. The only evidence we have is from a practicing estate agent who has clearly stated, even after we bought the property, that the price is 1.09 Japanese Yen or thereabout. Reason number five, Mr. Speaker, Sir, why this deal is irregular is that, no experts were involved in the negotiations against advice by the two lawyers, the former ambassador, Dennis Awori, Mr. Korir and the technical team which went to Japan. The lawyer says as follows: “Please, kindly be informed again that the scheme that the Government agreed above is very unusual and we barely could not see such a transaction in Japan.” I think this lawyer was in shock that these things, indeed, could happen! He continued to say: “This is not a recommended scheme at all. The lack of basic research is fatal.” He used the word “fatal”; so you can see the kind of strong words he is using. When you hear that an accident is fatal, you know that somebody has gone to see his God. That is what happened here. Mr. Speaker, Sir, he continues to say: “I believe that this could be avoided by involving the experts into the negotiations with the owners.” That is something that Amb. Awori recommended two years earlier in his letter dated 4th April to the Permanent Secretary. While concluding, he said: “Meanwhile, it is common practice in Japan to negotiate through an estate agent and we, therefore, also seek your permission to appoint one.” It is not that you did not know. The lawyer continues to say: “It is very difficult for us – the Japanese now – to understand why the Government of Kenya wants to take this kind of risk and why they stepped into the negotiations without basic research required in Japanese deals.” That is enough of one lawyer. Let us go to another lawyer. Mr. Speaker, Sir, this lawyer is called Shoshi Yanagawa. He cautioned the Government and said: “The Government of Kenya needs to make careful decisions on the price and proceed with relevant negotiations with the three persons wisely.” You can see that professional advice was not the issue; it was there. Reason number six why this transaction is a fraud and outright theft is because these were deals where payments were made over the counter. On 1st July, they paid 1.4 billion over the counter. I cannot imagine that. You can even not do it here and yet it happened! It should enter into the Guinness Book of Records if, indeed, it happened – and it happened! Mr. Speaker, Sir, the entire procurement team went to the bank and I am just wondering how that happened. That is reason number seven. Number eight, when the procurement committee asked permission to do direct procurement and they were denied, they advertised – against the law – for three days. Do you know in which newspaper they advertised? They advertised in an English newspaper and not in a Japanese newspaper and they restricted the area. Number nine, there are two sale agreements. Number 10, somebody by the name Allan Mburu gave himself the power of Attorney, something which does not happen! Then, after all that, they burnt down the building. No investigations have ever been carried out by the Kenya Police to find out why this happened. But it is not us who are questioning what happened. What was amazing was a report from the Ministry of Finance by what is called the Internal Audit Department. This department saw nothing wrong. One, they converted themselves to valuers and valued the property for 1.5 Japanese Yen. The Valuers Act does not allow somebody who is not a valuer to practice. Mr. Speaker, Sir, they gave the value of the buildings at a price of Kshs250 million. In the document, you will see a letter by a lawyer who says that the highest you can give these buildings is between 20 million Japanese Yen and 30 million Japanese Yen. They went on to say that they saw nothing wrong with advertising for three days; they saw nothing wrong with a cash payment of 1.47 billion Japanese Yen and these are the auditors we are relying on in this country to ensure that taxpayers’ money is not lost. We are done! Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Controller and Auditor-General in his Report of 2008/2009 had the following to say about Abuja, and this was the source of the money. He said that when he looks at all the monies, there is a difference of Kshs65.6 million which is not accounted for between the two sets of records. He says: “This difference has not been reconciled or explained.” He further says: “The sale agreement and other related records including the bids for the property were not made available for audit review and with the result that the terms and conditions of the sale could not be established.” In all fairness, we did give the Minister and his people time but they misled the Committee and that is why this Committee, in its recommendations stated as follows--- Mr. Speaker, Sir, before I get there, the Minister did write on 1st of October to the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC). What was most perplexing is that, in fact, KACC wrote to him in May – five months earlier – telling him that they were investigating and that they needed the following details – number one to 11 – and the Minister all that time was busy defending the Ministry and the staff. When things got very complicated, the Minister writes to KACC. I am sure when the letter got to KACC, they were wondering who should be doing the letters. The Committee has recommended the following on the Minister. That, hon. Moses Wetangula, the Minister for Foreign Affairs should take political responsibility and step aside to pave way for investigations by the KACC and other investigative arms of the Government."
}