Key institutions hamper KACC's war on corruption

By STEPHEN MAKABILA
Despite spirited efforts by the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) to fight corruption, its ability is limited and tied to reforms in the Judiciary and the Police.
Legal experts and keen observers of the war on corruption opine KACC cannot have a smooth run, without support from other institutions.
Judicial and police reforms are hinged on the successful implementation of the new Constitution, whose progress has been stagnated by divisions on judicial appointments between the two grand-coalition partners, (ODM and PNU).
"KACC can only investigate, but it requires the Attorney General, Police and the Judiciary for prosecution of corruption suspects whenever there is tangible evidence," says Mars Group Chief Executive Officer Mwalimu Mati.
Mr Mati says the war on corruption can only be won if all institutions shouldering the responsibility of fighting the vice are fully reformed and committed.
Nairobi lawyer Harun Ndubi says the commission has been frustrated for long and that PLO Lumumba’s determination to fight the vice may as well experience inhibitors.
"The Judiciary has been a stumbling block to the fight against corruption. It has failed to understand Kenyans have a right to know how public office bearers use their positions. The Judiciary is not protecting public interest," said Ndubi.
Ndubi went on, "We need to know what is important to the Judiciary when it comes to issues between protection of public and private interests."
Wanting institution
Indeed, Lumumba had a few days back lashed out at the Judiciary as a wanting institution that often threw out cases related to graft even where rulings are based on evidence adduced by KACC.
"Kenya loses between 25-35 per cent of annual budget through skewed procurement procedures, pilferage and wastage of public resources," Lumumba said.
Since taking over office last year, Lumumba had taken the war on corruption a notch-higher, bringing several serving ministers under investigations on corruption linked cases.
However, Lumumba’s greatest concern in recent days has been the High Court move to stop a case against a parastatal official in which the commission wanted him to declare his wealth.
"We know that the court has a right to decide based on the evidence at hand but the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused could not authenticate the source of his wealth. The judge misread the law," Lumumba was quoted as saying after the ruling.
In declaring the case null and void, the High Court ruling stated Section 55(5) and (6) of the Economic Crimes Act, which demands that public officials declare their wealth and prove that they acquired it lawfully, is inconsistent with the Constitution.
Lumumba has indicated the commission would appeal against Judge Kalpana Rawal’s ruling because it went against international tradition in fighting corruption.
The commission, Lumumba said, wants new appointees to the Judiciary be subjected to public scrutiny where they would declare their wealth before assuming offices.
Lumumba said Judiciary is one of the most crucial institution in the fight against corruption and holders of top positions need to be people of integrity.
He singled out the position of Chief Justice, whom he said should be appointed based on various benchmarks, including the quality of at least ten judgements the person has delivered.