Lee Makwiny
date Nov 9, 2009 4:34 AM
subject Uhuru Kenyatta For President:

“Our people have been oppressed because we are never together,” he said amid applause by the congregation. The deputy PM attributed the killing of many people from the region during the post-election mayhem to division among political leaders in the province. “The majority of those who lost their lives were our people. They were killed because we were split.” source: http://www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/-/
1064/683674/-/xt47b9z/-/index.html

Question: Who has oppressed you Mr. Kenyatta. You father stole the land and thats why “your” people live in fear in Rift Valley. give it back.

Mr. Kenyatta if you continue with those lines of campaigns, then be assured that Kenyans will rise against you. Let you be reminded that Kenya is bigger than central alone. You will get 100% votes in central, but you will be locked out. You have started again alienated PNU from the rest of Kenya. Kombo that made you believe you have support in western has made U-turn. Nyachae is gone, Mwakwere is going home. You will remain with Githae and some central MPs. I wish you hired Peter Keneth as your political advisor or better, support him, Kenyans are ready for him anytime, not you silly tribalist.

From: o j_k
Date: Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:44 AM

ICC Prosecutor Louis Moreno Ocampo, you are the weirdest prosecutor I ever heard of.

You came to Kenya to prosecute the masterminds of the 2008 post election violence; those who plotted the slaughter of fellow human beings, or gave orders to slaughter, or provided weapons to slaughter, or did the actual slaughter.

But based on what we know, the hotel where you sleep belongs to them., the people driving you around are them, the people dining you, and wining you, and gifting you are them. Every time I look around, you are having fun in our beautiful Kenya, with them.

You are having a blast in Kenya, being toured around like celebrity on holiday, by the same known thieves and murderers!

How are you going to prosecute people you have already gone out of your way and befriended, the people who have dined you, and wined you, and gifted you, and slept in their bed? Isn’t that what the ICC court judge, or any judge for that matter, will consider as a “conflict of interest”, thereby throwing out the case? Aren’t you already compromised and corrupted?

Why are you going out of your way to create a reason to not prosecute? We trusted you!

Love you.

Odundo jaKarateng’
http://blog.jaluo.com/

– – –
Subject: Fwd: ICC Prosecutor Louis Moreno Ocampo, you are the weirdest prosecutor I ever heard of.
To: Jaluo Jaluo (jaluo@jaluo.com)

Forwarded by: otieno sungu
Date: Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 3:11 AM

Kikuyu, Kalenjin presidential aspirants should give up for the good of country

By Kilemi Mwiria

Already we have many presidential aspirants for the 2012 race. Some of them are busy crafting ethnic alliances, despite the trouble such alliances caused in 2007. I would like to make a rather undemocratic suggestion informed by the experience of Tanzania.

One of Nyerere’s greatest legacies was to entrench a presidential identification system which informally locks out politicians from the large ethnic communities from contesting the presidency. It is an unwritten constitutional provision that addresses the fear of smaller ethnic groups that, with political power, large ethnic groups would be too dominant.

The violence witnessed in 2007/2008 had more to do with ethnic competition and less with the manifestoes of the presidential candidates. During the 2007 campaigns, there was much anti-Kikuyu sentiments, especially in the Rift Valley where Kikuyu and Kalenjin residents have had a history of conflict over land resources. This conflict manifests itself in a most ugly way when Kikuyu and Kalenjin candidates are involved in the presidential contest. Although other ethnic groups suffered from the violence, the key players were Kikuyu and Kalenjin — just as was the case in 1992 and 1997.

Those who suffer are always poor workers, peasants and the unemployed because they vote against local preferences. Unfortunately, those they sacrifice for often desert them in their time of need while embracing their elite political opponents with whom they have much in common. These political elites show little guilt in crafting alliances with their adversaries as evidenced by talk of a Kikuyu-Kalenjin alliance.

My take, therefore, is that potential Kalenjin and Kikuyu presidential aspirants should temporarily drop their claim to the top seat until we find a permanent solution to our ethnicised politics. After all, Kikuyu and Kalenjin politicians have dominated the presidency since independence.

Even if we distributed the presidency among all ethnic groups, it will take about 420 years for all our 42 tribes to have a shot at a two-term presidency.

In any case, given the tendency by most Kenyans to vote tribal, Kalenjin and Kikuyu candidates may be rejected, despite their credentials because their communities may be said to have had their turn. The candidates in question may be aware of this unfortunate reality but may go all the way hoping to use their candidature to negotiate powerful positions in the next government.

Kikuyu and Kalenjin communities need the goodwill of their neighbours for their business and farming success more than they could ever hope to get from one person in the name of a president. For no president can single-handedly make a difference for his ethnic community in these days of equitable distribution of national resources. Those who reap personal gain from associating with the president are often big businesses and a few close friends and relatives. More importantly, peaceful elections are good for the country’s economic stability and therefore the majority of Kenyans.

Although this proposal is undemocratic, we should also remember that we have hardly witnessed truly democratic elections in Kenya. We do not vote for presidential candidates because of their manifestos but more because of their ethnic background.

In any case, democracy is of no use if it only serves to divide people. Western democracy as practised in most of Africa has tended to promote greed, tribal conflicts and privileges for a few elites. Maybe we should consider entrenching in the new constitution a provision that checks political dominance by the large ethnic groups while stemming dictatorship by the smaller ones.

While we tinker with this idea, however, individual politicians gunning for the presidency can do Kenya a great deal of good by sacrificing their ambitions for the good of the country, especially where such ambition may intensify ethnic conflicts.

– – –
Subject: Kikuyu, Kalenjin presidential aspirants should give up for the good of country

From: Tebiti Oisaboke
Date: Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 2:03 AM

I have read with great dismay the payment or salary structure review resently conducted with the Price Water House Coopers (K) for CEOs in state corporations. The results are appalling, disgusting, absurd and pathetic to say the least. I can’t believe that some folks are make millions of shillings just for signing some paperwork. Most CEOs don’t do anything substantial to warrant these huge payments. Most of the work is done by the smallman and their job is just to autograph work documents already done by their subordinates. And most of these CEOs are underqualified for the designations assigned to them, because appointments to these prime posts is the delegatory of the president, and s/he may choose to pick anybody they so wish, as so long as this chap is able and willing to dance to the president’s tunes. In past administrations, the CEOs survived by plundering funds from their institutions and offer one half of their loots to “Mama Ngina Children’s Home” then it became “Kabarak High School”, “Moi Forces Accademy” etc later on. If you couldn’t do such kind of crab, you are done with and God what happens to you there after.

It is very unfair for a few clique members close to the inner circle, to make all they can make out of the sweat of the poor of the poorest folks who work their behinds to death making peanuts in only to sustain the lifestyles of the top 5% of Kenya’s population. This is inhuman and unacceptable in this day and age. That is why when President Obama came to power, he immediately slashed the Wall Street’s CEOs income along with those in the financial sector by a half on his second day in office. That was a job well done because these guys were squandering the tax payers money for nothing. We need an office manager who is brilliant, strong and couragious enough to stand and defend his employers. Someone who can constantly remind these folks that they ain’t the bosses but people’s servants. Right now, we have over 10 million Kenyans whose lives are technically hanging on the fringe of death due to the on going government inciated genocide starvation nationwide, while the government is handing out tens of millions of cahs to just a few Kenyans monthly, while forgeting about the starving poor man in the street. The gap between the poor and the elite folks in Kenya is very wide, simply because those who have broken the glass prism and graduated to the well insulated perimeters with the “Umbwa Kali” signs in front of their gates, don’t care about the straggling poor any more. I wonder how these Ksh. 3.9M, folks can managed to eat and sleep comfortably when millions of their country men are exterminating the wild animals, reptiles, poisonous fruits and scarvanging for food with birds. What these folks seem to forget is that, the late self crowned life president of the Central African Republic, Emporer Bokasa spent $3M of the state’s funds to purchase himself some bedroom furniture made of gold, from France while his people were dieying of hunger. As that wasn’t enough, he ordered the massacre of over 100 young kids – something which raise an uproar in his poor country and was overthrown in 1979. Emporer Haile Silasie of Ethiopia used to feed his dogs beef while his people starved to death. Gen. Mingistu Haile Mariamu got fed up and kicked him out of office in 1974.

In my opinion, there is no country on earth which can prosper if its people are hungry, sick, illiterate and unsecure. It doesn’t make any sense at all, to pay a single individual a monthly take home cheque of Ksh. 3.9M when millions of your people go without any basic nutritions for a good number of days. I also know that most administrative systems in Africa are crumbled, but they can be fixed with a good licensed driver. Unlicensed drivers such as those who drive themselves to power by the barrel of the gun or stealing the office keys from the ballot boxes can not and will not fix any disfranchised system. We should not read such news in the papers and just ignore them because by doing so, those people will think that “it’s life as normal” otherwise folks seem not to care!! Our local MPs with whom we have “bestowed” the authority of being our watchdogs, seem not to be doing what we hired them for. Stuff like this should be arrested and questioned by them and not the PWH-Coopers. Why don’t they raise red flags when they hear that certain CEOs are making a fortune out of the hard earned Kenyan shilling? They know how much each and every CEO makes because they’re the same folks who clears their wages through through Prince Kenyatta’s office. Years back, it was the expertrates who used to make such kind of “out of limit” wages but their jobs started to be nationalized through Kenyanization programme of 1967 and by the early 1970s most of thes prime positions were held by indiginious Kenyans whose wages were peged according to services they provided.

The expertrates who were retained, were only retained while the country was looking for a suitable Kenyan to take over such as Doctors, RNs,Accountants, Engineers etc. It was meant to be like that always but it is not. In the “Man-Eat-Man Soceity” as was described one time at the death of the EAC in 1977, by Mwalim Julius K. Nyerere, job appointments are
not dished out to the most quolified candidate, but to who knows who basis. Remember Mr. Joseph Kamere or is it Kamero, Kenya’s second AG or Mulu Mutisia? Mutisia ended up in the August house in 1974 as NMP without any accademic credentials but just because he happened to know who was who in Kenya. And his position of being the Chairman of the New Akamba Union, may have played a roll. The chap couldn’t even autograph his own signature. Kamere himself looked like someone who had just got here from another planet not even knowing he was an AG!!!.

God Bless Kenya
TOI

– – –
Subject: Ksh. 3.9 M for signing paperwork?

From: Francis Tome
Date: Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 7:28 PM

Dear Sir/Madam,

Perhaps the missile code named Grand Coalition Government (GCG) auto –destructed itself after its much hyped launch. It set out to navigate the judicial path of Post Election Violence (PEV) and implement essential reforms commonly referred to as “agenda four” with more bravado than common sense. Now everything is at a stand still yet the clock is fast ticking. All indications are that we are heading into a Cimmerian darkness. Even though the Grand Coalition Government keeps on reassuring Kenyans that it is committed to fighting impunity, one cannot fail to see impunity`s usual appurtenances. The permanent nature of GCG feebleness keeps on rearing its ugly head ad infinitum. Everyone right from the government functionaries enjoys a carte blanche. And the result is an avalanche of confusion in the GCG`s operations.

That is why Kenya`s foreign affairs Permanent Secretary; Thuita Mwangi easily adopted a very blinkered attitude of the conscientious public and then belligerently arrogated himself the power to pen down balderdash in one of the leading local dailies on the eve of the ICC prosecutor, Luis Moreno Ocampo`s visit in the country. In fact, Thuita only stopped short of declaring Ocampo a persona non grata in this country. This is obviously a case of engaging in a two penny theatrics on issues touching on the heartbeat of the nation.

The two principals on reading the mood of the conscientious public ostensibly castigated Mwangi for the impermissible conduct. However, a day later when the two met the ICC prosecutor, their body language on Ocampo`s demands was anything but different from Thuita`s. Beneath their well coded diplomatic verbiage was a tacit message to Ocampo and by extension the international community that Kenya was a sovereign state able to deal with its own internal problems without external interference. Now this is ad hominem par excellence. Like Thuita the two principals must be told that anybody perceived to be standing in the way of justice is an enemy of public conscience.

Thinking of using a special wing of the high court that reeks with impunity to try suspected perpetrators of PEV is ad nauseum. It will be chimerical. This will be chicanery most foul. It will no doubt be interpreted by the post election victims as an attempt to defenestrate justice and pamper the afreet of impunity. The time for bread and circuses is out. The two principals seem to working at cross purposes with the conscientious public.

We must stop behaving as though we are a people suffering from borderline personality disorder. Parliament made a resounding decision. “Let us not be vague, let us go to Hague”. So be it. Why backpedal and embellish incendiarism? It will be in our best interest as a country if we ceased beguiling ourselves with abrogation talk. Such talks will amount to nothing because ICC has no abandonment option. My exhortation to the President and the Prime Minister is not to allow the country to be held captive by the mumbo-jumbo sovereignty balderdash.

TOME FRANCIS,

BUMULA CONSTITUENCY.
– – –
Subject: COOPERATION WITH ICC: THE SOVEREINGTY BALDERDASH MUST CEASE.

From: otieno sungu
Date: Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 9:27 PM

A trend is developing in Kenya where citizens find it ok for a leader to break the law as long as he/she comes from “my tribe” or “my Party”. You will see arguments advanced for the neccesity to break the law because “it was for the common good!!!”

I am still baffled what common good can breaking the law bring!!!!

Recently, the President broke the law by re-appointing the KACC Director and his assistants without following the law. It was very disconcerting to see many, lawyers included, supporting an illegality. The current raging debate about the Procurement of Passats by the Finance Minister is another case. Some argue that those raising issues shoud have done so beforehand. This does not arise for there are clear procedures laid down and no one needs raise issues.The law should simply be followed, period!!!

Uhuru Kenyatta has a penchant for breaking laws. He did the same when he was Minister for Local Government and went against the laid down procedure for nominating councillors.He is doing it again with the procurement of Passats, and sadly, he has a lot of dancers to his law breaking tendencies!!!

As Kenyans, we must narture a culture of calling our leaders bluff when they break the law. It is sad that we have sunk so low that when a leader breaks the law, as long as he comes from “my tribe or my party”, I will excuse him. In other countries, that is enough reason for one to voluntarily resign. But because in Kenya such a leader will have “his people” supporting him, he will saunter around, saying things like ” I would rather die than resign”, ” I will not resign”, “I am enjoying the circus” etc

I must say that the bar for a Kenyan leader is set so low that leadership in Kenya has lost meaning. In civilized societies, the law is the custodian of the people’s rights, when we start giving leaders leeway to break laws, today it will be irregular procurement of Passats, tomorrow it will be organizing youths to murder and get away with it!!!

The law must remain sacred, there should be no compromise on the sanctity of the law. We must learn to revere our laws.

As common men, that is all we have and that is what makes us equal with the big man. When we allow them to trample on the law, we should not cry when they organize and fund youths to kill us, because the law will not protect us, and they know it!!!!!!!!

The law is the law, there is no small law and big law!!!

Otieno Sungu.
Juba-Southern Sudan.
– – –
Subject: Excuses for breaking the law!!!!

From: Paul Nyandoto
Date: Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 1:30 AM
Subject: Vs: Kenya AG to sue US over travel ban

Folks,

We now have a proof that Kenya is being ruled by low brain thinking, selfish hooligans. Is this the Wako somebody wrote about in daily nation how brilliant he is, with a lot of degrees, the Alliance product?. Now you see by your own eyes and hear by your own ears what type of education these guys have. I did read the same note in the BBC about Kenyan AG to sue US over travel ban. Wako is joking, how many cases in Kenya had he solved?. Who promised him that his case against US visa ban will be now solved?. It is good that he Mr. Wako has a confidence on the US judicial system. Of course he has a right as a human being to sue, BUT LET HIM USE HIS OWN MONEY NOT THE TAX PAYERS MONEY. Kenyan-tax payers have been robbed enough under his tenure enough.

Paul Nyandoto

>>> Judy Miriga 4.11.2009 21:21 >>>

Folks,

Wako needs a shove out of the Judiciary Office. His head is buried on the sand. He has no idea whats going on around him and did not adhere but totally forgotten his commitment to public service deliberations according to his job specification for duty.

Although he witnessed the signing Agreement of the two Principles on the Reform Accord Requirements which brought the Coalition into existance, he failed to adhere and to perform within his jurisdiction to be seen to excercise those principles to provide an enabling environment on his part (in many ways) for the Reform Accord to gain roots or take effect on the legal corridors. Instead he has been seen to behave in a suspecious manner construed to be a stumbling block to reform by such means of providing loopholes and leeways to facility support working against Reform take-off or success. In my opinion, Wako is of no valuable substance to Kenya as a whole, but a burden we cannot afford to carry. Anglo Leasing bla bla bla does not make sense to Wako. What will?

Wako should be shown the door before the Judiciary can gain some trust by the public.

I believe Wako has been working for his stomach and private interest rather than for the public. He needs reform himself before reform can be allowed entry into the Judicial system of Kenyan. Wako is Judicary retarded, he cannot perform. He should be shown the door people!………..

Thanks,

Judy Miriga
Diaspora Spokesperson
Executive Director
Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc.,
USA
http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/681974/-/uol8co/-/index.html
Kenya AG to sue US over travel ban

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJdhv7j9yNg
US visa ban puzzle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KihpS4VcCtI
Wako displays he is very naive to circumstances

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljhBsFQEHzM
Wako: Ringera fate lies with the courts 26/09/09

Getty Images 7 months ago
University of Nairobi students demonstrate in the streets of Nairobi on March 10, 2009 in protest of the kiling of a fellow student by police last week in the Kenyan capital. Around 2000 people, comprising university students, human rights activists and youth from disadvantaged neighbourhods marched the streets of downtwn Nairobi to demand the resignation of police commissioner, Maj [Rtd] Mohamed Ali and Attorney General Amos Wako for the death of the student who was gunned down alongside a prominent civil activist from Oxfam Nairobi, allegedly by police officers.

From: Khasakhala, Hudson
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 9:35 AM
Subject: FW: Kenya AG to sue US over travel ban

What has Wako accomplished as AG ?, Nothing, completely nothing of a tangible nature. All he does is smile and do shyt.

These folks are wealthy and stable, they will not get hurt by a VISA ban. It’s the common man, who suffers due to these sanctions. I think his response is so arrogant and non-chalant.

Attorney General Amos Wako. He said on Wednesday that he will sue the US for defaming him after banning him from traveling to the country. Photo/FILE By ANTHONY KARIUKIPosted Wednesday, November 4 2009 at 16:24 In Summary *

Mr Wako says he will take the fight to the US.

Kenya’s Attorney General Amos Wako has signalled his intention to sue the United States for defamation. Mr Wako said that he had “received notification that my visa has been revoked for blocking reforms,” more than a week after the US Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Jonnie Carson said his country had banned a senior Kenya Government official for blocking reforms.

Mr Carson, however, withheld the name of the banned official only saying he was of “influence” and his duties required extensive travel.

Addressing a news conference at his Sheria House office on Wednesday, Mr Wako said the ban due to “engaging in corrupt actions that have adversely affected the interests of the US,” were off the mark and amounted to defaming him.

The AG said that he will seek legal redress in the US adding: “I will take the fight there.” “While I am totally indifferent to the revocation of my visa and have absolutely no desire to visit the US, my intention is to seek legal action with a view to institute legal proceedings in the US,” said Mr Wako.

He added that he has always kept the fire of reforms burning within government adding that he was an “adviser and not a decision maker.”

Speculation had been rife that Mr Wako was the latest US target, after Mr Carson’s announcement coming on the back on US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Kenya visit, where she impressed on the Kenya leadership to push for reforms.

She is understood to have said told Kenya’s principals- President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga- that changes were required in the police, judiciary and the State Law Office.

Former Police Commissioner Major General Hussein Ali has since been transferred to the post office while Chief Justice Evans Gicheru remains in office.

“For 15 years, grand corruption has reigned such as Anglo Leasing but not one top officer has been found guilty. Millions of dollars that could have been used to build schools have disappeared and the Attorney-General and the Judiciary are responsible,” Mr Carson said at the time.

At the time, Foreign minister Moses Wetangula dismissed the US action as “megaphone diplomacy.”

Mr Wako has served for a record 18 years since he was appointed AG by former President Moi in 1991. He has been widely criticised for failing to prosecute corruption cases during his tenure.

The infamous Goldenberg and Anglo Leasing scandals, where the government lost billions of taxpayers’ money, occurred during his watch. The cases have never been successfully prosecuted.

Only recently, he entered nolle prosequi (terminate a case) in a case involving outlawed Mungiki sect leader Maina Njenga.

3 Comments…..

You need to login first to submit a comment.

Submitted by agusa2010
Posted November 04, 2009 05:06 PM
2.

Hon Wako, nobody really cares whether you intend to visit the US in your private capacity or not!Kenyans are only disgusted that the country’s Attorney General cannot conduct official business in the US.Remember,we need the US just like they also need us.

3.

Submitted by angle2090
Posted November 04, 2009 05:06 PM
4.

Hon. Wako knows that fighting this may expose him even more. Would it help justify his actions as AG and his reputation as a ‘chameleon-like’ AG? Perhaps he wants to swim in,and even sink deeper into, the quagmire of the messes afflicting Kenya due to his indecisiveness and, perhaps, ineptitude!

5.

Submitted by chesireken
Posted November 04, 2009 04:54 PM

6.

Wako makes himself a bigger fool than I thought he was. If somebody bans you from visiting his home, do you sue him? Carry your own cross Wako, you allowed Moi and Kibaki to use you to cover their corrupt deals and now you are on your own. I watched you defending yourself with number of taskforces you have set up. We want action not mere talk or task forces. Goldenberg and Anglo Leasing scandals happened under your watch and you did nothing! Wako okayed Anglo Leasing and he was trying to fool us on TV!

From: Yona Fares Maro
Date: 2009/11/4

LOWASSA HAKUONEWA; ALICHELEWA KUJIUZULU!

To: hollymaro

LOWASSA HAKUONEWA; ALICHELEWA KUJIUZULU!

Kuna baadhi ya watu ambao wanaamini mioyoni mwao kuwa aliyekuwa Waziri Mkuu na Mbunge wa Monduli Mhe. Edward Lowassa alionewa na Kamati Teule ya Bunge na kuwa alilazimishwa kujiuzulu kutokana na kutotendewa haki na Kamati hiyo iliyoongozwa na Dr. Harrison Mwakyembe, Mbunge wa Kyela. Watu wenye imani hiyo wanaamini kabisa kuwa Lowassa hakutendewa haki na hivyo wanafanya kila jitihada ya kuhakikisha kuwa Lowassa anasafishwa na hatimaye kujengwa tena ili kuweka rekodi iwe sahihi.

Katika makala hii ambayo nimeitengeneza kwa mtindo wa maswali na majibu nina kusudio la kuonesha kuwa Bw. Lowassa hakuonewa na mtu yeyote, alitakiwa kujiuzulu hata kabla ya Kamati Teule kuundwa na kuwa mjadala way eye kuonewa na chombo chochote ni mjadala unaotokana na mtazamo finyu, wenye ushahidi dhaifu, na kwa kipimo chochote unajaribu kutengeneza kitu ambacho hakipo. Ni makusudio yangu kuonesha kuwa Bw. Lowassa alistahili kujiuzulu mapema zaidi na hata pale alipochelewa alitakiwa kukubali adhabu aliyojipa yeye mwenyewe kutokana na kutokuwajibika kwake, uzembe wa ofisi yake, na kutokuonesha usimamizi unaomstahili Waziri Mkuu katika jambo nyeti kama la nishati.

Lengo kubwa ni hatimaye kulazimisha kwa nguvu za hoja kufunga mjadala huu baada ya kuzipima hoja zote kama zilivyo. Fuatana nami ukiwa na fikra huru ili uweze kuona kuwa nafasi aliyonayo sasa hivi Bw. Lowassa ndiyo nafasi ya juu kabisa ambayo anastahili kuishika katika Jamhuri yetu, ceteris paribus.

Swali:

Hivi karibuni makala ya gazeti la Nipashe imeonesha jinsi Lowassa alivyoshiriki katika mchakato wa kuipatia kampuni ya Richmond tenda, unaichukuliaje makala hiyo?

M.M. Kwanza niseme kwamba makala ile imeandikiwa kishabiki sana kiasi kwamba hata ukweli uliopo ndani yake unachafuliwa na ushabiki huo. Unapoandika habari za uchunguzi au kuibua kashfa au kufafanua jambo ni muhimu kuweka pembeni hisia zako juu ya jambo hilo au kutumia maneno ambayo katika ulimwengu wa hoja tunaita ni ‘kumshambulia mtu’ – ad hominem.

Licha ya ushahidi uliodaiwa kuoneshwa kwenye makala hiyo juu ya ushiriki wa Lowassa kwenye mchakato wa Richmond tunaweza kuona matumizi ya maneno ambayo yalikusudia au yamekusudia kuwafanya duni baaedhi ya washiriki. Kwa hiyo, Hivyo, makala ile ingeweza kuandikwa kitaalamu zaidi badala ya jinsi ilivyoandikwa kwa mtindo wa mipasho, vijembe, kejeli na dharau hasa kwenye jambo nyeti na zito kama hili.

Swali:

Makala imeonesha jinsi Lowassa alivyoshiriki katika mchakato wa kuipa Richmond tenda, kitu ambacho kuna watu wanadai kuwa hakuwa anashiriki huoni kuwa kuweka hilo wazi kulikofanywa na gazeti hilo kumefuta hoja hiyo?

Jibu:

Kwanza hoja siyo kushirki au kutoshiriki kwa Waziri Mkuu. Ukisoma vizuri makala hiyo utaona kuwa imemsaidia zaidi Lowassa kuliko kuonesha kuwa alichofanya si sahihi. Makala hiyo inaonesha sifa kadhaa ambazo kwa haraka haraka zinaonekana kumpamba Lowassa zaidi; ni mfuatiliaji, haogopi kuchukua maamuzi magumu, yuko tayari kufuatilia taarifa hata za mitaani, n.k Ndio maana mwitikio wangu wa kwanza kwenye makala hiyo ulikuwa ni kuwa gazeti la Nipashe limemsafisha Lowassa na kumfanya kuwa kweli ameonewa!

Swali:

Ina maana hiyo makala inamjenga Lowassa zaidi kuliko kumbomoa kama ilivyotarajiwa?

Jibu:

Bila ya shaka. Makala haioneshi ni makosa gani ya kisheria ambayo Lowassa aliyafanya kwa kuingilia mchakato wa tenda; haioneshi ni makosa gani aliyafanya kwa kutaka Richmond ipendelewe kupata hiyo tenda, na wala haioneshi ni tatizo gani linatokea pale Waziri Mkuu anapoamua kuunda chombo nje ya vile vilivyopo kisheria kufuatilia tenda. Hivyo, kwa mtu wa kawaida, utaona kuwa Lowassa anaonekana kama mtu aliyedhamiria kwa namna “yoyote” ile kuhakikisha kuwa suala la tatizo la umeme linakomeshwa mara moja. Kwa hiyo hiyo makala ilikuwa na udhaifu mkubwa sana na sijui ni vipi iliweza kutumiwa jinsi ilivyo!

Swali:

Sielewi; ina maana unaamini basi kuwa Lowassa hakustahili kujiuzulu kwani alikuwa anafanya alichotakiwa kufanya kama ushahidi unavyoonesha katika makala hiyo siyo?

Jibu: La hasha; ninaamini kuwa Lowassa alistahili kujiuzulu mapema zaidi si kwa kile tu ambacho kinaonekana katika makala hiyo au madai ambayo tumekuwa tukiyasikia bali kwa kitu kikubwa zaidi ambacho hakijaandikwa kwa kina kikaeleweka. Lowassa alistahili kujiuzulu kwanza kwa sababu alikiuka sheria, alijipa madaraka asiyokuwa nayo, na alishindwa kutumia nafasi aliyopewa kujitetea kujenga hoja kwanini ripoti ya Mwakyembe haikumtendea haki.

Swali: tafadhali fafanua kuhusu “kukiuka sheria”

Jibu: Wakati tatizo la nishati linatokea mwaka 2006 kama ilivyo kawaida serikali ikaanza kutafuta jinsi ya kulitatua. Ni lazima tutambue kwanza kabisa kuwa tatizo la nishati Tanzania siyo geni na hakuna mtu mwenye akili timamu ambaye anaweza kudai kuwa hatukujua kuwa tutakuwa na tatizo hilo kama vile lilivyotokea tena mwaka huu na kama itakavyotokea mwakani!

Zaidi ya yote ni muhimu kutambua kuwa tatizo la nishati la Tanzania halitokani na upungufu wa maji kwenye mabwawa yetu! Sababu hii imekuwa ikitajwa mara nyingi na wananchi wa kawaida wamekuwa wakikubali. Ni kisingizio dhaifu cha tatizo hasa la nishati nchini. Tatizo letu ni uongozi usio na maono, dhaifu kuamua, legelege katika kutenda na usiothubutu kujaribu mambo makubwa na kubakia kujaribu vitu vidogo kwa sababu vikubwa vinatisha! Tanzania haina sababu hata moja ya kuwa na tatizo la nishati ya umeme.

Tukielewa hilo tutaona kuwa mwitikio wa Waziri Mkuu wakati wa upungufu wa nishati hiyo mwaka 2006 ulikuwa ni wa jazba, hamaki, na uliojaribu kutengeneza kimbunga ndani ya kikombe cha chai au maporomoko ya maji kwenye kijiko.

Idara zote na taasisi zote za serikali zinaongozwa na Sheria ya Manunuzi ya Umma ya 2004. Sheria hii imeweka utaratibu wa jinsi gani wizara, idara, wakala au taasisi fulani ya serikali inaweza kununua vitu mbalimbali au kuuza vitu mbalimbali. Ni sheria inayohusu vyombo vya umma na hata vya binafsi ambavyo vinahusisha fedha za umma. Hivyo ni sheria hii ndiyo ilitakiwa kufuatwa wakati wa tatizo la nishati la mwaka 2006.

Swali: Sasa unasema kuwa hiyo sheria haikufuatwa?

Jibu: Jibu la moja kwa moja ni ‘ndiyo’. Sheria hii haikufuatwa ilivyotakiwa na matokeo yake ni kupatikana kwa kampuni ya Richmond kama mletaji wa majenereta ya kufua umeme. Ni kutokana na kutokufuatwa kwa sheria hii ndiko kulisababisha kampuni ya Richmond kupewa tenda, kushindwa kupatikana kwa majenereta katika muda uliotakiwa na hatimaye kusababisha kujiuzulu kwa Waziri Mkuu. Kama sheria hii ingefuatwa Lowassa asingekuwa katika nafasi iliyomkuta Februari mwaka jana. Hii ndiyo maana ya sheria ni msumeno.

Swali: Una mfano wowote wa jinsi gani sheria hii haikufuatwa?

Jibu: Ndiyo. Sheria ya Manunuzi ya Umma inasema wazi kuwa hakuna chombo chochote cha serikali kitakachotangaza, kutoa au kutia sahihi mkataba wa kununua kitu chochote bila ya kuhusisha Bodi ya Tenda ya taasisi hiyo na Mamlaka ya Manunuzi ya Umma. Ibara ya 31 ya sheria hiyo iko wazi kabisa. Kipengele (a) cha sheria hiyo kinasema wazi kuwa kinakataza jambo hilo na kipengele (b) kinasema wazi kuwa hakuna tenda yoyote itakayotolewa kwa mtu au taasisi yoyote isipokuwa kama imeidhinishwa na bodi ya tenda husika.

Swali: Nimekupata. Kwa hiyo kwenye suala la Richmond nani alitakiwa asimamie utoaji wa tenda?

Jibu: Katika suala hili chombo kilichotakiwa kusimamia mchakato wa upatikani wa tenda ni Bodi ya Tenda ya Shirika la Umeme la Tanzania (TANESCO). Ni chombo hicho peke yake kuanzia mwanzo hadi mwisho kilichotakiwa kutangaza, kuchuja, kupima, na hatimaye kuingia mkataba na kampuni iliyotimiza vigezo vya tenda hiyo kuleta majenereta ya umeme. Hii ina maana siyo Wizara ya Nishati na Madini, wala siyo Ofisi ya Waziri Mkuu, wala Ikulu waliokuwa na nguvu ya kuingilia mchakato wa tenda kwenye shirika hilo.

Swali: Kwa hiyo sheria inawapa nguvu hizo. Unataka kusema kuwa hakuna mtu au afisa nje ya sheria anayeweza kuingilia kati kama alivyofanya Waziri Mkuu?

Jibu: Hakuna. Sheria hiyo hiyo inaweka wazi kabisa kwenye ibara ya 38 kuwa vyombo vyote vinavyohusika na masuala ya tenda vitafanya kazi yake kwa “uhuru”. Hii ni katika kuzuia kile kilichofanywa na Waziri Mkuu katika suala la Richmond na Rais Kikwete kwenye suala la Dowans.

Swali: Lakini wapo wanaosema kuwa kutokana na dharura ya wakati ule hakukuwa na jinsi isipokuwa Waziri Mkuu kuingilia kati kuokoa jahazi. Unasemaje?

Jibu: Hili ni jibu ambalo nimelisikia kwa muda sasa. Kwamba “dharura” ile ilimpa nguvu Waziri Mkuu kuingilia utaratibu wa tenda. Kwamba, kutokana na hali hiyo basi sheria ya Manunuzi ya Umma ilisimamishwa kwa muda na hivyo kukatazwa kufanya kazi na kumpa Waziri Mkuu kuongoza mchakato wa kuipata Richmond. Mawazo hayo yana makosa.

Sheria ya Manunuzi ya Umma haijawasi kusitishwa na haijafutwa na hakuna afisa yoyote wa serikali akiwemo Rais anayeweza kuisimamisha kiholela au kwa kisingizio cha “dharura”. Zaidi ya yote,

Zaidi ya yote, sheria hiyo ilitarajia kuwa kuna wakati ambapo huduma au bidhaa fulani inahitajika kwa haraka na hivyo utaratibu wa kawaida wa utoaji wa tenda kutotumika. Ni kwa sababu hiyo ibara ya 59(2) ya sheria hiyo imeweka wazi kuwa endapo inatokea kuwa bidhaa au huduma inahitajika wakati wa dharura basi utaratibu wa haraka upatikanaji wa tenda waweza kutumika kwa kuzingatia kanuni kubwa mbili; kwanza, mazingira yaliyosababisha dharura hiyo hayakuweza kutarajiwa au kutokana na makosa ya bodi yenyewe kuchelewa na pili bodi itaweka nyaraka za kuelezea kwanini inatumia utaratibu huo wa haraka. Hivyo, Bodi ya Tenda ya Tanesco ilikuwa na nguvu zote za kufanya kazi hiyo.

Swali: Kwa mujibu wa mojawapo ya barua tulizosizoma kwenye magazeti mbalimbali Mhe. Lowassa aliona kuwa kule Tanesco wameshindwa kazi hiyo na ndiyo sababu ya yeye kuunda timu ya majadiliano na kuchukua madaraka ya kusimamia tenda. Unasemaje kuhusu hilo?

Jibu: Kama nilivyosema awali, Waziri Mkuu hana mamlaka ya kisheria ya kuingilia mchakato wa bodi ya tenda mahali popote; lakini la pili ni kuwa endapo kulikuwa na matatizo katika bodi ya tenda ya mahali fulani basi Mtendaji Mkuu wa Mamlaka ya Manunuzi ana uwezo wa kisheria kuingilia kati na siyo Waziri Mkuu. Hivyo, kwa kimsingi ni kuwa Waziri Mkuu alivunja sheria na hiyo peke yake ilikuwa ni sababu tosha ya kujiuzulu.

Swali: Lakini inaonekana alikuwa na nia njema ndio maana alichukua maamuzi hayo, ama sivyo?

Jibu: Yawezekana alikuwa na nia njema. Hata hivyo alipokula kiapo chake cha Ofisi ya Waziri Mkuu hakula kiapo cha “kulinda, kutetea na kuhifadhi” nia yake njema. Waziri Mkuu wetu kama walivyo watumishi wengine wakuu wanakula kiapo cha kuilinda na kuitetea Katiba ya Jamhuri ya Muungano na kiapo kingine cha utii kwa Rais aliyemteua na vile vile kile cha Usiri kama mshiriki wa Baraza la Mawaziri. Hivyo, nia yake njema haikumzuia kuwajibika au kujiwajibisha yeye mwenyewe.

Swali: Unachosema kinakubaliana kwa kiasi na kile kilichopo kwenye ripoti ya Mwakyembe. Umechota humo?

Jibu: La hasha; mtu yeyote anayeweza kutumia dakika chache kufikiri anaweza kufikia hitimisho ambalo nimelifikia mimi au walilofikia kina Mwakyembe. Wao walielezea hilo kwa maneno yafuatayo katika ripoti yao ile ya Kihistoria: “PPRA ilifanya uchunguzi makini na wa kina kujua kama Sheria na Kanuni za Ununuzi wa Umma zilifuatwa. Taarifa hiyo imebainisha wazi kuwa pamoja na nia nzuri ya Serikali ya kutaka kuiokoa nchi kutokana na hali mbaya ya umeme, mchakato mzima wa zabuni ulikiuka Sheria ya Ununuzi wa Umma ya Mwaka 2004 na Kanuni za Ununuzi wa Umma za Mwaka 2005”. Na vile vile kuwa “Kama vile Wizara hiyo haihusiki kabisa na utawala wa sheria na utawala bora, ikailazimisha TANESCO isiheshimu ushauri wa kitaalamu wa Mamlaka ya Udhibiti wa Ununuzi wa Umma (PPRA) na kuingilia mchakato wa zabuni wa procurement entity nyingine kwa kuiweka pembeni Bodi ya Zabuni ya TANESCO, kuiagiza TANESCO ivunje sheria kwa kuwabadilisha wajumbe wa Bodi yake ya Zabuni na Wizara kufanya maamuzi ya ununuzi kwa niaba ya TANESCO na kuu
lazimisha uongozi wake kusaini mkataba na kampuni ambayo TANESCO waliikataa mara tatu kwa vigezo vya kitaalamu kuwa haifai kwa kazi hiyo. Huo ulikuwa udhalilishaji mkubwa wa viongozi na watendaji ndani ya TANESCO.”

Swali: Utawaambia nini wale wanaomini kuwa Waziri Mkuu ana uwezo wa kuingilia kati suala kama hilo wakati wa dharura? Kwamba wakati wa dharura serikali inaweza kufanya jambo lolote bila ya kujali sheria iliyopo?

Jibu: Wazo hilo liko miongoni mwa watu wetu wengi na wengine ni wasomi mahiri Binafsi ningeiadhibu bodi ya tenda ya Tanesco kwa kukubali kuingiliwa kati na Ofisi ya Waziri Mkuu. Ninaamini kama wangeenda mahakamani wangeweza kumzuia Waziri Mkuu kuendesha mchakato wa tenda nje ya ule uliopo kwenye sheria ya 2004 ma Kanuni zake za 2005. Nina uhakika wa asilimia 101 wangeshinda.

Lakini vile vile, Waziri Mkuu hana uwezo wa kutangaza dharura inayoweza kusababisha baadhi ya sheria kutokutumika na maagizo yake yakatosha kuwa sheria. Kwa sheria zetu sisi ni Rais tu anayo madaraka ya kutangaza dharua na hali ya hatari.

Swali: Tafadhali fafanua hilo.

Jibu: Bila ya shaka. Mojawapo ya sheria ambazo wengi wetu hatujawahi kuzisikia au kuona zikitumika ni ile ya Mamlaka ya Rais wakati wa Dharura (Emergency Powers) ya mwaka 1986. Sheria hiyo inampa Rais madaraka ya kuweza kutangaza hali ya hatari kwa nchi nzima au sehemu yoyote ya Tanzania Bara au Visiwani. Na hali ya hatari (dharura) hapa kwa mujibu wa sheria ni pamoja na masuala ya “vita, uvamizi, uasi, kuvunjika kwa amani, vurumai au jangana jingine lolote au maafa mengine” yawe yamesababishwa na asili au vinginevyo na ambayo yanatosha kufanya kuwa nia suala kitaifa. Ninaamini janga la umeme la 2006 na hata la mwaka huu yanaweza kutosha kabisa kutangaza hali ya dharura.

Sasa, Rais ndiye mtu pekee ambaye anaweza kutangaza hali hiyo na ndiye pekee anayeweza kutoa mamlaka yake hayo kwa mtu mwingine kwa mujibu wa sheria. Na ikimbidi kufanya hivyo basi hilo linatangazwa kwenye Gazeti la Serikali na siyo kwa simu au kwa mdomo tu ni lazima iwe kwa maandishi.

Swali: Sasa, yawezekana Waziri Mkuu alipewa madaraka hayo ya Rais na hivyo kupewa uwezo huo wa kwenda nje ya sheria ya Manunuzi?

Jibu: Ndiyo inawezekana. Lakini hadi hivi sasa hakuna mahali hata pamoja ambapo Taifa lilitangaziwa kuwa Rais ametangaza hali ya dharura. Na kama ilitangazwa, ilitangazwa katika toleo gani la Gazeti la Serikali? Nitakuwa tayari kusahihishwa endapo litatolewa tangazo la Rais kumpatia Waziri Mkuu au mtu mwingine yoyote madaraka hayo.

Swali: Kama Waziri Mkuu hakupewa madaraka hayo yeye aliyapata wapi?

Jibu: Hilo ndilo swali la karne. Ninachoona nikuwa “dharura” tunayoisema ni dharura kwa maana ya kawaida ya jambo lenye uhitaji uangalizi wa haraka na siyo kwa maana ya kisheria. Kwa sababu hiyo basi Waziri Mkuu hakuwa na uwezo wa kufanya hivyo.

Swali: Vipi kuhusu kwa kutumia sheria ya Kusimamia Majanga ambayo iko chini ya Wizara yake?

Jibu: Hata kwa sheria hiyo Waziri Mkuu hana uwezo wa kuingilia tenda ya chombo chochote kile. Sheria ile nayo imeweka utaratibu wa kufuata wa kushughulikia majanga mbalimbali na nani anaongoza na vyombo hivyo vinaratibiwaje.

Swali: Kama nimekuelewa vizuri ni kuwa Waziri Mkuu alifanya makosa kuingilia mchakato wa tenda ya Richmond na ilimtosha kujiuzulu?

Jibu: Sawasawa.

Swali: Vipi kuhusu madai ya kuwa Kamati Teule haikumtendea haki Waziri Mkuu na kumnyima haki yake ya asili ya kujitetea?

Jibu: Hilo nalo limekuwa hoja kubwa sana kwa watu mbalimbali kiasi kwamba kuna watu wasomi wanaamini kabisa kuwa Lowassa hakutendewa haki na kuwa alionewa na kina Mwakyembe. Sasa mimi sizungumzi kwa niaba ya Kamati Teule (sina uwezo, nguvu, wala sababu hiyo). Ninachoangalia ni vitu vichache.

Kwanza ni kuwa Kamati Teule ilisema wazi kuwa “Watu pekee waliokuwa wanaujua ukweli wenyewe, ukweli ambao ungeipa Kamati Teule msingi wa kumhoji Waziri Mkuu kwa kiapo, walikuwa watatu: Waziri Dk. Msabaha (Mb), Katibu Mkuu Mwakapugi na Mwenyekiti wa Bodi Balozi Kazaura.” Na kuwa watu hao watatu walikataa “katakata kupokea maagizo toka kwa Waziri Mkuu” kuipendelea Richmond. Lakini hata hivyo, baada ya kushindwa kufanya hivyo nje ya kiapo watu hao hao waliidokeza kamati hiyo kuwa ni kweli walipata maagizo hayo!

Ni kutokana na hilo Kamati hiyo iliidai kuwa “Pamoja na woga uliokuwa dhahiri wa watumishi hao, ushahidi wa maandishi, wa mdomo na kimazingira ambao Kamati Teule iliupata kutoka kwa mashahidi mbalimbali, unamhusisha Waziri Mkuu na mchakato wa maamuzi katika suala hili la Richmond.”

Ni kutokana na hilo, Kamati Teule ilipofika wakati wa kutoa mapendekezo yake ilimpa nafasi Waziri Mkuu kukanusha, kupinga, kukataa, kujitetea au kujibu hoja zilizotolewa. Pendekezo lao kuhusu Waziri Mkuu lilisema hivi “Kwa kuzingatia umuhimu wa nafasi aliyonayo Mhe. Waziri Mkuu katika uendeshaji wa shughuli za Serikali na uongozi wa nchi kwa ujumla, ni wajibu wake yeye mwenyewe kupima uzito wa matokeo ya uchunguzi huu na wajibu wake kikatiba ndani na nje ya Bunge. Vile vile ni wajibu wa Bunge ambalo linathibitisha uteuzi wake kwa mujibu wa Ibara ya 51 inayothibitisha uteuzi wake. Kuangalia ikiwa matokeo ya uchunguzi huu hayajaathiri hadhi na uzito wake ndani ya Bunge.”

Kamati Teule haikuitisha kujiuzulu kwa Lowassa. Ilimpa nafasi ya “kupima uzito” wa matokeo ya huo uchunguzi na kwa Bunge kupima “kuangalia” kama matokeo ya uchunguzi hayajaathiri hadhi na uzito wake Bungeni”.

Swali: Hebu vunja vunja hapa nielewe naona kizunguzungu kwa kweli!

Jibu: Bila ya shaka. Kamati ya Mwakyembe ilimfungulia mwanya Lowassa kujibu hoja zao hapo hapo Bungeni. Hata kama hakuweza kuitwa kwenye Kamati (kwani hakuna mtu aliyemtaja moja kwa moja chini ya kiapo) kwa vile Kamati ya Bunge ina nguvu za Bunge na Bunge bado linaweza kusikiliza jambo linalotoka kwenye Kamati Lowassa angeweza kufanya mambo kadhaa.

Kutoa hoja mjadala uhairishwe ili apate nafasi ya kuandaa majibu yake. Hili naamini ndilo alilotakiwa kufanya. Angeweza kutoa hoja asubuhi hili kuwa “baada ya kupima uzito” wa ripoti ya Kamati Teule anamuomba Spika mjadala uahirishwe japo kwa siku moja ili aweze kupitia vielelezo mbalimbali na kuandaa majibu yake. Hakufanya hivyo.

Kama tayari alikuwa anajua msimamo wake angeweza asubuhi ile kuanza kupangua hoja moja baada ya nyingine, kuanzia barua zinazodaiwa kutoka kwake kwenda maafisa mbalimbali wa Wizara na za kutoka kwao kwenda kwake. Angeonesha kuwa hakufunja sheria yoyote na angeweza kutetea madaraka yake ya kuingilia utaratibu wa tenda na aliyapata wapi. Hapa angeweza kuonesha tamko la Rais kutoka sheria ya Madaraka ya Dharura kuwa Rais alimpa uwezo huo kwa agizo namba fulani lililotolewa kwenye gazeti la serikali toleo fulani. Hakufanya hivyo.

Angeweza kuomba Bunge liahirishwe ili aweze kufanya mazungumzo na Rais (aliyekuwa tayari Dodoma wakati ule) ili aweze kumueleza upande wake na kupata msimamo wake na kumtaka asimame upande wake atakapojitetea Bungeni. Hakufanya hivyo.

Angeweza kujiuzulu bila ya kujitetea. Hilo alilifanya.

Lowassa aliamua kutumia njia nyepesi zaidi ya kujiuzulu bila ya kujitetea.

Swali: Sasa alidai kuwa “natural justice” sijui haikufanyika kwake. Wewe hulioni hilo?

Jibu: Kwa mtu mwingine anaweza akaliona hivyo siyo mimi. Haki ya msingi ya asili (natural law) haimaanishi mtu kupewa nafasi ya kujitetea kwenye nafasi moja au sehemu moja tu. Haki ya kujitetea inaponyimwa ni pale mtu anapoadhibiwa pasipo kusikilizwa kabisa (condemnation without hearing). Yaani, mtu anaambiwa “wewe umeiba mbuzi” na kabla hajafungua mdogo wake anapigwa risasi! Lowassa hakunyimwa haki ya kujitetea!

Lowassa alipewa nafasi ya kujitetea, na akaamu kutoitumia na badala yake aliitumia kukandia Kamati Teule na kudai kuwa walichokuwa wanakitaka ni “Uwaziri Mkuu” na kuwa atawapa takwa hilo. Hakutaka kujitetea. Lowassa alipewa nafasi ya natural justice kuelezea upande wake mbele ya Bunge, hakufanya hivyo.

Kwa msingi huo, hoja ya kuwa Lowassa alionewa kuwa hakusikilizwa haina msingi isipokuwa kwa watu ambao hawataki kukumbuka kilichotokea siku ile. Lowassa angeweza kujitetea vizuri kabisa siku ile, angeweza kupangua kila hoja iliyotajwa dhidi yake, angeweza kuhutubia kutwa nzima Bungeni na kuonesha mapungufu kiasi cha kusababisha Bunge kupiga kura ya kukataa ripoti ya Mwakyembe; hakufanya hivyo! Aliamua kuzira kujitetea.

Swali: Ina maana basi ni yeye pekee ndiye anabeba lawama za kujiuzulu kwake na siyo Bunge, Spika au kina Mwakyembe!

Jibu: Naam! Na ninaamini hata kabla ya Kamati kutoa ripoti yake Lowassa alitakiwa awe amekwisha jiuzulu endapo mapendekezo yake ya baadaye kuhusu Richmond yalipokataliwa na Rais.

Swali: Hilo jipya! Unasema kuna mapendekezo ambayo yalikataliwa na Rais?

Jibu: Ndiyo. Katika makala mbalimbali unazosisoma magazetini utaona mawasiliano kati ya Waziri Mkuu, Ofisi yake na Wizara. Hata hivyo hujaona mawasiliano ya Waziri Mkuu na Rais au Ikulu. Mawasiliano hayo ndiyo ungekuuwa utetezi mkubwa wa Lowassa dhidi ya tuhuma dhidi yake. Kwa vile alishindwa kumshawishi Rais kufuta huo Mkataba kama alivyofanya yale ya Dawasa, basi kuendelea kusimamia kitu ambacho yeye mwenyewe alikuwa hakubaliani nacho kunatosha kumfanya ajiuzulu. Angemwandikia mapema zaidi Rais kuwa kutokana na unyeti wa suala hilo na kwa vile kwa moyo safi na dhamira njema asingeweza kusimamia suala la Richmond basi angeomba aondolewe madarakani au yeye mwenye kujiuzulu. Hilo lingemfanya shujaa.

Kwa kukubali kusimamia kitu ambacho hakukiamini ili tu mambo yaendee ni sifa mbaya ya kiongozi na ninaamini kabisa kuwa ingetosha kuwa sababu nyingine ya kujiuzulu. Tanzania inahitaji viongozi ambao wako tayari kuwajibika kwa makosa yao na kuwajibika vile vile pale inapobidi kwa makosa ya wengine ili kulinda usafi wao. Lowassa hakufanya lolote kati ya hayo mawili.

—
Yona Fares Maro
I.T. Specialist and Digital Security Consultant

– – –
Subject: LOWASSA ALICHELEWA KUJIUZURU

From: odhiambo okecth
Date: Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 3:20 AM

4th November 2009

Jaindi Kisero; I do not get it

Mr. Jaindi Kisero has put up a very academic and suspect support for Hon Uhuru Kenyatta on the issue of the purchase of the Passat vehicles for government officials in today’s issue of the Daily Nation.

I say academic and suspect because all of us Kenyans can read and interpret the provisions of the Public Procurement Act. This Act came into being because of such scandals. It was meant to forestall such like Uhuru scandals as it opens up procurement to public scrutiny and openness. It calls for invitation of not less than three bidders in instances where procurements are in excess of Kshs 1,000,000.00.

And here, we are not talking about Kshs 1m; we are talking about Kshs 5Billion! Or better still, Kshs 5,000 Million.

Mr. Kisero avers that the principle is to allow for the economies of scale and enjoy bulk purchase discounts. How? Can this not be achieved through competitive bidding process? If you subject the process to competition, will you not achieve economies of scale and enjoy bulk purchase discounts? Still, the Passats were bought at figures far higher than the known market rates, so, how did the government achieve bulk purchase discounts here?

Mr. Kisero supports the thinking behind going for a specific make, model and colour. This is so pedestrian coming from someone we all thought had competent knowledge on issues economic. Honestly, if you go for competitive bidding, will the winning bidder fail to comply on the same if that was the yardstick? Of course, it will be a specific model and make. Then they can give you all the vehicles in the colour that you want. This kind of argument, I would say with all confidence once more, is pedestrian and suspect.

If some minister wants to go to Majenjo in his official car, will owning a Passat stop him/her if s/he has been doing the same using a Mercedes. Again, this is not convincing coming from someone of Mr. Kisero’s calibre.

The use of words can really confuse and especially if there is ill motive. Mr. Kisero says that Migosi Uhuru must be supported for having the guts to implement the boldest attempt ever to rein in on ostentation, opulence and sickening conspicuous consumption among our leaders. I beg to differ. Passat presents the kind of wastefulness that we can do without. And I am talking from experience. The Passat consumes more fuel than all similar range of vehicles in the market. Secondly, obtaining parts is not easy. It will cost the government more in terms of maintenance as compared to the Mercedes E-Class. Thirdly, Passat is not as hardy as we are being made to believe.

To confuse our thinking, Mr. Kisero engages us to diversionary tactics. He goes ranting about what our MPs are given as soon as they get into parliament. My, it does not for any single moment justify what Uhuru has done. You are cleverly leading us astray and the worst part of it is that you are doing it intentionally. Our eyes are on the antelope brother!

I will take you down memory lane just to refreshen you. Mr. Uhuru Kenyatta was appointed the Minister for Local Government immediately Kibaki was declared the winner in 2007. And when time came for nominating Councilors, he chose not to follow the laid down provisions where Councilors are nominated on the strength of the civic performance of their mother parties. I bet as a renowned journalist, you have the facts.

Secondly, the moment he was posted to Treasury, he came up with things he casually called adding errors. The beauty of it all is that he was caught with his hands in the till and his mouth powdered. He could not escape it. But, together with his friend, the one he has given the insurance contracts for the ‘Uhuru Passats’, parliament gave them a reprieve.

Recently, he bought his own land for the benefit of resettling IDPs. A very noble thing indeed, only that he is the Minister for Finance and the land in question is his.

Before the dusts settles down, and with the government telling all those who care to listen that they will conform to the rule of law, your Uhuru is back in the news with this ‘Uhuru Passat’ issues.

It makes me ask, is this man serious? Is he intentional? Must he make all the money now? And MUST Jaindi Kisero, Jaindi of all people, must Jaindi defend him?

Odhiambo T Oketch

Nairobi Kenya.

– – –
Subject: Jaindi Kisero; I do not get it