Quote:
Originally Posted by mak&emoto
if you want out, just get out, don't look for lame excuses. Why the touchiness? i did not at any time get personal nor did i even insinuate that you were acting for pattni! not that i would even care. Actually, having considering your arguments, i am persuaded that the gist of what you seem to be stating is that cbk/pattni's interests are paramount to the interest of kenyans whose funds were actually looted in both the gil and grh scams, so i simply asked who you were arguing in favor of whether cbk or pattni? about the interest, yes, banks may be barred from charging interest when their receiver managers are managing the asset, isn't it on record that cbk's appointed receiver manager was removed by a court order in 1994? so what exactly stopped them from charging interest after that? finally, how much has cbk spent in pursuit of the kshs. 2.5bn and why were these collosal amounts not factored in setting the selling price and in recovery of the said debt?
|
this is not about pattni's interests or national interest am afraid to say. This is a legal matter to be settled by the presently established laws of the land. If we think pattni is trampling on our national interests, then we change the law - for future purposes. If you appreciate law, then u know the law is an ass - and national interests do not matter.
If in doubt, ask how many people have been convicted as murderers and sentenced to death by the high court only to see them set free by the court of appeal simply cos the police held the convict for more than the required 14 days before charging them in court. If it was about national interest, the court of appeal would say that the national interest of keeping a convicted murderer in jail is more important then the law.
So let us disabuse the idea that this is a case of national interest. This is a case of due legal process and whether kimunya followed it or not. After all, there is no offence in the penal code called "acting against national interest by selling grh/public assets". The law kimunya would be accused of flouting are the privatisation act etc....in which case the whole case would hinge on whether grh was a public asset so that kimunya could privatise it.
Anyway, it is the law that decided which interests are paramount, - not public opinion. Which is why MPs, ministers, judges swear allegiance to the constitution and the laws - not to the people of kenya. The only way public opinion affects court judgments in a democracy is by electing mps to change the law which the judges then interpret. Thats the way it is.
So dont doubt my interest in stating that kimunya was right. I am simply following what the law says - unless of cos u r suggesting the public should vote on all legal matters so as to decide which national interests are paramount.
Yes i agree that cbk was removed as receiver manager in 1994. The minister for finance and the cbk governor then (mudavadi & kotut) can best answer why this happened. Without delving into details, let it suffice to say that the politics and the attendant corruption involving grh could not have let cbk run grh as receiver manager. Pattni also launched so many court cases and counterclaims against cbk, used politicians to influence judiciary etc that cbk could not make any headway. The legal costs involved in grh are probably what makes cbk get the whole kshs 2.9 billion ie kshs 400m would then represent the costs.
This was the whole point of the agreement between cbk and pattni - ie that all these counterclaims be dropped amicably - otherwise pattni could go ahead and do what he has perfected ie go to court to block the sale and wer are back to 1993 all over again.
Lastly, lets also address the political question - there is a lot of hypocrisy which we kenyans are displaying here. The reasoning is - if a minister is
suspected of corruption, then he must resign. Kimunya has been suspected and he should resign - thats the argument being made.
If we adopt this, let us also simultaneoulsy call for the resignation of all ministers and assistant ministers
charged in court on corruption charges. On a political front, note some of the politicians are very quiet on kimunya's saga - cos they know that kimunya's removal on allegations will bring them down too - not even raila will take on kimunya head on - which is why we are hearing uhuru cautioning that if this is the way to go, then the grand coalition govt will collapse.
After all, all the main players have been accused of corruption by other probes or in a court of law. I mention probes cos thats what we have for kimunya....in the examples below, i have produced those people accused by probes/charges in a court of law - not mere allegations
would raila for example be willing to resign as pm since the ndung'u report accused him of corruption in acquiring mollasses?
will oburu odinga resign cos he is also mentioned in the ndung'u report for acquiring land illegally? In fact, will the same MPs now saying they cannot allow Kimunya to move finance motions in parliament cos of suspicions of corruption allow Oburu to move motions yet he is accused of the same?
would mudavadi resign cos of the goldenburg scam?
would ruto resign cos of the kenya pipeline corruption case currently in court? after all, how does ruto sit in the same cabinet with the same man (wako) who is prosecuting him in court?
would chris obure and okemo resign cos of initiating/signing of the anglo leasing contracts? etc etc
My take, from a political angle, is that Kibaki and Raila will realise what this will do to the govt - and theywill move to kill all these Kimunya talk as they both stand to lose from the above repercussions