KENYA Country Profile

General Information

Political Climate


Poor governance and rampant corruption in Kenya have had a negative impact on efforts to attract investments, and widespread poverty, rapid population growth, rising unemployment rates and strained welfare services have long posed problems. Nevertheless, Kenya had been thought of as one of the more politically stable countries in Eastern Africa until ethnic disturbances in the wake of the December 2007 presidential elections. Tensions came to the fore following the contested election results, which led to unprecedented violence resulting in at least a thousand deaths and the displacement of hundreds of thousands in ethnically-based riots. The political situation was extremely volatile up to the point where rival political factions, President Mwai Kibaki of the Party of National Unity (PNU) and opposition leader Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), reached a peace and power-sharing agreement in February 2008, formulated in the National Accord and Reconciliation Act 2008. Under the agreement, the Office of the Prime Minister has been reinstated and, while Kibaki remains President, Odinga has been made Prime Minister with the power to coordinate and supervise the functions of the government. This still fragile setup has created a platform for deepening checks and balances on executive discretion, something that Kenya has lacked for decades, and which led to rampant high-level corruption, state capture, judicial subordination and corruption. Despite a month-long political deadlock between Kibaki and Odinga over the composition of the cabinet, the broad-based coalition government became a reality in the beginning of April 2008, bringing about a return to relative political stability. However, according to Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2009, this arrangement has inadvertently culminated in the absence of an effective opposition, severely compromising parliament's oversight role over the executive.

Kibaki ran for presidential elections in 2002 on a strong anti-corruption platform and expectations of the new government were high. One of the President's first steps was to sack all state procurement executives due to evidence of widespread abuse of office among these officials. In 2003 and 2004, the government enacted several laws designed to curb corruption. These included the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act, the Public Officer Ethics Act and the Public Procurement and Disposal of Assets Act. The new legal framework led to the re-launch of the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) and required MPs and civil servants to provide evidence of their source of income. In addition, the position of a permanent Secretary for Ethics was established in the President's office. Yet, according to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, these steps were not translated into concrete actions. Through a change in the law, the KACC is legally unable to prosecute corruption incidents that occurred before 2003. Furthermore, the KACC is legally obliged to hand over evidence to the Attorney General's office, thereby limiting the KACC's ability to free itself from executive pressure. Similarly, Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2009 emphasises that although the KACC is a supposedly independent institution, it depends on the Attorney General's decision as to which cases to prosecute. All-in-all, it appears that the initiatives of the Kibaki government to curb the rampant corruption in Kenya have failed, and USD hundreds of millions are lost to graft each year. According to Transparency International Kenya's East African Bribery Index 2009, household respondents report that the probability to encounter bribery in Kenya has increased in recent years. Several high-level corruption scandals have been revealed over the last few years, and allegations of nepotism flourish. In Transparency International's Global Corruption Barometer 2009, over 60% of the Kenyan households surveyed believe that the government's fight against corruption is 'somewhat/very' ineffective.

There are indications of a changed perception of corruption among the Kenyan public. In the Transparency International Kenya Kenya Bribery Index 2008, citizens' willingness to report corruption remained low but was steadily growing. This is supported by the Transparency International East African Bribery Index 2009, according to which, apathy to bribery and corruption seems to be reducing, while the propensity to bribe and not report fell from 64% in 2008 to 56% in 2009. Public contempt towards corruption is also on the rise because citizens have had to cope with an increased immediacy of corruption related scandals, such as those in the maize and oil sectors. For instance, according to a public survey cited in a February 2009 article by Reuters, more than two-thirds of Kenyans would like senior members of the government to step down to allow graft probes. Moreover, according to Global Integrity 2007, corruption in Kenya has, especially since 2007, taken on an increasingly harsh face manifested by the Mungiki, violent maverick gangs disrupting transport, controlling public utility services, and extorting civilians. Corruption persists despite all the measures taken against it, such as the enactment of elaborate anti-corruption legislation and the establishment of anti-corruption institutions. Considering the present government setup, President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga have renewed government promises to curb corruption, aware of the fact that further high-level corruption scandals could lead to the dissolution of the coalition.

Business and Corruption

Kenya is the largest economy in Eastern Africa and has had a stable economic growth since President Kibaki first took office in 2002, mainly due to booming tourism and horticulture industries. However, the violence following the December 2007 elections negatively affected Kenya's economy, especially through extensive property loss and the disruption of transport of both workers and goods. Investors have been exerting greater caution in the wake of political and investment climate instability. Kenya's large informal sector, rising inflation, and a growing scarcity of employment opportunities have added to recent economic troubles. The Bertelsmann Foundation 2008 estimates that 50% of entrepreneurial and technological business takes place in the informal sector, and that its growth rate is higher than the formal economy. Furthermore, according to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, most enterprises start off in the informal sector and cannot afford the comparatively expensive process of registering with the state. Accordingly, in the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2007, more than 40% of the surveyed companies identify the practices of competitors in the informal sector as a major business constraint. Although the government has introduced market reforms, the business climate in Kenya continues to be hampered by corruption, and it is reportedly common for civil servants to solicit bribes and gifts from the private sector. According to Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2009, the costs of corruption remain a deterrent to potential investors, and corruption is a major impediment both for existing businesses and those seeking to establish new businesses. In the Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009, 16% of respondents gave corruption within the business and private sector in Kenya a score of 5 on a 5-point scale (1 'not and all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

In the World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010, corruption tops the list of obstacles for doing business with 23% of the companies surveyed naming it as the most problematic factor. This is further supported by the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2007, in which over 38% of the surveyed companies consider corruption a major constraint to their operations. The same survey also indicates that it is almost impossible to do business in Kenya without making facilitation payments, as roughly 80% of the companies surveyed cite that they are expected to make informal payments to public officials to 'get things done'. According to Transparency International Kenya's Kenya Bribery Index 2008, private companies are increasingly exposed to demands for bribes. While an average of 29% of private company employees encountered bribery in 2006, this number increased to 48% in 2007 and 58% in 2008. One should note, however, that the average size of bribes paid by companies in 2008 was half it was in 2006. This decrease could be attributed to a decline in the bribery reported by state-owned companies, which accounted for the largest proportion of business-related bribes in previous surveys. This suggests that the corporate governance and procurement reforms undertaken in that sector are paying off. Also, more investors are reporting that, unlike the pre-2003 period, they can now do business with less frequent political interference. Nevertheless, the use of agents to facilitate business operations and transactions in Kenya is widespread and poses a risk for companies, particularly at the entry and business start-up stage. Bribery through agents can lead to legal sanctions, including high fines and a maximum 10-year prison sentence. Therefore, investors are strongly recommended to develop, implement, and strengthen integrity systems and to conduct extensive due diligence when doing business in Kenya.

There are reports of businesspeople bribing MPs, senior officials and judges in order to influence policy-making, tenders, or to influence the result of a legal case. The majority of companies state that public procurement is an area of business where it is common to encounter corruption and demands for bribes. According to the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2007, 71% of the responding companies cite that they expect to give gifts to secure a government contract, with the value of the gift amounting to an average of 8% of the contract in question. Companies are recommended to use a specialised public procurement due diligence tool in order to mitigate corruption risks involving procurement in Kenya. Indeed, many corruption scandals in Kenya have involved fraudulent or inflated public procurement deals, where funds have been redirected to top government politicians and officials.

Regulatory Environment

Kenya has struggled to attract foreign direct investment and the previous government sought to change this by introducing market-based reforms and providing more incentives for both local and foreign private investment, particularly in the export and import sectors and in telecommunications. The new government is continuing these policies and focus on structural reforms, including privatisation and deregulation. Foreign investors seeking to establish a presence in Kenya generally receive the same treatment as local investors and are guaranteed ownership and the right to remit dividends, royalties and capital, but according to the US Department of State 2009, there are some exceptions. In addition, international observers cite lack of transparency and inconsistent application of commercial codes as persistent problems.

According to the US Department of State Investment Climate Statement 2009, the most significant disincentives for investment in Kenya include the complexity of the tax system, crime, local government licences, demands for bribes, and poor infrastructure. Nevertheless, Kenya was ranked as one of the world's top ten reformers by the World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2009 due to an ambitious licensing reform programme, which has so far succeeded in eliminating or repackaging and simplifying nearly 700 of Kenya's more than 1,300 business licences. In addition, an Electronic Regulatory Registry, among others, has been launched to enhance transparency in accessing information on registered companies. The changes have streamlined business start-up, cut both the time and cost of obtaining building permits, and facilitated cross-border trade. According to data from the World Bank & IFC Doing Business 2010, starting a business in Kenya requires the entrepreneur to go through 12 procedures, which takes an average of 34 days and costs 36.5% of GNI per capita. The de-licensing programme is envisaged to continue in order to minimise the possibilities for corrupt activities through bribes and facilitation payments to public officials. According to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, with the Investment Promotion Act 2004, the government significantly reformed the regulatory framework for setting up businesses, resulting in less red tape and being a measure against corruption.

Property rights are recognised and enforced. Nonetheless, the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010 reports that during the post-election violence in early 2008, property rights were violated on a large scale, leaving 600,000 people displaced from their homes. Most of these people have not yet been compensated for their losses. Foreigners in Kenya can own land, although there are some restrictions to leasing and ownership of land classified as agricultural. Moreover, obtaining title to land can be cumbersome and the process is often non-transparent. Kenya has a comprehensive legal framework to ensure intellectual property rights protection, which includes the Industrial Property Act 2001, the Trade Marks Act 1957 (revised 1994), the Copyright Act 2001 and the Universal Copyright Convention 1971. Moreover, Kenya is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) and of the Paris Union (International Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property). Nevertheless, according to the US Department of State Investment Climate Statement 2009, enforcement of intellectual property rights is weak.

Kenya has commercial courts to deal with commercial disputes and there is a separate industrial court that hears disputes over wages and labour terms, the rulings of which cannot be appealed. Contractual rights are enforceable, but the process of doing so is often lengthy. The legal system is adversarial, and most disputes are resolved through litigation in court, although arbitration and alternative dispute resolution are increasingly popular. The Arbitration Act 1995 and Arbitration Rules 1997 form the regulatory framework of domestic arbitration options for companies. Kenya accepts binding international arbitration and has ratified to the New York Convention 1958 as well as being a member of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Access Kenyan Law Reports or the Lexadin World Law Guide for a collection of legislation in Kenya.

Judicial System

Individual Corruption

According to Transparency International's Global Corruption Barometer 2009, the judicial system is perceived by households to be one of the most corrupt institutions in Kenya, ranked second only to public officials in the survey. This perception is supported by the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, according to which, despite an increase in salaries, the Kenyan judiciary is widely regarded as one of the most corrupt institutions in the country. Nonetheless, Transparency International Kenya's East African Bribery Index 2009 reports that the likelihood of encountering bribery in the judiciary has slightly decreased compared to the 2008 index.

A 2005 report by the International Commission of Jurists concluded that corruption in the justice system remained a serious impediment to the rule of law, a view that was echoed by Kenya's Attorney General in 2008, as reported by Freedom House 2009.

Business Corruption

According to the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2007, the vast majority of companies do not show much faith in the legal system. Legal fees are high, and although small and medium-sized companies may be able to initiate a case, sustaining a case is difficult and many parties will opt to settle their dispute outside court, as court processes are long and highly bureaucratic. According to the Freedom House 2009, courts are understaffed and underfinanced, suffering from a lack of capacity. The solicitation and acceptance of bribes by court officials in order to provide a favourable verdict is not uncommon.

Political Corruption

According to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, the Kenyan judiciary has been seen by international development agencies as an agent of the executive and deeply corrupt. Political interference in judicial appointments and rulings has been common in the past, and the appointment process remains non-transparent. Furthermore, the US Department of State 2008 reveals that the government sometimes makes use of the legal system to harass critics.

President Kibaki has criticised the extent of corruption in the judiciary and has ordered the Minister of Justice to establish a process to identify corrupt judges. In 2003, several judicial officers, senior magistrates and judges were suspended and accused of abuse of office. The decision to suspend them won immediate public approval. However, the subsequent appointment process raised concerns about the selection criteria and the lack of transparency. There is no process for vetting judges, and they are often appointed by the President in practice.

All provinces have an Anti-Corruption Court set up by the Chief Justice to deal with and expedite cases of corruption and fraud within the normal legal framework, which includes the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act 2003. However, claims have been made that the establishment of and recruitment to the courts was unauthorised and thus unconstitutional.

In August 2008, the Kenyan judiciary announced that it would introduce modern information technology systems in order to clear the systems of backlogs and corruption. Moreover, Justice Minister Karutha called for a concerted campaign to fight corruption in the legal system, acknowledging that it was still rampant, according to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010.

In December 2009, a High Court Judge was charged with corruption relating to the controversial sale of a prime land belonging to National Social Security Fund, according to a December 2009 article by Business Daily. Allegedly, the judge has fraudulently paid the company Kipkenda, Lilan and Co. Advocates KES 8 million for services that Kenya's Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) claims were not adequately rendered. According to the US Department of State 2009, a total of 23 judges have been sacked for corruption after 2003.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- It takes 40 procedures over an average of 465 days at a cost of 47% of the claim to enforce a commercial contract in Kenya.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the Kenyan judiciary's level of independence from influences of government, citizens and companies a score of 2.7 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'heavily influenced' and 7 'entirely independent').

- Business executives give the efficiency of the legal framework for private companies to settle disputes and to challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations a score of 2.9 and 2.6 respectively on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'highly efficient').

Transparency International Kenya: The East African Bribery Index 2009:
- With a score of 66.5%, the judiciary is ranked the third most corrupt institution in Kenya by respondents in this citizen survey.

- The likelihood of encountering bribery in interactions with the judiciary is reported to be 86.1%.

- 57.8% of the respondents report to have paid a bribe in their interaction with the police.

- 17.3% of respondents interacting with the judiciary report that the consequence of refusing to bribe was a denial of service.

- The average size of bribe paid to the judiciary is KES 5,627.

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- Citizens give the judiciary a score of 4 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

- 42% of households surveyed consider the judiciary to be 'extremely corrupt'.

- 35% of households who had contact with the judiciary in 2008 report to have paid a bribe.

Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Kenya 2008:
- 20% of the household respondents report to not trust the courts of law.

- 35% of the household respondents believe that most or all of the judges and magistrates are involved in corruption.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2007:
- A little more than 22% of companies polled believe the court system is fair, impartial and uncorrupted.

- 13% of companies identify the functioning of the courts as a major business constraint.

Police

Individual Corruption

The US Department of State 2008 outlines that citizens perceive the police to be complicit in criminal activity. According to Transparency International's Global Corruption Barometer 2009, more than half of the surveyed households report to have paid a bribe in 2008. At the same time, Transparency International Kenya's East African Bribery Index 2009 reports that while the number of bribes paid to the police has declined in recent years, the amount paid per bribe has increased.

Solicitation of bribes by traffic police is reportedly common. Accordingly, the police commissioner established a special police squad in 2006 that included undercover detectives with a mandate to combat corruption involving police during traffic stops, as stated in the US Department of State Human Rights Report 2008. The government arrested and charged some officers with various offences, including corruption. Nonetheless, according to the report, police officers are rarely arrested and prosecuted for corruption. According to Global Integrity 2008, the involvement of the police in corruption is the driving force that has transformed the vice into a USD multi-billion business.

The Kenyan Human Rights Commission has drafted a bill designed to help the police cultivate a culture of respect for human rights and promote transparency and accountability in interactions between police and the public, according to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010.

Business Corruption

Foreign investors should be aware that transportation costs may rise as a consequence of arbitrary demands for bribes at road blocks and other transit checkpoints. The World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010 reveals that companies identify Kenya to perform insufficiently in relation to the reliability of police services to protect them from crime.

Political Corruption

Global Integrity 2008 points out that, over the years, KES millions have gone into the pockets of senior prison officials.

According to the US Department of State 2008, the police often employ unqualified candidates with political connections or who have paid bribes to win the position. In December 2005, a police recruitment process was halted after the Anti-Corruption Commission reported that nearly eight out of every ten candidates had either paid bribes or used their connections to obtain jobs. The police commissioner also suspended about 60 senior police officers involved in the scandal.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the reliability of Kenyan police services to enforce law and order a score of 3.5 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'cannot be relied upon at all' and 7 'can always be relied upon').

Transparency International Kenya: The East African Bribery Index 2009:
- With a score of 66.5%, the police are ranked as the most corrupt institution by citizens. The police have been perceived to be the most bribery-prone institution in the country for seven years in a row.

- The likelihood of encountering bribery in interactions with the police is reported to be 85.5%.

- 63.4% of the respondents report to have paid a bribe in their interaction with the police.

- 10.4% of the respondents who refused to pay bribes to the police, were denied service.

- The respondents pay 3.1 bribes per year on average to the police, the average size of which is KES 3,180.

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- 55% of households who had contact with the police in 2008 report to have paid a bribe.

.Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Kenya 2008:
- 44% of household respondents report to not trust the police.

- 77% of household respondents believe that most or all police officers are involved in corruption.

Licences, Infrastructure and Public Utilities

Individual Corruption

The registry and permit services are considered to be very corrupt in Kenya, according to Transparency International's Global Corruption Barometer 2009. The average Kenyan household frequently has to pay bribes for simple bureaucratic tasks, such as the issuing of birth certificates or vehicle licences. Furthermore, as emphasised by the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, corruption is also at the heart of the ongoing deterioration of the health system.

Business Corruption

According to Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2009, excessive regulatory requirements such as licensing create widespread opportunities for bribery. This is supported by the US Department of State 2009, according to which, new foreign investment in Kenya is usually constrained by a cumbersome and highly discretionary licensing system that is subject to corrupt practices.

Transporters routinely overload trucks and then pay-off weigh-station clerks along transport routes. This practice has been reduced, but some companies still employ bribes to expedite shipments by the use of 'clearing agents'.

Political Corruption

In 2005, the Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission carried out an examination of Registration and Licensing of Motor Vehicles and Enforcement of Traffic Laws. The examination targeted the Department of the Registrar of Motor Vehicles, Transport Licensing Board, Motor Vehicle Inspection Unit, Traffic Police, Ministries of Transport and Finance and Local Authorities. Findings arising from the exercise indicate the existence of a thriving parallel market for fake registration and licensing documents, leading to a massive loss of government revenue.

Several corruption scandals, such as the Anglo-Leasing Affair, have involved licensing and the Managing Directors of Kenya Power and Lighting, Telecommunications, Postal Services and Communication Commission of Kenya have all been sacked and charged with corruption in the past.

Kenya's government launched an investigation into the suspected embezzling of large quantities of maize in January 2009, following allegations of corruption in the Ministry of Agriculture by Justice Minister Martha Karua, according to a 2009 article by BBC News. These allegations came at a time when Kenya was severely affected by food shortages. Kenya's Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) and other state agencies have begun an investigation into this matter. Critics say Kenya's coalition government is partly to blame for the grain shortfall because of poor planning and high-level corruption involving the import, storage and sale of maize, as reported in a January 2009 article by Reuters.

The Kenyan government has suspended 50 officials over misappropriation of funds in two donor-funded projects, including the Kenya Education Sector Support Programme, in relation to which KES 101 million has been allegedly embezzled, as reported in a December 2009 article by Bloomberg. The matter has been handed over to the KACC for further investigation.

Frequency

The Word Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- Building a warehouse in Kenya requires a company to go through 11 administrative steps, taking an average of 120 days at a cost of 162% of income per capita - all well below regional averages.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give government administrative requirements (permits, regulations, reporting) in Kenya a score of 3.1 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely burdensome' and 7 'not burdensome at all').

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- 32% of households who had contact with registry and permit services in 2008 report to have paid a bribe.

- 11% of households who had to obtain utilities in 2008 report to have paid a bribe.

Transparency International Kenya: The East African Bribery Index 2009:
- 51% of respondents in the survey reported to have paid bribes to access or speed up services (this is an increase from 45% in 2008).

Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Kenya 2008:
- 23% of household respondents have paid a bribe, given a gift, or done a favour for a governmental official in the past year in order to obtain a document or permit.

- 12% of household respondents have paid a bribe, given a gift, or done a favour for a governmental official in the past year in order to get water or sanitation services.

Transparency International Kenya: Kenya Bribery Index 2007:
- Respondents in this citizen survey rank the Transport Licensing Board (TLB) as the second most bribery-prone organisation within the licensing bodies.

- The respondents pay an average of 14 bribes per year to the TLB, the highest frequency of bribery reported.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2007:
- Slightly more than 3% of companies surveyed identify business licensing and permits as a major business constraint.

- Slightly more than 79% of companies report that they expect to make informal payments to public officials to get things done.

- 29% of companies expect to give gifts to get an operating licence.

- 36% of companies expect to give gifts to get a construction permit.

- 23%, 27% and 34% of companies expect to give gifts to get an electrical, phone, and water connection respectively.

Land Administration

Individual Corruption

Land disputes frequently form the basis of ethnic tensions and violence. The violence in the wake of the 2007 elections has resulted in renewed disputes.

Land squatters moved into a 15,000 acre private homestead in September 2007 shortly after President Kibaki announced that idle land would be re-possessed and given to the landless, according to the US Department of State 2009. The source reports that the owner continues to try his case to reclaim his land in court.

Business Corruption

According to the US Department of State 2009, secured interests in property are recognised and enforced. The legal system formally protects and facilitates acquisition and disposition of all property rights. In practice, however, obtaining titles to land is a cumbersome and often non-transparent process, which is a serious impediment to new investment. Companies should be aware that although they are legally protected against expropriation and are guaranteed compensation, land is becoming an increasingly sensitive and heated issue in Kenya, and local and national level ethno-political considerations may see the protection of property rights inadequately enforced. The obtaining of land titles is frequently made more complicated by improper allocation of access and easements to third parties. It is rather common for public officials or members of the police force to accept bribes in order to falsify deeds or contracts.

In the article Corruption and Land Administration 2006 by Paul van der Molen and Arbind Tuladhar, the Minister of Lands and Settlements states that land has been used as a pay-back system for favoured political supporters since independence. According to the same article, the state owns large chunks of land for development and research that are irregularly subdivided and sold. The coordinator of the Kenya Land Alliance reports that all land registries, land boards, the land rent collecting offices and the central registry in Nairobi are very prone to corruption. The offices of the provincial administration are equally prone to corruption because they are in charge of the executive administration of land within their administrative areas. Other offices prone to corruption include the survey offices, and the land tribunal offices, extending from the chief to the district officer to heads of municipalities.

Political Corruption

Private property is protected by law and no new cases of land-grabbing practices by government or ruling party officials have become publicly known since 2003. Nonetheless, as reported by the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, property rights were violated on a large scale during the 2007 post-election violence. As a result, more than half a million people were displaced from their homes, and most of them have not yet received compensation.

In January 2009, former Finance Minister Amos Kimunya, who was involved in a dubious privatisation of the Grand Regency Hotel, was re-appointed to his previous position despite a parliamentary vote of no confidence against him. According to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, this is an example that confirms that the prosecution of office abuse is not a political priority. Moreover, the source reports that privatisation is ultimately seen as vehicle for the realisation for individual interests.

See the Review of African Political Economy The Ndungu Report 2005 for more information on corruption and land administration in Kenya.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- Registering property in Kenya requires a company to go through 8 administrative steps, which takes an average of 64 days and costs 4% of the property value.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business leaders give the protection of property rights in Kenya, including financial assets, a score of 3.8 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'very weak' and 7 'very strong').

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- 25% of the households surveyed reported to have paid a bribe to land services in 2008.

- 48% of households consider grand or political corruption in land matters to be a 'very serious problem'.

- 46% of respondents consider bribes to land authorities to obtain favourable decisions a 'very serious problem' in Kenya.

Transparency International Kenya: The East African Bribery Index 2009:
- With a score of 45.6%, the Ministry of lands is ranked as the fifth most corrupt institution by citizens.

- 15.8% of the respondents interacting with the Ministry of Lands report that the consequence of refusing to bribe was a denial of service.

- The likelihood of encountering bribery in interactions with the Ministry of Lands is reported to be 77.7%.

- The average size of bribe paid to the Ministry of Lands is KES 4,060.

Tax Administration

Individual Corruption

According to the Transparency International Kenya East African Bribery Index 2009, citizens often encounter demands for bribes in interactions with the Kenya Revenue Authority.

Business Corruption

A large informal sector exists in Kenya in which tax evasion is practised through corruption and other kinds of fraud. A dialogue between the business lobby and the revenue authorities on this issue has begun, but has not yet shown visible results. The Kenyan banking system has allegedly been involved in money laundering and tax evasion scandals.

The alleged Charterhouse Bank scam, involving money-laundering and tax evasion activities in connection to about KES 18 billion, was exposed by whistleblowers in 2004. Investigators believe that the cost of the tax evasion and money-laundering that took place through the bank was equivalent to 10% of Kenya's national income, according to Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2009.

Useful information on tax related issues can be found on the homepage of the Kenya Revenue Authority.

Political Corruption

Corruption is a major threat to the revenue base in Kenya. According to Global Integrity 2008, while revenue collection has improved, there are continual reports that well-connected people can manage to evade paying taxes. High-level government officials have been reported to use their positions and influence to provide their friends and their companies with tax exemptions.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- A medium-sized company operating in Kenya must make 41 payments to tax authorities and spend 417 hours preparing, filing, and paying taxes at a total annual tax rate of nearly 50% of profits.

Transparency International Kenya: The East African Bribery Index 2009:
- Kenya Revenue Authority scores of 38.3%, placing the institution as the 10th most corrupt institution according to the citizens polled.

- The likelihood of encountering bribery in interactions with the Kenya Revenue Authority is reported to be 57%.

- 5% of respondents interacting with the police report that the consequence of declining to bribe was a denial of service.

- The average size of bribe paid to the Kenya Revenue Authority is KES 4,734.

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- 14% of households who had contact with tax revenue services throughout 2008 report to have paid a bribe.

Afrobarometer: Summary of Results Kenya 2008:
- 49% of household respondents believe that all or most tax officials are involved in corruption.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2007:
- 32% of companies expect to give gifts in meetings with tax officials.

- 61% of companies report that a typical company reports less than 100% of its sales for tax purposes.

- 32% of companies identify tax administration as a major constraint.

Customs Administration

Business Corruption

Corruption in the customs sector often does not take place directly, but rather occurs through agents who are hired to help companies clear their goods faster through customs. Companies are recommended to access the Kenyan Ports Authority's official fees to be aware of situations in which hired agents may be demanding extra funds and making unofficial payments to customs authorities on their behalf.

Global Integrity 2008 reports that the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) is facing a major problem in the disposal of KES millions worth of environmentally harmful substances contained in substandard goods. According to the report, these goods are released from the Mombasa port and transported across Kenya after bribes are paid to pass several police checks.

Political Corruption

The past several years have seen significant improvements in the Customs Department, although discretionary behaviour on behalf of customs officials leading to unjustified delays, bribery, and other barriers remains common, as illustrated in an article by The Philadelphia Inquirer. Global Integrity 2008 reports that although customs and excise laws in Kenya are generally enforced uniformly and without discrimination, some exceptions remain.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- A standardised export shipment of goods requires 9 documents and takes an average of 27 days at a cost of USD 2,055 per container.

- A standardised import shipment of goods requires 8 documents and takes an average of 25 days at a cost of USD 2,190 per container.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the efficiency of customs procedures (formalities regulating the entry and exit of merchandise) in Kenya a score of 3.3 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'extremely efficient').

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- Citizens give the judiciary a score of 4 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

Transparency International Kenya: Kenya Bribery Index 2008:
- The Kenya Ports Authority scores of 20%, placing it as the 18th most corrupt institution according to the citizens polled.

- The likelihood of encountering bribery in interactions with the Kenya Ports Authority is reported to be 58%.

- 17% of respondents interacting with the Kenya Ports Authority report that the consequence of declining to bribe was a denial of service.

- The average size of bribe paid to the Kenya Ports Authority is KES 2,255.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2007:
- 24% of companies surveyed identified customs and trade regulations as a major constraint.

- 19% of companies expect to give gifts to get an import licence.

Public Procurement and Contracting

Business Corruption

The Bertelsmann Foundation 2010 points out that there are still serious issues regarding the procurement of public enterprises in Kenya. The private media have often described these as shady deals. Many of Kenya's large corruption scandals have involved public procurements in which foreign or local companies have skimmed-off resources from over-invoiced contracts. Companies are recommended to use a specialised public procurement due diligence tool in order to mitigate corruption risks involved in public procurement.

According to the Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2008, as a result of privatisation and liberalisation, more opportunities for corruption are found in public procurement and public administration. In 2004, Kenya and its public procurement framework were shook by the Anglo-Leasing and Finance Limited scandal. According to some reports, the government issued promissory notes worth more than KES 50 billion to companies, including Anglo-Leasing, which reportedly received notes totalling KES 7 billion. The Anglo-Leasing deal was only one of 18 sham contracts entered into with different companies, most of which were non-existent entities paid for supplying fictional or overpriced services. Although the notes have supposedly been revoked, confirmation of the revocation of what were supposed to be irrevocable promissory notes has not been subject to parliamentary or public oversight.

See more on public procurement under 'Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives' in the Initiatives section.

Political Corruption

Finance Minister Amos Kimunya was forced to resign in July 2008 as lawmakers demanded his resignation over a public procurement corruption scandal. The scandal involved the greatly underpriced sale of a five-star hotel to a local company with Libyan interests. The hotel had been reclaimed by the government from Kamlesh Pattni, who allegedly purchased the hotel with profits reaped from the 1990s corruption scandal known as the Goldenberg scandal (see the 'Environment, Natural Resources and Extractive Industry' in the Corruption Levels section). In January 2009, Kimunya was re-appointed to his previous position despite a parliamentary vote of no confidence against him, according to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010.

Although the Law on Public Accessibility of Legal Texts states that the public should have access to instructions and regulations regarding public procurement, few documents are publicised. Many tenders are awarded uncompetitively to companies in which government officials have interests. Nepotism remains a major problem, although legislation requires disclosure of any potential conflict of interest. Public procurement without competitive bidding ('single sourcing') and overpricing and profit skimming in public procurement by senior officials and elected politicians have been widespread phenomenons in Kenya for many years. The former Permanent Secretary for Ethics and Governance in the Kibaki government, John Githongo, estimated that public contracts were inflated by 25-100% in the Anglo-Leasing deals between 2001 and 2004. One of Kibaki's first steps as President was to sack government procurement heads because of evidence that widespread abuse of office was particularly prevalent among these officials.

See more on public procurement under 'Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives' in the Initiatives section.

Frequency

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the diversion of public funds to companies, individuals, or groups due to corruption a score of 2.5 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'very common' and 7 'never occurs').

- Business executives give Kenya's government officials' favouritism towards well-connected companies and individuals when deciding upon policies and contracts a score of 2.3 (1 being 'always show favouritism' and 7 'never show favouritism').

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2007:
- 71% of companies polled expect to give gifts to secure a government contract.

- Companies polled expect to pay a gift of 8% of the contract amount on average to secure a government contract.

Environment, Natural Resources and Extractive Industry

Individual Corruption

According to the Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2008, more than one in two Kenyan consumers have witnessed petty corruption in relation to water service provision. Furthermore, people living in the slums of Nairobi unconnected to the water grid are reported to pay up to 5-10 times more for water access than in other areas.

According to the executive director of the development group Maji na Ufanisi, Edward Kairu, about 70% of Kenya's water problems, including water shortage, are due to corruption in the water system, as reported in a September 2009 article by Voice of America News. This is supported by Transparency International Kenya's June 2009 report, 'Water Governance Study', cited in the aforementioned article, according to which, as a result of corruption, more than half of water consumed for domestic purposes in Kenya is unaccounted for, while the government is collecting only 20% of the fees due from large water users. The report also revealed that officials from various water boards accept bribes to establish illegal connections that are never built. Subsequently, the entire board of the Nairobi Water and Sewerage Company was sacked by the government over alleged mismanagement.

Business Corruption

During the 1990s, the major Goldenberg International corruption scandal unfolded when the billionaire Kamlesh Pattni exploited a government scheme designed to revitalise Kenya's faltering economy. The Goldenberg Commission investigated the scandal and revealed how Kenya lost up to USD 1 billion through fake gold and diamond deals. Despite the reports provided by the commission, their findings have had no consequences to date, with findings either remaining unpublished or evidence declared insufficient to convict many of the perpetrators. Pattni has reportedly surrendered his assets reaped from the Goldenberg scandal in exchange for amnesty in connection to the outstanding corruption charges against him.

Political Corruption

Global Integrity 2007 reports that an April 2006 inter-ministerial task force on national game reserve management revealed that there was monumental corruption in the Narok County Council (NCC), home of the world-famous wildlife sanctuary and national reserve Masai Mara. Land was illegally allocated to a former NCC treasurer, who is the son of the late Masai paramount chief and brother of an assistant minister at the time.

Another corruption related problem facing Kenya's national parks concerns the markets located near the game park entrances, building permits for which can be obtained through unofficial fees. A 2005 audit of Masai Mara Game Reserve tourism fees revealed that KES millions were misappropriated or unaccounted for. Another report by the NCC's internal auditor unearthed a USD 300,000 embezzlement scam.

The Masai Mara Game Reserve is not an isolated case; Tourism Minister Morris Dzoro exposed a scandal in 2006 in which staff looted the ministry of a sum in excess of USD 2.8 million. Nearly 75 ministry employees and tour drivers were involved in the scam.

Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives

  • Legislation: The Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act 2003 defines and criminalises corruption and establishes rules for integrity and transparency. Corruption in the form of attempted corruption, active and passive bribery, bribing a foreign official, money laundering, abuse of office, extortion, conflict of interest, bid rigging, and bribery involving agents is criminalised by the act. If found guilty of corruption, one faces a maximum fine of KES 1 million, a maximum 10-year prison sentence, or to both. The act does not cover business-to-business corruption. The Public Officers Ethics Act 2003 sets rules for transparency and accountability and defines graft and abuse of office. It requires certain public officials and their spouses to declare their assets. Furthermore, public officials are not permitted to operate private companies or have positions in the private sector. The Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering Bill was originally tabled in Parliament in 2007, but it lapsed and was subsequently retabled in spring 2008. At the end of December 2009, the Parliament passed the bill. Despite this, experts fear that it may just be a gimmick by the government to appease international partners, according to a December 2009 article by Inter Press Service. In addition, the executive director of International Commission of Jurists Kenya, George Kegoro, points out that while the legislation is adequate, he doubts there is political will to completely stamp out money laundering in Kenya. The Finance Act 2006 addresses measures to be taken against tax fraud and lays out guidelines on tax administration insofar as value added tax (VAT), customs and excise duties and income tax are concerned. The legislation provides sanctions on corrupt practices and expands the tax bracket to capture a wider tax base, thereby reducing opportunities for tax evasion. The Service Commissions Act has a Code of Regulations for civil servants that require meritocratic recruitment and promotion of public officials, as well as provisions for ensuring their political independence. In the past, civil servants have faced sanctions for breaching this code. Still, interviews with civil servants conducted by Transparency International Kenya 2007 indicate that the Code of Regulations is often not followed and that bribery, nepotism and political patronage are widespread. Access the Lexadin World Law Guide for a collection of legislation in Kenya.

  • Government Strategies: The government's governance reform efforts are multidimensional and involve, amongst other things, the enactment of appropriate laws (e.g. the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act, the Public Officer's Ethics Act, etc.) and the creation and strengthening of institutions involved in governance. Central to these reforms in the area of governance are the increasing number of government agencies with codes of conduct and ongoing reforms of the public financial management (PFM) systems, as reflected in the PFM reforms strategy. These reforms in the PFM arena are meant to greatly enhance transparency and accountability in the utilisation of public resources and thereby improve service delivery to the public. These reforms are complemented by a 2006 Ministry of Finance Staff Code of Conduct. Former Finance Minister Amos Kimunya made promises of a comprehensive anti-corruption plan, but similar past pledges have not been kept and Kimunya himself has been linked to a public procurement corruption scandal in early 2008, which led to his resignation several months later. Despite the scandal, Kimunya was re-appointed to his previous position in January 2009. An ethics and governance committee of the judiciary has been established to collect information to determine the levels of corruption in the judiciary, report on individual cases and recommend remedial measures. The government has recently taken more positive steps to develop freedom of information legislation. After issuing a draft policy for public consultation, it drafted a Freedom of Information Bill for tabling in Parliament that provides for both proactive disclosure and repeal of the Official Secrets Act. The new government has taken the initiative to establish a special quasi-judicial commission that will act as a one-stop plea-bargaining shop for confessions of corruption and surrender of illegally acquired assets in order to clean up past corruption cases in exchange for amnesty. This strategy forms part of discussions at higher government levels concerning the need to reconcile potentially destabilising divisions in government that could arise due to continuing high-level corruption scandals, a general amnesty bill, and the need to reduce the backlog of old corruption cases that are pending and ongoing in Kenyan courts.

  • Anti-Corruption Agency: The Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC) became fully operational in August 2005 and replaced previous agencies and units. The tasks of the KACC include the investigation of corruption and economic crime, examination of practices and procedures of public bodies and educating the public on the dangers of corruption and economic crime. The KACC does not have any prosecution powers, but forwards cases to the Attorney General. This is seen as a potential weakness by Transparency International Kenya 2007. The KACC has received more than 19,000 complaints since it began operating, more than 3,000 of these complaints have been fully investigated and recommendations sent to the Attorney General for appropriate action. The Attorney General has been criticised for a lack of results, because even if the KACC passes cases on with recommendations, the Attorney General fails to act. Although the KACC has recommended prosecution of several government officials, according to Freedom House 2009, only 51 people had been convicted by the end of 2008. In December 2008, the KACC managed to launch legal actions against seven MPs, including one minister, on charges of having been paid KES several million as allowances. Nevertheless, as assessed by the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, the agency has failed to live up to its expectations; it has only brought one major suit to compel a public official (former Internal Security Minister) and has failed to win a single significant corruption case. Moreover, as illustrated by Global Integrity 2008, the KACC is not free of non-transparent practices; in July 2008, a Nairobi parliamentarian, Ferdinand Waititu, appeared before an anti-corruption court on charges of trying to bribe an official at the KACC with KES 230,000. The KACC receives regular funding and has a full-time staff, which, according to Global Integrity 2008, are among the best-paid public officials in Kenya, with the director receiving a higher salary than the national president. The commission is required by law to publish annual and quarterly reports of its activities. Corruption can be reported anonymously on the KACC's website.

  • Auditor General: The Controller and Auditor General (CAG) of the Kenya National Audit Office (KENAO) is the supreme audit institution in Kenya. The CAG is appointed by the president and can only be removed from office on the findings of a tribunal. The Controller and Auditor General is legally protected by political interference and according to Global Integrity 2008, despite the fact that the CAG is appointed by the president, there has been no suggestion that this affect their work. The agency receives regular funding and has a full time staff. The CGA makes regular reports, which are public after they have been presented to the Parliament. After receiving the reports, the Parliament makes recommendations as to the actions that should be taken. However, the government rarely reacts to those recommendations. According to Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2009, the executive powers in Kenya greatly compromise the effectiveness of the oversight institutions.

  • Ombudsman: In 2007, the government established the Public Complaints Standing Committee (PCSC) to receive, register, sort, classify and document all complaints against public officers. In addition, the PCSC is mandated to inquire into allegations of abuse of office, corruption and unethical conduct, breach of integrity, maladministration, delay, injustice, discourtesy, inattention, incompetence, misbehaviour, inefficiency or ineptitude. The PCSC is not independent from the executive, as officials are appointed by the president, to whom they also report. The PCSC receives regular funding and has a full-time staff; nonetheless, some sources suggest that the Committee remains understaffed and in need of more resources to handle high rates of complaints, as reported in a December 2009 article by Kenya Broadcasting Corporation. According to the third quarterly report released by the PCSC, poor service from the Kenyan police, including abuse of office and unethical conduct, has emerged as the issue most complained about by the public. Earlier in 2009, the PCSC complained that the institutions it is mandated to oversee have refused to respond to complaints against them slowing down the pace of action on complaints, as pointed out in an August 2009 article by The Kenya Weekly Post. An Ombudsman Bill is currently in formulation and it is expected to give the PCSC powers to summon officials and to demand for documents.

  • E-Governance: There have been direct efforts to automatise the tax and customs services which have, together with the reduction of the road transport licences, drastically reduced direct contact between the Kenya Revenue Authority and the public. The Internet portal of the Government of Kenya portal provides links to ministry websites and local authorities as well as to the Directorate of E-Governance portal and Kenya Revenue Authority, which offer valuable information and services to companies and individuals. This includes business registration, e-tax registration/payment, VAT refund claims forms, and road transport, customs and land rent forms. Traders can now submit their documents online through an electronic system. The government aims at further improving Kenya's investment climate and recovering lost ground in the fight against corruption by digitising information of key sectors in the economy, including the procurement sector, the Lands ministry, the judiciary and the business registry, by 2011, as reported in a December 2009 article by Daily Nation.

  • Public Procurement: The Public Procurement and Disposal Act 2005 was enacted in December 2006 to promote more unified and transparent public procurements, and established the Public Procurement Oversight Authority (PPOA) to oversee all procurement matters. The PPOA, under the Ministry of Finance, is the agency responsible for policy formulation and implementation as well as oversight of the public procurement process in Kenya. The PPOA is mandated with the responsibility of ensuring that procurement procedures established under the act are complied with, monitoring the procurement system and reporting on its overall functioning. It provides advice and assistance to procuring entities, and develops, promotes and supports the training and professional development of staff involved in procurement. Procurement regulations can be obtained and past reviews can be accessed and new reviews lodged through its website. All major transactions require competitive bidding by way of open tender, with provisions that allow for restricted tendering, direct procurement and requests for proposals. Unsuccessful bidders can challenge procurement decisions in courts. The 2005 Act provides that companies guilty of violations of public procurement regulations, such as bribery, may be debarred at the discretion of the director general; however, according to Global Integrity 2008, it is unclear whether companies that have previously violated regulations are barred from future activities. According to a December 2009 article by Daily Nation, Kenya is in the process of automatising the procurement sector, which has been identified as the major route exploited by corrupt state officials. The current procurement legislation is an effort to curb loss of public funds, stipulating strict operational measures and penalties for breach, in an attempt to eradicate corruption in tendering processes, as assessed by the US Department of State 2009.

  • Whistle-Blowing: According to the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act and the Witness Protection Act 2006, no disciplinary action may be taken against any private or public employee, who assists an investigation or discloses information for such an investigation. Courts are required to conceal or remove any information that may disclose the identity of the informer, and to provide relocation and identity change if required. Global Integrity 2008 reports that it is not clear how effective this protection is in practice as several whistle-blowers that have exposed high-level corruption have fled the country. In May 2008, the government launched a multi-sector task force to formulate a framework for the implementation of the Witness Protection Act 2006. According to Transparency International's Global Corruption Report 2009, this task force is required to develop a programme that will protect vulnerable witnesses. Public corruption should be reported to the Kenya Anti-Corruption Coalition's (KACC) anonymous reporting system. The Ministry of Finance also operates a whistleblower reporting system, and the Kenya Revenue Authority operates a complaints and information centre.

  • General Comments on the Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives: Major corruption scandals have damaged the current government's credibility, and there have been major setbacks in the fight against corruption. The strategy for combating corruption in Kenya has been criticised for being a 'grafting' approach, meaning that there are only weak institutional and legislative ties between the anti-corruption efforts and to other parts of the public system. The many shifting anti-corruption agencies during the last decade can be seen as a symptom of this lack of institutional anchorage. Critics have warned that the disparity in resource allocation between the highly-funded investigative KACC and the Attorney General could result in meticulously investigated corruption cases failing to lead to convictions because of weaknesses in prosecution caused by resource constraints. Competing agency mandates have also given rise to adversarial relationships between anti-corruption agencies that desperately require the opposite if they are to produce solid results. The country is perceived to have slackened its campaign against corruption because of the failure to prosecute and convict the perpetrators of the infamous Goldenberg scandal under the Moi regime or of the Anglo-Leasing scams under the Kibaki administration. Furthermore, three of the four government ministers who were forced to resign because of corruption scandals have later returned to the cabinet. The general apathy towards the government's anti-corruption efforts is also evident in data from Afrobarometer 2008, which reports that a large proportion of households consider all or most of the officials throughout the political system at both central and local levels, including the President, to be involved in corruption.

Private Anti-Corruption Initiatives

  • Media: Although the Kenyan Constitution does not explicitly guarantee press freedom, the country enjoys one of the freest press environments in the region. However, there are several examples of this right being hampered in practice. The constitution grants limited rights to access and communicate information, but fails to provide clear guarantees on access, according to the Transparency International Global Corruption Report 2008. There is no active freedom of information legislation, although a bill is pending in Parliament. The Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Bill provides for heavy fines and prison sentences for press offences. It gives the government authority to raid media offices, tap phones and control broadcast content for purposes of national security, according to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010. In March 2006, a period when the government faced severe corruption allegations, the offices belonging to the Standard Group, the country's second largest media conglomerate, were raided by the police force. The Standard Group's printing press was shut down, newspapers were burned, employees terrorised and three reporters were jailed. The Internal Security Minister admitted that the press raids were planned by government officials who presumably wanted to send a signal to the Kenyan media that recent reporting on government corruption would not be tolerated. Nevertheless, in August 2007 the President rejected a bill that forced media practitioners to divulge their sources in court. Recent events have demonstrated a drive by the administration towards greater freedom of information through new constitutional provisions. However, as these developments progress public oversight of government performance remains impeded by opaqueness in transactions and bureaucratic barriers to accessing them. Although defamation remains illegal in Kenya, the Attorney General has stated that the law is outdated and will no longer be used. Global Integrity 2008 reports that the press can safely investigate and report corruption cases. The Internet use is unrestricted. Reporters Without Borders 2010 ranks Kenya 96th out of 175 countries, while Freedom House 2009 ranks the country 128th out of 195 countries and describes its media environment as 'partly free'.

  • Civil Society: The constitution provides for freedom of association and assembly and, according to Freedom House 2009, these rights are generally respected. Kenya has a strong civil society which has played a significant role in political mobilisation since the early 1990s. According to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, there are numerous NGOs and other civil society organisations engaging constructively with the state in all areas of policy-making. Nonetheless, at the same time, the report acknowledges that the voice of civil society has been consistently ignored in all major policy debates, even though their advice was frequently sought. The former head of Transparency International Kenya John Githongo was appointed head of the former Permanent Secretary for Ethics and Governance in 2003, but resigned in 2005 due to the failings of the Kibaki administration's anti-corruption and reform campaign. He subsequently fled Kenya after he leaked a report on graft to the British press and received death threats. His report, which had been ignored by the Kibaki administration, implicated several high-level ministers and Vice-President Moody Awori in the Anglo-Leasing scandal. Nonetheless, as alleged in a February 2009 article by BBC News, the government quickly reinstated the sacked ministers, and corruption allegations continued to appear in the country. Githongo returned shortly to Kenya in August 2008 on the invitation of Prime Minister Odinga and current Vice-President Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka, hinting that he might return permanently. His visit provided a strong boost to anti-corruption civil society activism and signalled a renewed sense of hope on behalf of anti-corruption activists under the new grand coalition government. Githongo actively engaged in anti-corruption activities during his visit and partook in discussions concerning the development of a quasi-judicial commission to grant amnesty to those involved in old but ongoing corruption cases if they admit their guilt and surrender the assets they acquired illegally.

  • Transparency International Kenya (TI Kenya): TI Kenya is very active in the struggle against corruption in the country and aims to inform the public concerning the fight against corruption with rigorous research and analysis. TI Kenya is a prime source for documentation, investigation and activism on corruption-related issues. TI Kenya publishes the Kenya Bribery Index every year, which captures corruption as experienced by ordinary citizens in their interaction with officials of both public and private organisations.

  • MARS Group Kenya: The goal of MARS Group Kenya is to create awareness and to generate demands for accountability from Kenya's leadership and to encourage Kenyans to hold to account those who have committed improprieties. The organisation's website offers interactive forums, corruption reports, access to certain government reports, daily corruption news, as well as recommended reading. A web-ombudsman including an online corruption reporting system is in development. MARS Group Kenya includes the Movement for Political Accountability (MOPA) which is a non-partisan coalition of organisations that brings together the private sector, religious leaders, civil society organisations and other stakeholders to promote accountability of elected leaders.

  • Centre for Law and Research International Kenya (Clarion Kenya): Clarion Kenya aims to contribute to processes that make public institutions more accountable and responsive to the needs and demands of Kenyans. Clarion Kenya makes publications regarding corruption in Kenya available on its website.

  • East African Association (EAA): The EAA has membership of some 300 companies from a number of countries representing banking, insurance, manufacturing, trading, mining and agriculture, transport and shipping etc. The EAA conducts surveys on corruption amongst other issues.

  • Institute of Certified Public Secretaries (ICPS): The ICPS is a professional organisation which has spoken out against corruption and runs continuing education and training programmes for its members to promote integrity and professionalism. The ICPS aims to develop and promote good governance, enhance productivity in the private and public sectors of the economy through its members, by inculcating in them high standards of professional knowledge, expertise and competence in public secretarial practice, administration, public and corporate management and related disciplines.

  • Centre for Corporate Governance (CCG): The CCG is a private organisation which works to develop and promote the adoption of sustainable best practices in corporate governance through training, education, research, advocacy, monitoring and evaluation. The CCG develops corporate governance courses and training manuals for directors and leaders of all types of corporations, institutions and organisations, and conducts tailor-made, client specific courses in corporate governance and leadership. The organisation works actively in the field of private sector anti-corruption through the promotion integrity, transparency and accountability in corporate governance.

Resources

The websites listed below provide useful facts on Kenya as well as contacts and tools for companies operating in Kenya

 

Sources for further reading:

Conventions and Indices

UNCAC Status: Signed and Ratified 9 December 2003.

Status on UNCAC Implementation
This field describes the country's status on the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Please note any declarations and reservations made upon ratification. The list of signatories can be found on the UNODC website. Read more about the UNCAC.

 

Other Relevant Conventions or Treaties:

 

Transparency CPI: 2009: 146/180 (Score: 2.2)

Transparency CPI
This field consists of the score for the country in question on the Corruption Perceptions Index from Transparency International as well as its ranking.

 

World Bank CORR Index (-2.5 - +2.5): 2008: -1.01

World Bank Corruption Index
This field consists of the score for the country in question on the 'Control of Corruption' indicator in the World Bank Governance Research Indicator Country Snapshot (GRICS): 1996-2008.

 

OECD Country Risk Classification (0-7): 2010: 6

Country Risk Classification
The classification of countries by risk category has the aim of providing OECD countries with a basis for calculating the premium interest rate to be charged to cover the risk of non-repayment of export credits. Countries are placed in risk categories 0 - 7, with 0 being the lowest risk category and thus the least expensive. Conversely, premium group 7 is the highest risk category. Each classification is comprised of 2 components: 1) an assessment of the country's economic/financial situation, and 2) its overall political stability. Access the complete list of OECD Country Risk Classification figures.

 

Data Verification:

Latest update: January 2010

Data verified by: Global Advice Network

Information Network

 

Relevant Organisations

 

Transparency International Kenya (TI Kenya)

3rd Floor, Wing D
ACK Garden House
1st Ngong Avenue, off Bishop's Road
P.O. Box 198
00200 City Square
Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 272 7763/5 / 273 0324/5
Cell: +254 072 229 6589 / 073 383 4659
Fax: +254 20 272 9530
E-mail: transparency(at)tikenya.org

NGO. Local Transparency International chapter.

MARS Group Kenya

Contact information: info(at)marskenya.org

Non-partisan coalition of organisations aiming at promoting accountability among elected leaders.

Centre for Law and Research International Kenya (Clarion Kenya)

P.O. Box 46991
00100 GPO Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 387 1614/0740
Cell: +254 733 542 335
Fax: +254 20 287 1857
E-mail: info(at)clarionkenya.org

An association which aims to enhance the accountability of public institutions.

East African Association (EAA)

Room 512, Jubilee Place, 5th Floor
Wabera Street
Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 340 341 / 214 898
Fax: +254 20 214 898
Cell: +254 0733 623 034
E-mail: info(at)eaa.co.ke

Business association working to facilitate participation in the economic development of Eastern Africa and the Indian Ocean region by overseas companies and individuals.

Institute of Certified Public Secretaries (ICPS)

Red Cross Building, 1st Floor
St. John's Gate, Off Parliament Road
P.O. Box 46935
00100 Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 216 572 / 224 487/511/829
Fax: +254 20 249 0890
E-mail: icpsk(at)wananchi.com

Professional organisation working against corruption and running education and training programmes for its members to promote integrity and professionalism.

Centre for Corporate Governance (CCG, formerly the Private Sector Corporate Governance Trust)

Brookside Grove, Westlands
P.O. Box 13936
Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 374 5915/5918
Cell: +254 722 700 180 / 733 573 276
Fax: +254 20 374 5935
Email: info(at)ccg.or.ke / training(at)ccg.or.ke

Independent, not-for-profit, private sector led organisation that serves as the Secretariat to the Pan African Consultative Forum on Corporate Governance.

Kenya Anti-Corruption Commission (KACC)

Integrity Centre
Milimani/Valley Road Junction
P.O. Box 61130
00200 Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 271 7318 / 310 722
Fax: +254 20 271 9757
E-mail: kacc(at)integrity.go.ke

National anti-corruption commission.

 

Partner Embassies

 

Embassy of Denmark

Cassia House
Westlands Office Park
off Waiyaki Way
P.O. Box 40412
00100 GPO Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 445 1460-3
Fax: +254 20 445 1474
E-mail: nboamb(at)um.dk

Embassy.

Embassy of the Netherlands

Riverside Lane, off Riverside Drive
Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 428 8000
Fax: +254 20 428 8264
E-mail: nai(at)minbuza.nl

Embassy.

Embassy of Norway

Lion Place, Waiyaki Way
Westlands
Nairobi

Postal address:
Royal Norwegian Embassy
P.O. Box 46363
00100 Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 445 1510-6/ 073 462 1984 (Visa)
Fax: +254 20 445 1517
E-mail: emb.nairobi(at)mfa.no

Embassy.

Embassy of Sweden

Lion Place, 3rd Floor
Waiyaki Way, Westlands
Nairobi

Postal Address:
Embassy of Sweden
P.O. Box 30600
00100 Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 423 4000 / 445 2000
Fax: +254 20 445 2008/09
E-mail: ambassaden.nairobi(at)foreign.ministry.se

Embassy.

British High Commission

Upper Hill Road
P.O. Box 30465
00100 Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 284 4000/4312/4322 (Trade & Investment)
Fax: +254 20 284 4088
E-mail: visaenquiries.nairobi(at)fco.gov.uk / bhcinfo(at)jambo.co.ke

High commission.

Embassy of Austria

2nd Floor, City House, Corner Wabera Street/Standard Street
Nairobi

Postal Address:
P.O. Box 30560
00100 Nairobi

Tel: +254 20 319 076/77/78
Fax: +254 20 342 290
E-mail: nairobi-ob(at)bmeia.gv.at

Embassy.

Country Profile Sources

General Information Sources

Corruption Levels Sources

Judicial System

Police

Licences, Infrastructure and Public Utilities

Land Administration

Tax Administration

Customs Administration

Public Procurement and Contracting

Environment, Natural Resources and Extractive Industry

Public Anti-Corruption Initiatives Sources

Private Anti-Corruption Initiatives Sources