A tense confrontation unfolded before the Senate Committee probing the Finland Scholarships scandal, revealing deep-seated frustrations between Kisii Senator Richard Onyonka and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) deputy Chief Executive Officer, Abdi Mohamud. The exchange underscored ongoing concerns about the effectiveness and integrity of the EACC in its fight against corruption.
The clash began when Mohamud, appearing before the committee, voiced his grievances about Onyonka’s repeated public criticisms of the EACC. Mohamud accused the Senator of undermining the credibility of the anti-graft body through unfounded allegations of corruption. He pointed out that Onyonka had frequently used platforms such as TV and radio to suggest that the EACC was riddled with corruption, implying that bribery was a common practice within the commission.
“I’ve heard Onyonka on many occasions on live TV and Radio, indicating that if you have an issue with EACC just take a briefcase,” Mohamud said, referring to the Senator’s comments. “Such statements without substantiation really portray a very negative image of a public institution that is supposed to fight corruption.”
Onyonka’s response was sharp and unequivocal. The Senator rejected Mohamud’s assertion that he lacked knowledge about the EACC’s inner workings. He challenged Mohamud to provide specific details on the number of corruption cases that the EACC had investigated and forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP). Mohamud’s inability to answer the question led to further escalation of the debate.
“How many cases has EACC investigated and handed over to the DPP? You don’t know… Don’t pretend we don’t know what we are doing,” Onyonka retorted, emphasizing his point by suggesting that if the EACC required him to deliver a briefcase of money to aid their investigations, he would be willing to do so.
The confrontation was not only a clash of personalities but also a reflection of broader concerns regarding the EACC’s effectiveness. The commission has faced criticism for its handling of corruption cases, with accusations of weak investigations and prolonged delays. Many of the cases handled by the EACC are often referred back for further investigation before they reach the court, contributing to a perception of inefficiency.
Mohamud defended the EACC’s position, stressing the importance of maintaining the institution’s image. “For EACC, image is everything. If we lose our image, we might as well close shop,” he said. He highlighted the difficulty in countering allegations that could easily tarnish the reputation of the commission, irrespective of its actual performance.
The debate was further intensified by the context of EACC’s leadership transition. The current CEO, Twalib Mbarak, is set to conclude his six-year term in January 2025. His impending departure adds a layer of uncertainty to the commission’s future direction and effectiveness. The EACC has been advocating for changes in the law to grant it prosecutorial powers, which would allow it to bring cases to court independently, rather than relying solely on the DPP.
This lack of prosecutorial power has been a significant hurdle for the EACC. Cases often stagnate or face delays as they are passed back and forth between the commission and the DPP. The EACC’s struggle to move cases efficiently through the legal system has contributed to frustrations among politicians and the public alike.
The heated exchange between Onyonka and Mohamud reveals the underlying tensions surrounding the EACC’s role and performance. Onyonka’s allegations, whether fully substantiated or not, highlight a critical dialogue about the transparency and accountability of public institutions in Kenya. Meanwhile, Mohamud’s defense underscores the challenges faced by anti-corruption bodies in maintaining credibility amidst persistent scrutiny.
As the Senate Committee continues its investigation into the Finland Scholarships scandal, the clash between Onyonka and Mohamud serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle against corruption in Kenya. The outcome of this scrutiny, combined with potential legal reforms, will play a crucial role in shaping the future effectiveness of the EACC and its ability to combat corruption in the country.
