Connect with us


USA: Public Probity, Private Corruption



American Corruption
Download PDFPrint Article

New York, USA – In the 2015 Corruption Perception Index released by Transparency International, the United States ranks a creditable 16th out of over 170 countries. It could be because the index looks at levels of public sector corruption, in which case ordinary Americans can comfortably say they do not suffer the scourge of corrupt public service dispensing.

Acquiring a driver’s licence, or small business incorporation, or a car registration, usually goes smoothly with no expectation of bribes. If you have the required documents, you get what you need, no matter who you are. After waiting in line at the local Department of Motor Vehicles to renew my licence in upstate New York, the elderly white lady in front of me was told she could not get what she had come for as she did not have the right documents. She was visibly upset, but there are no favours in a public service system that has strong foundations of accountability. I was served in a minute and left a happy immigrant.

In America, acquiring a driver’s licence, or small business incorporation, or a car registration, usually goes smoothly with no expectation of bribes. If you have the required documents, you get what you need, no matter who you are… the US has built a sturdy system of accountability when it comes to the public sector

It was not lost on me that in my own country, Kenya, I had encountered the most humiliating and frustrating experiences trying to acquire just about every document I needed, from a driver’s licence to a passport, a national ID or a company registration. It’s the corrosion-of-the-soul experience thousands of Kenyans endure daily, some during their deepest moments of grief, such as getting a death certificate.

Public servants in the US do not have the luxury of bribing their way out of corruption charges either. In 2009, Mayor Sheila Dixon of Baltimore City was found guilty of misappropriating over $500 worth of gift cards that her office had solicited for charity. As restitution, she stepped down from office and agreed to pay $45,000 to charity. There have been numerous other persons holding high public office who received swift justice for corruption, including Jesse Jackson, Jr and his wife who were found guilty of stealing from their campaigns. Perhaps the most colourful of such characters was the former Governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, who solicited bribes from those interested in occupying the State Senate seat that President Obama had left vacant. As Governor, he held the power to fill the seat for the duration until elections. He was sentenced to 14 years in jail. In other words, the US has built a sturdy system of accountability when it comes to the public sector.

What was paradoxical was that Mr Trump’s supporters never perceived him as a corrupt person, but rather as an astute businessman who simply took advantage of corporate-friendly laws. The revelation that he had avoided paying federal income taxes for 18 years should have knocked him off his pedestal, but it didn’t

However, this does not mean that those in public office have not found a way to engage in high-level corruption. The channels of American corruption have burrowed deep into corporate business, with politicians feeding off of a contractual greed that has no legal ramifications. In fact, American corruption is so extensive it could place the country right at the top of the corruption index were the private sector to be considered. The reason this side of American corruption is important is that it impacts the ordinary person struggling to achieve a dream through honest labour. It permeates the moral fibre of society so that wealthy and powerful individuals who have dominated the private sector are able to get away with ridiculous corruption schemes no public official can get away with. There’s no better example of private sector corruption and bullying than the newly elected American President, Donald Trump.


In what turned out to be an election shocker that still leaves many reeling, Americans elected Mr Trump as their 45th president on November 8. The surreal implications of this historical upset are partly about the triumph of murk over mien. Mr Trump never could hide his penchant for the salacious, in speech and actions that had their contestations in court. He name-called his opponents and critics like a drunken sailor, stiffed his workers because he could, disrespected women through slander and sleazy speech, championed a shameless birther falsehood against a sitting president, and openly called for the violence against protesters at his campaigns. In spite of all this, American democracy picked him for its next president.


What was paradoxical was that Mr Trump’s supporters never perceived him as a corrupt person, but rather as an astute businessman who simply took advantage of corporate-friendly laws. The revelation that he had avoided paying federal income taxes for 18 years should have knocked him off his pedestal, but it didn’t. He had taken advantage of tax loopholes available to the rich, having filed an almost $1 billion loss that allowed him the shady legality of tax avoidance practices. Mr Trump had also refused to release his taxes, a tradition of accountability and transparency that has been observed by many presidential candidates since the early 1970s.

Citizens United allows corporations to contribute to political campaigns as ‘persons,’ with the privilege to hide their identities and amount of contribution. Political corruption has thus become institutionalised. Private individuals now form super PACs (Political Action Committees) that amass massive amounts of money to influence campaigns

The Ethics in Government Act mandates all US presidential candidates to file a Public Financial Disclosure report. Mr Trump never went further than what the law called for, and this did not cost him any loss of support. This unprecedented result of his withholding tax returns indicates just how unimportant financial transparency was for the half of America that voted for him. His financially struggling supporters knew he had somehow risen from bankruptcy to billions, and in a bizarre twist of fantasy, hoped the corrupt fellow could pull off the same trick for them. Exit polls showed that poor Americans with no college education voted overwhelmingly for Trump.

This trend, strangely enough, mirrors the voting patterns of poor villagers in economically depressed countries who regularly vote in a corrupt wealthy politician rather than an honest, poor contender. The idea, perhaps, is to put an astute scammer in office who can do a Robin Hood for the poor. After all, America thrives on a plutocracy that concentrates wealth within an exclusive political and corporate class, and Mr Trump had promised that if he got inside the Beltway, he would remember the forgotten.


Hillary Clinton’s full tax returns disclosure, on the other hand, only won her points for maintaining a tradition of transparency. One interesting thing that voters look for in candidates’ tax returns is how much they give to charity. Altruism balances off any accusations of corruption. Clean as her returns seemed to be, they did not save her from the wrath and accusations of those who believed she was irredeemably corrupt.

She faced numerous questions on her use of the Clinton Foundation for pay-to-play deals. It did not help when leaked e-mails alluded to the charity receiving donations from Qatar and Saudi Arabia, countries known for their financial support of terrorist activity. It did not matter that Charity Watch gave the Clinton Foundation an A ranking for its global impact. The thought of a family-run charity accepting money from those who make it possible for terrorists to attack and kill Americans became an unsettling notion to deal with. It contributed towards the narrative that Clinton was an establishment wheeler-dealer who could not be trusted to bring about any change.


Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of it all is that Trump’s rise gave permission to the shadowy movements of racial hate to emerge from their lairs of masked identities and into mainstream America. White supremacist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan endorsed Mr Trump’s candidacy and became a constant presence at his rallies. These groups have in the past four years grown their membership by over 600 per cent, according to research by the George Washington University’s Programme on Extremism, outpacing the growth of Islamic State followers.

It is not lost on minorities and white Americans who wish to see a more united country that the slavery upon which America was founded still has its tentacles in the emancipated socio-economic fabric of the country; its claws shackling hundreds of thousands of black men to a profit-driven prison industry, and to police brutality. Many well-meaning Americans banked upon the improbable, that President Obama had been able to kill this beast once and for all and bring in an era of racial Kumbayah across America.

In a spree of deregulation, the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed after over 60 years. It allowed banks to invest people’s money with abandon. The greed level spiked when banks suddenly found themselves with piles of money to play with

Now that the Trump candidacy has allowed for racial hate to rear its head, the thriving of private prisons gains new life. The markets recorded an over 58% surge in the stocks of two private prison contractors, CoreCivic and GEO Group, following Trump’s victory. American prisons also function as modern-day slave houses staffed with corrupt law enforcers who specifically target minority non-white groups. Large corporations such as Wal-Mart, McDonald’s, Victoria’s Secret, Whole Foods and others, contract prison labour to harvest, make or package their products. In the kids-for-cash scandal, Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan were sentenced to 28 and 17 and-a-half years consecutively for taking bribes from contractors who ran for-profit juvenile prisons. To increase the prison population and drive profits up, the judges schemed to impose harsh and unjust sentences on youth.

In spite of the shocking statistics that show that the world’s sole superpower has 5% of the global population and 25% of the world’s prison population, this is gleam of hope; once again, American institutions of justice showed no mercy to a senior judge caught in a compromised position.


One of the most significant pieces of legislation that opened the doors to political corruption was the Supreme Court’s passage of Citizens United. This allows corporations to contribute to political campaigns as ‘persons,’ with the privilege to hide their identities and amount of contribution. Political corruption has thus become institutionalised. Private individuals now form super PACs (Political Action Committees) that amass massive amounts of money to influence campaigns. However clean a politician may try to be, it becomes too easy to use this platform. The funding of a candidate by Wall Street to the tune of undisclosed millions has been at the centre of a number of presidential campaigns, with Senator Bernie Sanders leading the charge against those who benefit from Citizens United.

It was also Secretary Clinton’s close association with big money and undisclosed Wall Street associations that became a major hurdle for her campaign. With a Republican now in office, this piece of legislation is unlikely to go anywhere as it would at the very least require a Democratic-leaning Supreme Court to reverse it. America is likely to continue growing its plutocratic regimes for years to come.

The corruption of political influence has also built a powerful corridor between K-Street and Capitol Hill. Corporations and powerful interest groups contract Washington DC lobbyists who buy favour with Congress members in exchange for their Congressional votes to support legislation friendly to the corporations. Issue campaigns such as voting on the environment, for example, are heavily influence by lobbyists who are contracted by private companies to ensure the environmental laws stay or change in the corporation’s favour.

One of the most famous cases of lobbying corruption is the Jack Abramoff case. Abramoff was a top lobbyist whose prowess in bribing members of Congress and Senators on behalf of his clients led him to declare in an interview with RT news that ‘corruption is legal in Washington.’ He admitted that getting jail time for scamming his clients is what led him to a public mea culpa. Much like most who engage in big-money political corruption, the only thing that stops them is getting caught.

When it comes to legislation that widened the wealth gap by miles, perhaps the reversal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 carries the greatest impact. This was legislation that was passed during the Great Depression to separate ordinary banking from investment banking. It allowed for the common person’s money in the bank to stay safe from the greed of banks. In a spree of deregulation, Glass-Steagall was repealed after over 60 years. It allowed banks to invest people’s money with abandon. The greed level spiked when banks suddenly found themselves with piles of money to play with. Those in the financial sector took greater risks that enriched them and passed on the losses to unsuspecting investors. Products such as the sub-prime mortgages were pushed on uncreditworthy Americans whose dream of home ownership was suddenly packaged as achievable.

The wave of homelessness and decline from middle-class to welfare nation came swiftly when many could not afford to service their rising mortgages. The pain of many families was private and enormous. Others were victims of Ponzi schemes that promised good returns on retirement investments that families had saved up for for a lifetime. As hundreds of thousands of houses were foreclosed on and lifetime savings disappeared, a small percentage of white-collar corporate thieves made off with millions in profits. Some were recycled right back into government, reminiscent of the Kenyan saying: ‘nyani ni wale wale’ (it’s the same monkeys). Greedy banks were bailed out because they were seen as too big to fail.

US wars: Profits in dollars, costs in human lives

As a superpower, America has had the strategic ability to make other countries sites for major corruption schemes through war profiteering. In many ways, the war against terrorism has been one such scheme. In the past 15 years, the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have made massive profits for American corporations that got contracts to rebuild those countries following the destruction of their infrastructure by American bombs. Construction firms such as Houston-based KBR Inc won contracts worth billions of dollars. The Costs of War Project run by Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies noted that the war in Iraq cost $1.7 trillion, a good amount of which went into private pockets. The famous General Smedley Butler, who saw the true nature of war, wrote in his book, War Is a Racket: “War… is easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious… the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.”

As hundreds of thousands of houses were foreclosed on and lifetime savings disappeared as a a result of the subprime crisis, a small percentage of white-collar corporate thieves made off with millions in profits. Some were recycled right back into government, reminiscent of the Kenyan saying: ‘nyani ni wale wale’ (it’s the same monkeys)

Building standing armies for sovereign countries that are connected to an accountable international system of laws such as the Geneva Convention is necessary. War profiteering is not necessary; it is simply strategised corruption carried out in someone else’s sovereign state.

How does America deal with major corporate corruption and war profiteering? By the organised uprising of protest voices that build up enough force to demand a change of guard in Washington that will usher in new policies. When such an uprising, however extensive, lacks political organisation, it tapers off. This was the case with Occupy Wall Street movement that targeted corporate corruption. The Wall Street corporations that scammed the people are now richer than ever.

Corruption is a heartless beast. While many get away with it, some do not. Perhaps it is this evidence of the moral universe moving towards justice, however slowly, that keeps American society from imploding under the weight of grand corruption.

Support The Elephant.

The Elephant is helping to build a truly public platform, while producing consistent, quality investigations, opinions and analysis. The Elephant cannot survive and grow without your participation. Now, more than ever, it is vital for The Elephant to reach as many people as possible.

Your support helps protect The Elephant's independence and it means we can continue keeping the democratic space free, open and robust. Every contribution, however big or small, is so valuable for our collective future.


Ms Hall is a freelance writer based in the USA


Asylum Pact: Rwanda Must Do Some Political Housecleaning

Rwandans are welcoming, but the government’s priority must be to solve the internal political problems which produce refugees.



Asylum Pact: Rwanda Must Do Some Political Housecleaning
Download PDFPrint Article

The governments of the United Kingdom and Rwanda have signed an agreement to move asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda for processing. This partnership has been heavily criticized and has been referred to as unethical and inhumane. It has also been opposed by the United Nations Refugee Agency on the grounds that it is contrary to the spirit of the Refugee Convention.

Here in Rwanda, we heard the news of the partnership on the day it was signed. The subject has never been debated in the Rwandan parliament and neither had it been canvassed in the local media prior to the announcement.

According to the government’s official press release, the partnership reflects Rwanda’s commitment to protect vulnerable people around the world. It is argued that by relocating migrants to Rwanda, their dignity and rights will be respected and they will be provided with a range of opportunities, including for personal development and employment, in a country that has consistently been ranked among the safest in the world.

A considerable number of Rwandans have been refugees and therefore understand the struggle that comes with being an asylum seeker and what it means to receive help from host countries to rebuild lives. Therefore, most Rwandans are sensitive to the plight of those forced to leave their home countries and would be more than willing to make them feel welcome. However, the decision to relocate the migrants to Rwanda raises a number of questions.

The government argues that relocating migrants to Rwanda will address the inequalities in opportunity that push economic migrants to leave their homes. It is not clear how this will work considering that Rwanda is already the most unequal country in the East African region. And while it is indeed seen as among the safest countries in the world, it was however ranked among the bottom five globally in the recently released 2022 World Happiness Index. How would migrants, who may have suffered psychological trauma fare in such an environment, and in a country that is still rebuilding itself?

A considerable number of Rwandans have been refugees and therefore understand the struggle that comes with being an asylum seeker and what it means to receive help from host countries to rebuild lives.

What opportunities can Rwanda provide to the migrants? Between 2018—the year the index was first published—and 2020, Rwanda’s ranking on the Human Capital Index (HCI) has been consistently low. Published by the World Bank, HCI measures which countries are best at mobilising the economic and professional potential of their citizens. Rwanda’s score is lower than the average for sub-Saharan Africa and it is partly due to this that the government had found it difficult to attract private investment that would create significant levels of employment prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Unemployment, particularly among the youth, has since worsened.

Despite the accolades Rwanda has received internationally for its development record, Rwanda’s economy has never been driven by a dynamic private or trade sector; it has been driven by aid. The country’s debt reached 73 per cent of GDP in 2021 while its economy has not developed the key areas needed to achieve and secure genuine social and economic transformation for its entire population. In addition to human capital development, these include social capital development, especially mutual trust among citizens considering the country’s unfortunate historical past, establishing good relations with neighbouring states, respect for human rights, and guaranteeing the accountability of public officials.

Rwanda aspires to become an upper middle-income country by 2035 and a high-income country by 2050. In 2000, the country launched a development plan that aimed to transform it into a middle-income country by 2020 on the back on a knowledge economy. That development plan, which has received financial support from various development partners including the UK which contributed over £1 billion, did not deliver the anticipated outcomes. Today the country remains stuck in the category of low-income states. Its structural constraints as a small land-locked country with few natural resources are often cited as an obstacle to development. However, this is exacerbated by current governance in Rwanda, which limits the political space, lacks separation of powers, impedes freedom of expression and represses government critics, making it even harder for Rwanda to reach the desired developmental goals.

Rwanda’s structural constraints as a small land-locked country with no natural resources are often viewed as an obstacle to achieving the anticipated development.

As a result of the foregoing, Rwanda has been producing its own share of refugees, who have sought political and economic asylum in other countries. The UK alone took in 250 Rwandese last year. There are others around the world, the majority of whom have found refuge in different countries in Africa, including countries neighbouring Rwanda. The presence of these refugees has been a source of tension in the region with Kigali accusing neighbouring states of supporting those who want to overthrow the government by force. Some Rwandans have indeed taken up armed struggle, a situation that, if not resolved, threatens long-term security in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region. In fact, the UK government’s advice on travel to Rwanda has consistently warned of the unstable security situation near the border with the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Burundi.

While Rwanda’s intention to help address the global imbalance of opportunity that fuels illegal immigration is laudable, I would recommend that charity start at home. As host of the 26th Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting scheduled for June 2022, and Commonwealth Chair-in-Office for the next two years, the government should seize the opportunity to implement the core values and principles of the Commonwealth, particularly the promotion of democracy, the rule of law, freedom of expression, political and civil rights, and a vibrant civil society. This would enable Rwanda to address its internal social, economic and political challenges, creating a conducive environment for long-term economic development, and durable peace that will not only stop Rwanda from producing refugees but will also render the country ready and capable of economically and socially integrating refugees from less fortunate countries in the future.

Continue Reading


Beyond Borders: Why We Need a Truly Internationalist Climate Justice Movement

The elite’s ‘solution’ to the climate crisis is to turn the displaced into exploitable migrant labour. We need a truly internationalist alternative.



Beyond Borders: Why We Need a Truly Internationalist Climate Justice Movement
Download PDFPrint Article

“We are not drowning, we are fighting” has become the rallying call for the Pacific Climate Warriors. From UN climate meetings to blockades of Australian coal ports, these young Indigenous defenders from twenty Pacific Island states are raising the alarm of global warming for low-lying atoll nations. Rejecting the narrative of victimisation – “you don’t need my pain or tears to know that we’re in a crisis,” as Samoan Brianna Fruean puts it – they are challenging the fossil fuel industry and colonial giants such as Australia, responsible for the world’s highest per-capita carbon emissions.

Around the world, climate disasters displace around 25.3 million people annually – one person every one to two seconds. In 2016, new displacements caused by climate disasters outnumbered new displacements as a result of persecution by a ratio of three to one. By 2050, an estimated 143 million people will be displaced in just three regions: Africa, South Asia, and Latin America. Some projections for global climate displacement are as high as one billion people.

Mapping who is most vulnerable to displacement reveals the fault lines between rich and poor, between the global North and South, and between whiteness and its Black, Indigenous and racialised others.

Globalised asymmetries of power create migration but constrict mobility. Displaced people – the least responsible for global warming – face militarised borders. While climate change is itself ignored by the political elite, climate migration is presented as a border security issue and the latest excuse for wealthy states to fortify their borders. In 2019, the Australian Defence Forces announced military patrols around Australia’s waters to intercept climate refugees.

The burgeoning terrain of “climate security” prioritises militarised borders, dovetailing perfectly into eco-apartheid. “Borders are the environment’s greatest ally; it is through them that we will save the planet,” declares the party of French far-Right politician Marine Le Pen. A US Pentagon-commissioned report on the security implications of climate change encapsulates the hostility to climate refugees: “Borders will be strengthened around the country to hold back unwanted starving immigrants from the Caribbean islands (an especially severe problem), Mexico, and South America.” The US has now launched Operation Vigilant Sentry off the Florida coast and created Homeland Security Task Force Southeast to enforce marine interdiction and deportation in the aftermath of disasters in the Caribbean.

Labour migration as climate mitigation

you broke the ocean in
half to be here.
only to meet nothing that wants you
– Nayyirah Waheed

Parallel to increasing border controls, temporary labour migration is increasingly touted as a climate adaptation strategy. As part of the ‘Nansen Initiative’, a multilateral, state-led project to address climate-induced displacement, the Australian government has put forward its temporary seasonal worker program as a key solution to building climate resilience in the Pacific region. The Australian statement to the Nansen Initiative Intergovernmental Global Consultation was, in fact, delivered not by the environment minister but by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.

Beginning in April 2022, the new Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme will make it easier for Australian businesses to temporarily insource low-wage workers (what the scheme calls “low-skilled” and “unskilled” workers) from small Pacific island countries including Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Kiribati, Samoa, Tonga, and Tuvalu. Not coincidentally, many of these countries’ ecologies and economies have already been ravaged by Australian colonialism for over one hundred years.

It is not an anomaly that Australia is turning displaced climate refugees into a funnel of temporary labour migration. With growing ungovernable and irregular migration, including climate migration, temporary labour migration programs have become the worldwide template for “well-managed migration.” Elites present labour migration as a double win because high-income countries fill their labour shortage needs without providing job security or citizenship, while low-income countries alleviate structural impoverishment through migrants’ remittances.

Dangerous, low-wage jobs like farm, domestic, and service work that cannot be outsourced are now almost entirely insourced in this way. Insourcing and outsourcing represent two sides of the same neoliberal coin: deliberately deflated labour and political power. Not to be confused with free mobility, temporary labour migration represents an extreme neoliberal approach to the quartet of foreign, climate, immigration, and labour policy, all structured to expand networks of capital accumulation through the creation and disciplining of surplus populations.

The International Labour Organization recognises that temporary migrant workers face forced labour, low wages, poor working conditions, virtual absence of social protection, denial of freedom association and union rights, discrimination and xenophobia, as well as social exclusion. Under these state-sanctioned programs of indentureship, workers are legally tied to an employer and deportable. Temporary migrant workers are kept compliant through the threats of both termination and deportation, revealing the crucial connection between immigration status and precarious labour.

Through temporary labour migration programs, workers’ labour power is first captured by the border and this pliable labour is then exploited by the employer. Denying migrant workers permanent immigration status ensures a steady supply of cheapened labour. Borders are not intended to exclude all people, but to create conditions of ‘deportability’, which increases social and labour precarity. These workers are labelled as ‘foreign’ workers, furthering racist xenophobia against them, including by other workers. While migrant workers are temporary, temporary migration is becoming the permanent neoliberal, state-led model of migration.

Reparations include No Borders

“It’s immoral for the rich to talk about their future children and grandchildren when the children of the Global South are dying now.” – Asad Rehman

Discussions about building fairer and more sustainable political-economic systems have coalesced around a Green New Deal. Most public policy proposals for a Green New Deal in the US, Canada, UK and the EU articulate the need to simultaneously tackle economic inequality, social injustice, and the climate crisis by transforming our extractive and exploitative system towards a low-carbon, feminist, worker and community-controlled care-based society. While a Green New Deal necessarily understands the climate crisis and the crisis of capitalism as interconnected — and not a dichotomy of ‘the environment versus the economy’ — one of its main shortcomings is its bordered scope. As Harpreet Kaur Paul and Dalia Gebrial write: “the Green New Deal has largely been trapped in national imaginations.”

Any Green New Deal that is not internationalist runs the risk of perpetuating climate apartheid and imperialist domination in our warming world. Rich countries must redress the global and asymmetrical dimensions of climate debtunfair trade and financial agreements, military subjugation, vaccine apartheidlabour exploitation, and border securitisation.

It is impossible to think about borders outside the modern nation-state and its entanglements with empire, capitalism, race, caste, gender, sexuality, and ability. Borders are not even fixed lines demarcating territory. Bordering regimes are increasingly layered with drone surveillance, interception of migrant boats, and security controls far beyond states’ territorial limits. From Australia offshoring migrant detention around Oceania to Fortress Europe outsourcing surveillance and interdiction to the Sahel and Middle East, shifting cartographies demarcate our colonial present.

Perhaps most offensively, when colonial countries panic about ‘border crises’ they position themselves as victims. But the genocide, displacement, and movement of millions of people were unequally structured by colonialism for three centuries, with European settlers in the Americas and Oceania, the transatlantic slave trade from Africa, and imported indentured labourers from Asia. Empire, enslavement, and indentureship are the bedrock of global apartheid today, determining who can live where and under what conditions. Borders are structured to uphold this apartheid.

The freedom to stay and the freedom to move, which is to say no borders, is decolonial reparations and redistribution long due.

Continue Reading


The Murang’a Factor in the Upcoming Presidential Elections

The Murang’a people are really yet to decide who they are going to vote for as a president. If they have, they are keeping the secret to themselves. Are the Murang’a people prepping themselves this time to vote for one of their own? Can Jimi Wanjigi re-ignite the Murang’a/Matiba popular passion among the GEMA community and re-influence it to vote in a different direction?



The Murang’a Factor in the Upcoming Presidential Elections
Download PDFPrint Article

In the last quarter of 2021, I visited Murang’a County twice: In September, we were in Kandiri in Kigumo constituency. We had gone for a church fundraiser and were hosted by the Anglican Church of Kenya’s (ACK), Kahariro parish, Murang’a South diocese. A month later, I was back, this time to Ihi-gaini deep in Kangema constituency for a burial.

The church function attracted politicians: it had to; they know how to sniff such occasions and if not officially invited, they gate-crash them. Church functions, just like funerals, are perfect platforms for politicians to exhibit their presumed piousness, generosity and their closeness to the respective clergy and the bereaved family.

Well, the other reason they were there, is because they had been invited by the Church leadership. During the electioneering period, the Church is not shy to exploit the politicians’ ambitions: they “blackmail” them for money, because they can mobilise ready audiences for the competing politicians. The politicians on the other hand, are very ready to part with cash. This quid pro quo arrangement is usually an unstated agreement between the Church leadership and the politicians.

The church, which was being fund raised for, being in Kigumo constituency, the area MP Ruth Wangari Mwaniki, promptly showed up. Likewise, the area Member of the County Assembly (MCA) and of course several aspirants for the MP and MCA seats, also showed up.

Church and secular politics often sit cheek by jowl and so, on this day, local politics was the order of the day. I couldn’t have speculated on which side of the political divide Murang’a people were, until the young man Zack Kinuthia Chief Administrative Secretary (CAS) for Sports, Culture and Heritage, took to the rostrum to speak.

A local boy and an Uhuru Kenyatta loyalist, he completely avoided mentioning his name and his “development track record” in central Kenya. Kinuthia has a habit of over-extolling President Uhuru’s virtues whenever and wherever he mounts any platform. By the time he was done speaking, I quickly deduced he was angling to unseat Wangari. I wasn’t wrong; five months later in February 2022, Kinuthia resigned his CAS position to vie for Kigumo on a Party of the National Unity (PNU) ticket.

He spoke briefly, feigned some meeting that was awaiting him elsewhere and left hurriedly, but not before giving his KSh50,000 donation. Apparently, I later learnt that he had been forewarned, ahead of time, that the people were not in a mood to listen to his panegyrics on President Uhuru, Jubilee Party, or anything associated to the two. Kinuthia couldn’t dare run on President Uhuru’s Jubilee Party. His patron-boss’s party is not wanted in Murang’a.

I spent the whole day in Kandiri, talking to people, young and old, men and women and by the time I was leaving, I was certain about one thing; The Murang’a folks didn’t want anything to do with President Uhuru. What I wasn’t sure of is, where their political sympathies lay.

I returned to Murang’a the following month, in the expansive Kangema – it is still huge – even after Mathioya was hived off from the larger Kangema constituency. Funerals provide a good barometer that captures peoples’ political sentiments and even though this burial was not attended by politicians – a few senior government officials were present though; political talk was very much on the peoples’ lips.

What I gathered from the crowd was that President Uhuru had destroyed their livelihood, remember many of the Nairobi city trading, hawking, big downtown real estate and restaurants are run and owned largely by Murang’a people. The famous Nyamakima trading area of downtown Nairobi has been run by Murang’a Kikuyus.

In 2018, their goods were confiscated and declared contrabrand by the government. Many of their businesses went under, this, despite the merchants not only, whole heartedly throwing their support to President Uhuru’s controversial re-election, but contributing handsomely to the presidential kitty. They couldn’t believe what was happening to them: “We voted for him to safeguard our businesses, instead, he destroyed them. So much for supporting him.”

We voted for him to safeguard our businesses, instead, he destroyed them. So much for supporting him

Last week, I attended a Murang’a County caucus group that was meeting somewhere in Gatundu, in Kiambu County. One of the clearest messages that I got from this group is that the GEMA vote in the August 9, 2022, presidential elections is certainly anti-Uhuru Kenyatta and not necessarily pro-William Ruto.

“The Murang’a people are really yet to decide, (if they have, they are keeping the secret to themselves) on who they are going to vote for as a president. And that’s why you see Uhuru is craftily courting us with all manner of promises, seductions and prophetic messages.” Two weeks ago, President Uhuru was in Murang’a attending an African Independent Pentecostal Church of Africa (AIPCA) church function in Kandara constituency.

At the church, the president yet again threatened to “tell you what’s in my heart and what I believe and why so.” These prophecy-laced threats by the President, to the GEMA nation, in which he has been threatening to show them the sign, have become the butt of crude jokes among Kikuyus.

Corollary, President Uhuru once again has plucked Polycarp Igathe away from his corporate perch as Equity Bank’s Chief Commercial Officer back to Nairobi’s tumultuous governor seat politics. The first time the bespectacled Igathe was thrown into the deep end of the Nairobi murky politics was in 2017, as Mike Sonko’s deputy governor. After six months, he threw in the towel, lamenting that Sonko couldn’t let him even breathe.

Uhuru has a tendency of (mis)using Murang’a people

“Igathe is from Wanjerere in Kigumo, Murang’a, but grew up in Ol Kalou, Nyandarua County,” one of the Mzees told me. “He’s not interested in politics; much less know how it’s played. I’ve spent time with him and confided in me as much. Uhuru has a tendency of (mis)using Murang’a people. President Uhuru wants to use Igathe to control Nairobi. The sad thing is that Igathe doesn’t have the guts to tell Uhuru the brutal fact: I’m really not interested in all these shenanigans, leave me alone. The president is hoping, once again, to hopefully placate the Murang’a people, by pretending to front Igathe. I foresee another terrible disaster ultimately befalling both Igathe and Uhuru.”

Be that as it may, what I got away with from this caucus, after an entire day’s deliberations, is that its keeping it presidential choice close to its chest. My attempts to goad some of the men and women present were fruitless.

Murang’a people like reminding everyone that it’s only they, who have yet to produce a president from the GEMA stable, despite being the wealthiest. Kiambu has produced two presidents from the same family, Nyeri one, President Mwai Kibaki, who died on April 22. The closest Murang’a came to giving the country a president was during Ken Matiba’s time in the 1990s. “But Matiba had suffered a debilitating stroke that incapacitated him,” said one of the mzees. “It was tragic, but there was nothing we could do.”

Murang’a people like reminding everyone that it’s only they, who have yet to produce a president from the GEMA stable, despite being the wealthiest

It is interesting to note that Jimi Wanjigi, the Safina party presidential flagbearer is from Murang’a County. His family hails from Wahundura, in Mathioya constituency. Him and Mwangi wa Iria, the Murang’a County governor are the other two Murang’a prominent persons who have tossed themselves into the presidential race. Wa Iria’s bid which was announced at the beginning of 2022, seems to have stagnated, while Jimi’s seems to be gathering storm.

Are the Murang’a people prepping themselves this time to vote for one of their own? Jimi’s campaign team has crafted a two-pronged strategy that it hopes will endear Kenyans to his presidency. One, a generational, paradigm shift, especially among the youth, targeting mostly post-secondary, tertiary college and university students.

“We believe this group of voters who are basically between the ages of 18–27 years and who comprise more than 65 per cent of total registered voters are the key to turning this election,” said one of his presidential campaign team members. “It matters most how you craft the political message to capture their attention.” So, branding his key message as itwika, it is meant to orchestrate a break from past electoral behaviour that is pegged on traditional ethnic voting patterns.

The other plunk of Jimi’s campaign theme is economic emancipation, quite pointedly as it talks directly to the GEMA nation, especially the Murang’a Kikuyus, who are reputed for their business acumen and entrepreneurial skills. “What Kikuyus cherish most,” said the team member “is someone who will create an enabling business environment and leave the Kikuyus to do their thing. You know, Kikuyus live off business, if you interfere with it, that’s the end of your friendship, it doesn’t matter who you are.”

Can Jimi re-ignite the Murang’a/Matiba popular passion among the GEMA community and re-influence it to vote in a different direction? As all the presidential candidates gear-up this week on who they will eventually pick as their running mates, the GEMA community once more shifts the spotlight on itself, as the most sought-after vote basket.

Both Raila Odinga and William Ruto coalitions – Azimio la Umoja-One Kenya and Kenya Kwanza Alliance – must seek to impress and woe Mt Kenya region by appointing a running mate from one of its ranks. If not, the coalitions fear losing the vote-rich area either to each other, or perhaps to a third party. Murang’a County, may as well, become the conundrum, with which the August 9, presidential race may yet to be unravelled and decided.

Continue Reading