BY CHARLES MULILA
Administration Police houses that went up in flames on Monday are located on a controversial plot allocated to a firm associated with a powerful cabinet minister from the Rift Valley province. The plot, LR number 209/13332 was allocated to Rosestar Properties Limited, whose directors at the time of formation were listed the minister and and a Mr.Jamal. Rosestar then used the plot as a security to secure a Sh.200 million overdraft at the collapsed Trust Bank limited in 1996. During the Monday inferno, scores of people were injured and goods worth millions of shillings destroyed.
Two years ago, property worth millions of shillings was burnt at the same property. Investigators are yet to unravel the mystery of the fire then, and now.Interest on the overdraft has since accumulated to a whooping Sh.1.2 billion, according to an official at Central Bank of Kenya who declined to be named. The debt is being chased by the Central Bank's DPF department. Documents obtained by the Business Times show that the said a firm associated with the individual procured a Sh.200 million loan from the collapsed Trust Bank Bank and offered Government land as collateral. The land in question, LR number 209/13332, valued at Sh.500 million by October 1996 is owned by the Office of the President. But is also claimed by Rosestar. The partner however resigned on 14th January 1997, after the firm secured the Sh.200million from Trust Bank.
The money was wired to the firm on 11th November 1996, a letter written by then Trust Bank officials in our possession shows. It is believed that the loan, and many others advanced to politically correct individuals led to the ultimate collapse of the bank, in which billions of savings were sank. The bank collapsed in 2001.
Before it went under, frantic efforts to recover debts by the Central Bank of Kenya(CBK) appointed statutory manager Rose Ndetho yielded no results. In January 2000, Ndetho wrote to the minister and other directors of the firm in question demanding Sh.545,786,606, as principle and accrued interest from the debt. Detho's letter said in part..”We are concerned that you have not responded to our demands to settle this account…if we shall not have heard from you within seven days from the date here of, we shall proceed as appropriate without any further reference to you”, Detho's hard hitting letter said. Communications in our possession indicates that earlier correspondence between the then PS incharge of Provincial Administration and Internal Security Zakayo Cheruiyot and the firm associated with the minister had been exchanged.
In one such communication, the firm firm wrote to the PS demanding that he (Cheruiyot) removes the APSs at LR number 209/13332, which according to the firm was private property. It would appear that the land in question had been allocated to the minister's firm, but the allocation revoked in unclear circumstances.
The letter, addressed to the PS said in part…You area ware that the land is private property and hence we are asking you to remove your personel within the next seven(7) days to enable the Bank to which the property is charge realize their security. The PS neither responded not acted on the ultimatum. But suffice is to say that todate, the plot still belongs to the Government. A check at Ardhi House indicated that the Title Deed still belongs to the Government, raising questions about the authenticity of the title given to Trust Bank as surety for its principal loan of Sh.200million. Currently, the loan interest has risen to Sh.1.2 biillion. Efforts to get a comment from Ms Ndetho, the director of financial services at CBK were fruitless. Not a single coin has been paid of the loan.
The Star
IS RUTO TRYING TO SELL PLOT FOR 1.2BN?
Date: Sat 06th March 2010
BY STAR TEAM
AGRICULTURE Minister William Ruto and fellow directors of Rose star Properties want to sell back to government a prime piece of land that was allocated to them in Nairobi during the Moi regime.
Ruto has reportedly been in talks with the Office of the President to sell the plot LR No 209/13332. It covers 0.871ha in. Nairobi's Community area within Upper Hill, next to National Social Security Fund headquarters. "The allotees are not servicing a loan and have tried to sell the land to the office of the President at Sh1.2 billion," Minister of Lands James Orengo told the Star this week.
"The allottees acquired a bank loan which was not used to develop the plot as is required by the Lands Act", said Mr Orengo. He is now intends to revoke the allocation. The land belonged to the Ministry of Immigration and was allocated to Rosestar Properties by then President Moi before the title was processed by then Lands Commissioner Wilson Gachanja.
The Depositor Protection Fund records the directors of Rosestar Properties as William Ruto and Charles Mwangi. In recent correspondence from Rosestar, Cyrus Jirongo has also apparently identified himself as a director. Ruto and Jirongo were in the Youth for Kanu '92 lobby group that campaigned for Moi in the 1992 multiparty elections.
Moi won the election against strong opposition from Kenneth Matiba and the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga. The Rosestar plot was occupied by Administration Police officers until mid- 2009 when a mysterious fire razed their wooden houses and they had to move. Rosestar was allocated the plot in 1996 and used it to take a loan from the collapsed Trust Bank, whose Managing Director was Ajay Shah. By December 2000, the outstanding loan had accrued interest and stood at 5h693,355. The Deposit Protection Fund and the Central Bank of Kenya are holding the title as security. The DPF document remarks "Property is government land. Matter with Ochieng Oduol Advocate. Recovery doubtful"
Yesterday, Jirongo disowned any involvement. "I am not a director in the said company. If you want to verify facts just go to the AG offices and get the records from then registrar of companies. I have never tried to sell any land to the Office of the President," stated Jirongo. However the Commissioner of Lands received a letter in April 2009 signed by 'Hon SK Jirongo" saying "the property is currently charged and we are in the process of redeeming the title for development of the property". The letter said the Minister of Internal Security and Secretary Provincial Administration had agreed to vacate the property.
"I have discussed this issue with the Head of the Civil Service and he is in agreement that this is a private property and therefore not available for allocation to the disabled," the letter states. "That's not my signature on that, letter because I have never written ,any, letter to anybody. Any link to myself can only be motivated by Raila-Ruto wars and them trying to use my name, said Jirongo. Ruto did riot return several calls made by the Star to' his mobile telephone this week.
While cancelling several land title, deeds three weeks ago, Lands minister James Orengo said the land was irregularly allocated to Rosestar Properties Limited. Yesterday, the Star learnt that the minister has already ordered the revocation of the title deed and the return of the land to the Ministry of Immigration. Rosestar Properties was one of Trust Bank's largest debtors when it collapsed. Trust Bank was run down by insider borrowing, unsecured loans and charging of fake titles deeds on loans.
The bank collapsed in 1998 with close to Sh12 billion belonging to depositors. It re-opened three years later and was again shut by the then CBK governor Nahashon Nyagah in 2001. Former Trust bank depositors and shareholders have been fighting a long battle to try and recover some of their lost funds.
They claim that the Deposit Protection Fund and the judiciary have blacked them out on the latest developments after the bank was shut down for the second time by Central Bank. "Most loans were basically insider borrowing. Directors came up with companies and through their nominees and borrowed large sums of money from the bank," stated a former director. Trust Bank had close to 25,000 depositors. The missing funds amounted to Sh12.5 billion.
Ajay Shah was the Managing Director of Trust Bank when it went down. Just before Trust Bank collapsed, Azim Virjee was also a director together with Ajay Shah, Praful Shah and Nithin Chandaria. Praful is also the director of Otis Elevators and Kenya Canvas. Nithin has since become a fugitive in US. Yesterday, the shareholders vowed that they will fight on however long it takes.
When the bank collapsed, many shareholders were heart broken and died. Others have sold their houses and everything they had. We cannot be impoverished when Ajay Shah walks the streets of Kenya a free man," stated a shareholder. ' They accused Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) of breaching a scheme of arrangement where the bank was to operate for four years to recover funds owed to depositors and shareholders.
"The scheme of arrangement was prepared for protection of shareholders and depositors. It was approved by the high court. However, Nahashon Nyagah (then CBK governor) disregarded it and shut it down," stated another former director, who was in the 2001 shareholder team to revive the bank.
Trust Bank loans and eventual collapse of the bank touches on the very sensitive nerves of the then KANU government. It is an issue that has never been resolved. The wahindi who collapsed trade bank are fugitives to date.
You can be sure that once the referendum campaigns start proper, we will hear the real reasons why some people are opposing the land chapter and the kadhis courts. This is where Ruto and Moi will be exposed for who they really are.
The fact that Ruto's company Rosestar have not contested Orengo's title revocation three months after the order was issued clearly tells us that Ruto wants to quietly blackmail Kibaki into ordering the purchase. The immigration department would start development on it. The referendum will certainly change the political matrix.
So when Ruto talks land, ask which land he is talking about. It is certainly not Chebarus squatters who are in his mind. It is HIS grabbed land. This is where he comes together with Moi and Jirongo. Talk of birds of a feather, and there you got them.
-----------------------------------------
A land lease shrouded in mystery
By Vitalis Kimutai
The land lease for multinational tea companies operating in the South Rift has been shrouded in mystery.
While the initial lease is said to have been 99 years, the same is said to have been revised upward to 999 years without consultation with or consent from the residents.
James Finlay Tea Kenya, Unilever (to be renamed Brooke Bond), George Williamsons, Lesla and Sotik Tea are some of the multinational companies with huge chunks of tea estates.
Local leaders have recently demanded that the ownership should revert to the local community and the tea estates be managed by the local authorities on behalf of the residents. Debate has been raging over the years on the circumstances surrounding take-over of the land by white settlers.
Forcibly Taken
“The land was leased out to settlers in the pretext that it was idle while in reality the residents had livestock and crops on it,” Peter Cheruiyot, the chairman Kaptuigeny / Chepchabas Welfare Society, said.
Most of the land is said to have been forcibly taken away from the residents without due regard to human rights issues and the prevailing laws at the time.
The Devonshire White Paper of 1923 clearly states conditions governing land tenure in the colony.
It states that whenever there were conflicts of interest on land use, the interests of the natives were to come before those of white settlers.
The post-independence Sessional Paper No 10 stressed prioritisation of the economic resources / chances for the locals.
SOURCE: Sunday Standard, 18th April 2010
------------------------------------------------
I am happy it is Ruto leading campaign against the draft
By Wanyonyi Wambilyanga
I follow the ongoing debate on the Proposed Constitution with glee. Not because the process is so informed, but rather because the comical characters involved.
Agriculture Minister William Ruto wants to campaign for a 'No' vote in the referendum. Some members of the clergy, too, want to say 'No' to the Proposed Constitution. While it is their right to say whatever they want, I am grateful that it is no longer the Church but a few clerics who are crying foul over the document and a few politicians.
Some of the arguments such people are presenting are so misinformed to an extent of being abstract. A top cleric says abortion is allowed in the Proposed Constitution. How far from the truth can he be? This fellow simply has not read the document. He wants to campaign against something he has not looked at. Isn't this the height of buffoonery? Ruto is crying foul over regional government and land, among other issues. He failed to convince his fellow MPs on numerous occasions why we need to alter the draft so when he calls for an extension of the debate who is he going to talk to?
Land grabbing and ethnicity are two devils we have been forced to live with. Politicians have perfected debauchery in grabbing land and used the tribal card to pit neighbour against neighbour. When a land policy is to be entrenched in the constitution, these chaps are raising a furore.
Show me anyone who owns tens of thousands of acres and I wills show you his relationship with the present and former governments, and the squatters living on the periphery of his land.
I am, however, happy that is is Ruto who will lead the onslaught since apart from Cherangany MP Joshua Kutuny, his crony, I do not think there is any other person Ruto can convince on matters constitution. Ruto has not been doing a good job at winning hearts when it comes to voting.
When he supported Gatundu South MP Uhuru Kenyatta in the 2002 presidential race, it was a debacle. And Ruto has never grasped any opportunity to right his political character. But he is not alone. It was interesting to watch the Reverend Mutava Musyimi among 26 MPs vouching for a 'No' vote.
My dear Reverend aren't these the same legislators who walked out on you when you needed them most? Musyimi pushed for his amendments and the MPs walked out on him when it was time to vote. Will I be wrong therefore to say that this newfound alliance is unholy and its foundation is greed and deceit? Watch out you are not left with egg on your face when the country votes 'Yes' and your faithful abandon you too.
It would be interesting for the clerics to vote 'No' and the day after the vote they read an advert in the papers that the Judiciary is looking for a Chief Kadhi; and that the country will have to put up with fellows who, riding on choppers, apportioned themselves land the size of provinces. What shall it benefit you to gratify your ego and lose your faithful, constituents, and their trust?
Citizens who have been denied their rightful share of land, their heritage, because some powerful persons grabbed more than their fair share must say 'Yes' to the Proposed Constitution to address historical injustices.
The writer is Chief Sub-Editor
Weekend Editions
fwanyonyi@standardmedia.co.ke
SOURCE: Sunday Standard, 11th April 2010
------------------------------------------
Provisions on land a thorn in the flesh of politicians
By Emeka-Mayaka Gekara
The chapter on land is a critical weapon for politicians opposed to the proposed constitution.
They have rejected proposals that Parliament puts a ceiling on land holding, the functions of the National Land Commission and on repossession of irregularly acquired land.
The draft says the commission will administer all public land on behalf of the national government and counties but MPs opposed to the draft say counties should be empowered to administer land as well as game parks and reserves.
The MPs, mainly from the Rift Valley, include Higher Education minister William Ruto, assistant ministers Jebii Kilimo, Jackson Kiptanui and MPs Peris Simam, Sammy Mwaita, Boaz Kaino, Zakayo Cheruiyot, Mithika Linturi, Elijah Lagat and Joshua Kutuny.
The MPs claim that some communities will lose their land while a group of elders from the region has made the baffling assertion that all land titles will be cancelled if the draft is enacted into law.
Absentee landlords
Mr Nzamba Kitonga, the chairman of the Committee of Experts on law review, describes the views as “completely untrue.”
The draft only provides for a national policy that requires absentee landlords to pay taxes on idle land or make it available for use by other Kenyans.
Due to these provisions, there are fears that big landowners – rich political and business families as well as churches – could be pulling strings to derail the constitution.
During debate in Parliament on April 1, a spirited fights to amend the land chapter failed to go through.
Chepalungu MP Isaac Ruto unsuccessfully tried to amend Article 40 which compels the government to protect the right to own property, but excludes irregularly acquired resources. The bid was seen by some MPs as a bid to protect grabbers.
The MP also unsuccessfully tried to amend Article 60 which says land shall be held, used and managed in a manner that is equitable, efficient and in accordance with the security of land rights.
Mr Ruto wanted to insert the words “for all land holders, users and occupiers in good faith” immediately after the word “rights”.
It was argued that if change was accepted, invaders and squatters would justify their action, claiming it was in good faith.
The proposed set of laws has made a strong attempt to ensure marginalised groups such as women have access to land by spelling out that land administration should eliminate gender discrimination.
But the National Land Commission is probably the major hallmark of the new law. Public land in counties will be held by a county government in trust for the residents but administered by the commission.
SOURCE: Daily Nation, 23rd April 2010
------------------------------------------
Don't seek shortcuts nor issue threats if your decision is 'No'
By Gitau Warigi
Some Kalenjin leaders opposed to sections of the draft constitution are citing clauses on land and in particular, the creation of the National Land Commission.
It is important we demystify what they are putting out in order to get to the bottom of their threats. Contrary to what they are saying, their anger is not really about the enactment of a minimum or maximum ceiling on individual land ownership. Actually, they could care less about that.
Their real beef is that land management will remain under the control of the central government. They are furious because the draft denies them control of public land in their local fiefdoms that they want to exercise through a regional jimbo.
This is precisely why they have been shouting themselves hoarse that the draft needs to be amended to accommodate regional, or rather provincial, governments.
The draft has actually placed them in a bind. They would have much preferred a draft that recognised Rift Valley as a wholesome jimbo, which they dream of controlling. Yet even if they got their jimbo without this land control component, they would still cry foul.
However, the draft opted to go for counties, which will operate without much institutional reference to the existing provincial setup. This arrangement, of course, denies these politicians the control they seek over the entire Rift Valley.
The way they were recently rebuffed by Maasai leaders led by William ole Ntimama is a pointer to the sure path to be taken by other Kalenjin counties in the Rift Valley like Nakuru, Samburu, Laikipia and Turkana.
None of them is keen on a self-styled “land commissar” somewhere in Eldoret or Kericho professing to oversee their land affairs.
We often forget that provinces, more so Rift Valley, were not pre-ordained. They were, and remain, arbitrary creations of the colonial government. It is not just Kalenjin who found themselves locked within these new borders. Scores of other ethnicities, both indigenous and immigrant, inhabited this province.
A scheme where just one community asserts as its exclusive right the determination of land and settlement issues within this province must be rejected. The recurrent cases of IDPs in that same province already tells enough.
It is shame church leaders find no problem being in this kind of company. I guess by now they know the jimboists are not animated by the controversy around abortion and kadhis' courts. I would give the bishops a better hearing if, at the onset, they made it clear that they don't care to be poster-boys for this land bandwagon. There are plenty of things wrong with the draft, but none has anything to do with what this eccentric alliance is raising.
What pleases me so far is the way the authorities have come out sternly against inciters and peddlers of hate speech. I notice that the National Cohesion and Integration Commission, led by the aptly named Mzalendo Kibunja, has weighed in with a warning that it will prosecute whomever is caught propagating such speech. The authorities should a keep a particularly keen eye and ear on known political inciters as well as certain rogue vernacular radio stations.
I covered the 2007 election campaigns extensively, and I saw firsthand the particularly poisonous atmosphere hate speech created in the Rift Valley. I also followed closely the testimony of the NSIS director general (the bit that was not on camera) before the Waki Commission and also that of then Commissioner of Police Hussein Mohammed Ali.
It was clear they had reported the explosive atmosphere early enough but were let down by political superiors who failed to take the necessary preventive actions.
Let us be clear on one thing. What is ahead of us is a referendum, which means a contest. That is why people will be voting Yes or No. Otherwise we would simply congregate at Uhuru Park were it possible, and ululate the new constitution into being. If your decision is to go No, don't plead for shortcuts, like calling on the President to to carry out some vague, extra-legal “executive order” to change the draft, or call it back from the Attorney-General in order to railroad your desired amendments through.
That won't work. Just go to the Kenyan public and campaign for your No. And don't confine yourself only to the North Rift. Go and preach your message also to Coast, Nyanza, Western, Nairobi, Central, Eastern, and North Eastern provinces. After all, if you are sure you have a sound argument, what's to fear?
gwarigi@ke.nationmedia.com
SOURCE: Sunday Nation, 25th April 2010
---------------------------------------------
Land the next big hurdle in the way of new law
Unlike divisive aspects such as devolution and representation, the land debate has assumed regional and ethnic dimensions
By Gakuu Mathenge
The land question that has agonised generations is back, threatening to become the biggest hurdle for the Proposed Constitution.
Provisions on the Land Chapter (Article 59) attracted some of the sharpest protests and amendment calls, at the Naivasha consensus retreat by the Parliamentary Select Committee, and during debate in Parliament last week.
Few chapters, including the Bill of Rights, have attracted as much passion, almost bordering on panic, like the Land Chapter.
Unlike traditional divisive aspects as devolution and representation, usually debated along party lines, land debate has assumed regional and ethnic dimensions, with some of the harshest adjectives reserved for the most revolutionary provision in the Land Chapter: the proposal for creation of a National Land Commission to take over administrative and technical functions from the Ministry of Lands.
The passions and patterns on support and opposition of the land provisions are a throwback to the heady days of Lancaster Constitutional Conference in London in the early 1960s that pitted Kanu against Kadu delegates. Indeed, some delegates like former minister John Keen and AR Khalif, among others, refused to sign the final document.
In 2005, land was one of the issues seized on by the opponents of the Draft Constitution to defeat it.
One of the amendment Motions defeated in Parliament last week was from one of the leading opponents of the proposals in the Land Chapter - Chepalungu MP Isaac Ruto.
Irregular Allocations
Ruto sought to reverse the powers of the proposed National Land Commission (NLC) to repossess illegally acquired land without compensation.
NLC will also have powers to establish a national data bank on all aspects of land – ownership and transactions, collection of revenue on behalf of Government, review and resolution of historical injustices, including repossession of public land stolen by individuals over the years.
Others who have lined up against the draft over concerns in the Land Chapter are MPs and leaders from the Coast and Rift Valley, among them former President Moi, Agriculture Minister William Ruto and Co-operative Development Assistant Minister Jebii Kilimo, among others.
Moi last week condemned the document as “bordering on debauchery”.
Lobbies like Kenyans for Equitable Land Laws, Kenya Land Alliance (Kela), Kenya Association of Manufacturers among others, have opposed the land provisions. “The Committee of Experts deliberately ignored all our submissions to the PSC consensus building meetings in Naivasha. We have no choice but to oppose this document,” said Kela spokesperson Chris Foot.
The land proposals are consistent with the National Land Policy hat was passed by Parliament and adopted by the Cabinet last year.
The policy proposed the creation of the National Land Commission and that it be domiciled in the Constitution, along the lines of the Kenya Revenue Authority.
“The National Land Commission shall be a constitutional body. An Act of Parliament, taking into account the need for broad representation, expertise, integrity and equity, shall define its composition. The nominees shall be vetted by Parliament and appointed by the President,” the policy states.
Land Commission's role of spearheading consolidation of all land laws to overhaul decades of decadence at Ardhi House was first proposed by a commission appointed by Moi in 1999, under chairmanship of former Attorney General Charles Njonjo.
Radical Reforms
The Njonjo Commission's report, that described the Ministry of Lands as “rotten and dead” recommended the National Land Authority along the lines of Kenya Revenue Authority, and cancellation of all title deeds to grabbed land, among other radical reforms.
“The Constitution should be amended to recognise title deeds of land that was acquired illegally. Besides taking over key departments of the ministry, the authority will operate branches in every district answerable to people and not the State,” the Njonjo Commission, officially known as Commission of Inquiry into Land System in Kenya, stated.
It was not until a decade later, last year, that the National Land Policy finally became a reality, when Parliament and Cabinet endorsed it.
Land Commission Role
Functions of the proposed Land Commission include:
Hold title to and manage public land on behalf of Government
Exercise powers of compulsory acquisition, and development control on behalf of State and local authorities
Offer technical advice to proposed district and community land boards
Levy, collect and manage all land revenues except rates, which shall be collected by district authorities
SOURCE: Sunday Standard, 11th April 2010
Administration Police houses that went up in flames on Monday are located on a controversial plot allocated to a firm associated with a powerful cabinet minister from the Rift Valley province. The plot, LR number 209/13332 was allocated to Rosestar Properties Limited, whose directors at the time of formation were listed the minister and and a Mr.Jamal. Rosestar then used the plot as a security to secure a Sh.200 million overdraft at the collapsed Trust Bank limited in 1996. During the Monday inferno, scores of people were injured and goods worth millions of shillings destroyed.
Two years ago, property worth millions of shillings was burnt at the same property. Investigators are yet to unravel the mystery of the fire then, and now.Interest on the overdraft has since accumulated to a whooping Sh.1.2 billion, according to an official at Central Bank of Kenya who declined to be named. The debt is being chased by the Central Bank's DPF department. Documents obtained by the Business Times show that the said a firm associated with the individual procured a Sh.200 million loan from the collapsed Trust Bank Bank and offered Government land as collateral. The land in question, LR number 209/13332, valued at Sh.500 million by October 1996 is owned by the Office of the President. But is also claimed by Rosestar. The partner however resigned on 14th January 1997, after the firm secured the Sh.200million from Trust Bank.
The money was wired to the firm on 11th November 1996, a letter written by then Trust Bank officials in our possession shows. It is believed that the loan, and many others advanced to politically correct individuals led to the ultimate collapse of the bank, in which billions of savings were sank. The bank collapsed in 2001.
Before it went under, frantic efforts to recover debts by the Central Bank of Kenya(CBK) appointed statutory manager Rose Ndetho yielded no results. In January 2000, Ndetho wrote to the minister and other directors of the firm in question demanding Sh.545,786,606, as principle and accrued interest from the debt. Detho's letter said in part..”We are concerned that you have not responded to our demands to settle this account…if we shall not have heard from you within seven days from the date here of, we shall proceed as appropriate without any further reference to you”, Detho's hard hitting letter said. Communications in our possession indicates that earlier correspondence between the then PS incharge of Provincial Administration and Internal Security Zakayo Cheruiyot and the firm associated with the minister had been exchanged.
In one such communication, the firm firm wrote to the PS demanding that he (Cheruiyot) removes the APSs at LR number 209/13332, which according to the firm was private property. It would appear that the land in question had been allocated to the minister's firm, but the allocation revoked in unclear circumstances.
The letter, addressed to the PS said in part…You area ware that the land is private property and hence we are asking you to remove your personel within the next seven(7) days to enable the Bank to which the property is charge realize their security. The PS neither responded not acted on the ultimatum. But suffice is to say that todate, the plot still belongs to the Government. A check at Ardhi House indicated that the Title Deed still belongs to the Government, raising questions about the authenticity of the title given to Trust Bank as surety for its principal loan of Sh.200million. Currently, the loan interest has risen to Sh.1.2 biillion. Efforts to get a comment from Ms Ndetho, the director of financial services at CBK were fruitless. Not a single coin has been paid of the loan.
The Star
IS RUTO TRYING TO SELL PLOT FOR 1.2BN?
Date: Sat 06th March 2010
BY STAR TEAM
AGRICULTURE Minister William Ruto and fellow directors of Rose star Properties want to sell back to government a prime piece of land that was allocated to them in Nairobi during the Moi regime.
Ruto has reportedly been in talks with the Office of the President to sell the plot LR No 209/13332. It covers 0.871ha in. Nairobi's Community area within Upper Hill, next to National Social Security Fund headquarters. "The allotees are not servicing a loan and have tried to sell the land to the office of the President at Sh1.2 billion," Minister of Lands James Orengo told the Star this week.
"The allottees acquired a bank loan which was not used to develop the plot as is required by the Lands Act", said Mr Orengo. He is now intends to revoke the allocation. The land belonged to the Ministry of Immigration and was allocated to Rosestar Properties by then President Moi before the title was processed by then Lands Commissioner Wilson Gachanja.
The Depositor Protection Fund records the directors of Rosestar Properties as William Ruto and Charles Mwangi. In recent correspondence from Rosestar, Cyrus Jirongo has also apparently identified himself as a director. Ruto and Jirongo were in the Youth for Kanu '92 lobby group that campaigned for Moi in the 1992 multiparty elections.
Moi won the election against strong opposition from Kenneth Matiba and the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga. The Rosestar plot was occupied by Administration Police officers until mid- 2009 when a mysterious fire razed their wooden houses and they had to move. Rosestar was allocated the plot in 1996 and used it to take a loan from the collapsed Trust Bank, whose Managing Director was Ajay Shah. By December 2000, the outstanding loan had accrued interest and stood at 5h693,355. The Deposit Protection Fund and the Central Bank of Kenya are holding the title as security. The DPF document remarks "Property is government land. Matter with Ochieng Oduol Advocate. Recovery doubtful"
Yesterday, Jirongo disowned any involvement. "I am not a director in the said company. If you want to verify facts just go to the AG offices and get the records from then registrar of companies. I have never tried to sell any land to the Office of the President," stated Jirongo. However the Commissioner of Lands received a letter in April 2009 signed by 'Hon SK Jirongo" saying "the property is currently charged and we are in the process of redeeming the title for development of the property". The letter said the Minister of Internal Security and Secretary Provincial Administration had agreed to vacate the property.
"I have discussed this issue with the Head of the Civil Service and he is in agreement that this is a private property and therefore not available for allocation to the disabled," the letter states. "That's not my signature on that, letter because I have never written ,any, letter to anybody. Any link to myself can only be motivated by Raila-Ruto wars and them trying to use my name, said Jirongo. Ruto did riot return several calls made by the Star to' his mobile telephone this week.
While cancelling several land title, deeds three weeks ago, Lands minister James Orengo said the land was irregularly allocated to Rosestar Properties Limited. Yesterday, the Star learnt that the minister has already ordered the revocation of the title deed and the return of the land to the Ministry of Immigration. Rosestar Properties was one of Trust Bank's largest debtors when it collapsed. Trust Bank was run down by insider borrowing, unsecured loans and charging of fake titles deeds on loans.
The bank collapsed in 1998 with close to Sh12 billion belonging to depositors. It re-opened three years later and was again shut by the then CBK governor Nahashon Nyagah in 2001. Former Trust bank depositors and shareholders have been fighting a long battle to try and recover some of their lost funds.
They claim that the Deposit Protection Fund and the judiciary have blacked them out on the latest developments after the bank was shut down for the second time by Central Bank. "Most loans were basically insider borrowing. Directors came up with companies and through their nominees and borrowed large sums of money from the bank," stated a former director. Trust Bank had close to 25,000 depositors. The missing funds amounted to Sh12.5 billion.
Ajay Shah was the Managing Director of Trust Bank when it went down. Just before Trust Bank collapsed, Azim Virjee was also a director together with Ajay Shah, Praful Shah and Nithin Chandaria. Praful is also the director of Otis Elevators and Kenya Canvas. Nithin has since become a fugitive in US. Yesterday, the shareholders vowed that they will fight on however long it takes.
When the bank collapsed, many shareholders were heart broken and died. Others have sold their houses and everything they had. We cannot be impoverished when Ajay Shah walks the streets of Kenya a free man," stated a shareholder. ' They accused Central Bank of Kenya (CBK) of breaching a scheme of arrangement where the bank was to operate for four years to recover funds owed to depositors and shareholders.
"The scheme of arrangement was prepared for protection of shareholders and depositors. It was approved by the high court. However, Nahashon Nyagah (then CBK governor) disregarded it and shut it down," stated another former director, who was in the 2001 shareholder team to revive the bank.
Trust Bank loans and eventual collapse of the bank touches on the very sensitive nerves of the then KANU government. It is an issue that has never been resolved. The wahindi who collapsed trade bank are fugitives to date.
You can be sure that once the referendum campaigns start proper, we will hear the real reasons why some people are opposing the land chapter and the kadhis courts. This is where Ruto and Moi will be exposed for who they really are.
The fact that Ruto's company Rosestar have not contested Orengo's title revocation three months after the order was issued clearly tells us that Ruto wants to quietly blackmail Kibaki into ordering the purchase. The immigration department would start development on it. The referendum will certainly change the political matrix.
So when Ruto talks land, ask which land he is talking about. It is certainly not Chebarus squatters who are in his mind. It is HIS grabbed land. This is where he comes together with Moi and Jirongo. Talk of birds of a feather, and there you got them.
-----------------------------------------
A land lease shrouded in mystery
By Vitalis Kimutai
The land lease for multinational tea companies operating in the South Rift has been shrouded in mystery.
While the initial lease is said to have been 99 years, the same is said to have been revised upward to 999 years without consultation with or consent from the residents.
James Finlay Tea Kenya, Unilever (to be renamed Brooke Bond), George Williamsons, Lesla and Sotik Tea are some of the multinational companies with huge chunks of tea estates.
Local leaders have recently demanded that the ownership should revert to the local community and the tea estates be managed by the local authorities on behalf of the residents. Debate has been raging over the years on the circumstances surrounding take-over of the land by white settlers.
Forcibly Taken
“The land was leased out to settlers in the pretext that it was idle while in reality the residents had livestock and crops on it,” Peter Cheruiyot, the chairman Kaptuigeny / Chepchabas Welfare Society, said.
Most of the land is said to have been forcibly taken away from the residents without due regard to human rights issues and the prevailing laws at the time.
The Devonshire White Paper of 1923 clearly states conditions governing land tenure in the colony.
It states that whenever there were conflicts of interest on land use, the interests of the natives were to come before those of white settlers.
The post-independence Sessional Paper No 10 stressed prioritisation of the economic resources / chances for the locals.
SOURCE: Sunday Standard, 18th April 2010
------------------------------------------------
I am happy it is Ruto leading campaign against the draft
By Wanyonyi Wambilyanga
I follow the ongoing debate on the Proposed Constitution with glee. Not because the process is so informed, but rather because the comical characters involved.
Agriculture Minister William Ruto wants to campaign for a 'No' vote in the referendum. Some members of the clergy, too, want to say 'No' to the Proposed Constitution. While it is their right to say whatever they want, I am grateful that it is no longer the Church but a few clerics who are crying foul over the document and a few politicians.
Some of the arguments such people are presenting are so misinformed to an extent of being abstract. A top cleric says abortion is allowed in the Proposed Constitution. How far from the truth can he be? This fellow simply has not read the document. He wants to campaign against something he has not looked at. Isn't this the height of buffoonery? Ruto is crying foul over regional government and land, among other issues. He failed to convince his fellow MPs on numerous occasions why we need to alter the draft so when he calls for an extension of the debate who is he going to talk to?
Land grabbing and ethnicity are two devils we have been forced to live with. Politicians have perfected debauchery in grabbing land and used the tribal card to pit neighbour against neighbour. When a land policy is to be entrenched in the constitution, these chaps are raising a furore.
Show me anyone who owns tens of thousands of acres and I wills show you his relationship with the present and former governments, and the squatters living on the periphery of his land.
I am, however, happy that is is Ruto who will lead the onslaught since apart from Cherangany MP Joshua Kutuny, his crony, I do not think there is any other person Ruto can convince on matters constitution. Ruto has not been doing a good job at winning hearts when it comes to voting.
When he supported Gatundu South MP Uhuru Kenyatta in the 2002 presidential race, it was a debacle. And Ruto has never grasped any opportunity to right his political character. But he is not alone. It was interesting to watch the Reverend Mutava Musyimi among 26 MPs vouching for a 'No' vote.
My dear Reverend aren't these the same legislators who walked out on you when you needed them most? Musyimi pushed for his amendments and the MPs walked out on him when it was time to vote. Will I be wrong therefore to say that this newfound alliance is unholy and its foundation is greed and deceit? Watch out you are not left with egg on your face when the country votes 'Yes' and your faithful abandon you too.
It would be interesting for the clerics to vote 'No' and the day after the vote they read an advert in the papers that the Judiciary is looking for a Chief Kadhi; and that the country will have to put up with fellows who, riding on choppers, apportioned themselves land the size of provinces. What shall it benefit you to gratify your ego and lose your faithful, constituents, and their trust?
Citizens who have been denied their rightful share of land, their heritage, because some powerful persons grabbed more than their fair share must say 'Yes' to the Proposed Constitution to address historical injustices.
The writer is Chief Sub-Editor
Weekend Editions
fwanyonyi@standardmedia.co.ke
SOURCE: Sunday Standard, 11th April 2010
------------------------------------------
Provisions on land a thorn in the flesh of politicians
By Emeka-Mayaka Gekara
The chapter on land is a critical weapon for politicians opposed to the proposed constitution.
They have rejected proposals that Parliament puts a ceiling on land holding, the functions of the National Land Commission and on repossession of irregularly acquired land.
The draft says the commission will administer all public land on behalf of the national government and counties but MPs opposed to the draft say counties should be empowered to administer land as well as game parks and reserves.
The MPs, mainly from the Rift Valley, include Higher Education minister William Ruto, assistant ministers Jebii Kilimo, Jackson Kiptanui and MPs Peris Simam, Sammy Mwaita, Boaz Kaino, Zakayo Cheruiyot, Mithika Linturi, Elijah Lagat and Joshua Kutuny.
The MPs claim that some communities will lose their land while a group of elders from the region has made the baffling assertion that all land titles will be cancelled if the draft is enacted into law.
Absentee landlords
Mr Nzamba Kitonga, the chairman of the Committee of Experts on law review, describes the views as “completely untrue.”
The draft only provides for a national policy that requires absentee landlords to pay taxes on idle land or make it available for use by other Kenyans.
Due to these provisions, there are fears that big landowners – rich political and business families as well as churches – could be pulling strings to derail the constitution.
During debate in Parliament on April 1, a spirited fights to amend the land chapter failed to go through.
Chepalungu MP Isaac Ruto unsuccessfully tried to amend Article 40 which compels the government to protect the right to own property, but excludes irregularly acquired resources. The bid was seen by some MPs as a bid to protect grabbers.
The MP also unsuccessfully tried to amend Article 60 which says land shall be held, used and managed in a manner that is equitable, efficient and in accordance with the security of land rights.
Mr Ruto wanted to insert the words “for all land holders, users and occupiers in good faith” immediately after the word “rights”.
It was argued that if change was accepted, invaders and squatters would justify their action, claiming it was in good faith.
The proposed set of laws has made a strong attempt to ensure marginalised groups such as women have access to land by spelling out that land administration should eliminate gender discrimination.
But the National Land Commission is probably the major hallmark of the new law. Public land in counties will be held by a county government in trust for the residents but administered by the commission.
SOURCE: Daily Nation, 23rd April 2010
------------------------------------------
Don't seek shortcuts nor issue threats if your decision is 'No'
By Gitau Warigi
Some Kalenjin leaders opposed to sections of the draft constitution are citing clauses on land and in particular, the creation of the National Land Commission.
It is important we demystify what they are putting out in order to get to the bottom of their threats. Contrary to what they are saying, their anger is not really about the enactment of a minimum or maximum ceiling on individual land ownership. Actually, they could care less about that.
Their real beef is that land management will remain under the control of the central government. They are furious because the draft denies them control of public land in their local fiefdoms that they want to exercise through a regional jimbo.
This is precisely why they have been shouting themselves hoarse that the draft needs to be amended to accommodate regional, or rather provincial, governments.
The draft has actually placed them in a bind. They would have much preferred a draft that recognised Rift Valley as a wholesome jimbo, which they dream of controlling. Yet even if they got their jimbo without this land control component, they would still cry foul.
However, the draft opted to go for counties, which will operate without much institutional reference to the existing provincial setup. This arrangement, of course, denies these politicians the control they seek over the entire Rift Valley.
The way they were recently rebuffed by Maasai leaders led by William ole Ntimama is a pointer to the sure path to be taken by other Kalenjin counties in the Rift Valley like Nakuru, Samburu, Laikipia and Turkana.
None of them is keen on a self-styled “land commissar” somewhere in Eldoret or Kericho professing to oversee their land affairs.
We often forget that provinces, more so Rift Valley, were not pre-ordained. They were, and remain, arbitrary creations of the colonial government. It is not just Kalenjin who found themselves locked within these new borders. Scores of other ethnicities, both indigenous and immigrant, inhabited this province.
A scheme where just one community asserts as its exclusive right the determination of land and settlement issues within this province must be rejected. The recurrent cases of IDPs in that same province already tells enough.
It is shame church leaders find no problem being in this kind of company. I guess by now they know the jimboists are not animated by the controversy around abortion and kadhis' courts. I would give the bishops a better hearing if, at the onset, they made it clear that they don't care to be poster-boys for this land bandwagon. There are plenty of things wrong with the draft, but none has anything to do with what this eccentric alliance is raising.
What pleases me so far is the way the authorities have come out sternly against inciters and peddlers of hate speech. I notice that the National Cohesion and Integration Commission, led by the aptly named Mzalendo Kibunja, has weighed in with a warning that it will prosecute whomever is caught propagating such speech. The authorities should a keep a particularly keen eye and ear on known political inciters as well as certain rogue vernacular radio stations.
I covered the 2007 election campaigns extensively, and I saw firsthand the particularly poisonous atmosphere hate speech created in the Rift Valley. I also followed closely the testimony of the NSIS director general (the bit that was not on camera) before the Waki Commission and also that of then Commissioner of Police Hussein Mohammed Ali.
It was clear they had reported the explosive atmosphere early enough but were let down by political superiors who failed to take the necessary preventive actions.
Let us be clear on one thing. What is ahead of us is a referendum, which means a contest. That is why people will be voting Yes or No. Otherwise we would simply congregate at Uhuru Park were it possible, and ululate the new constitution into being. If your decision is to go No, don't plead for shortcuts, like calling on the President to to carry out some vague, extra-legal “executive order” to change the draft, or call it back from the Attorney-General in order to railroad your desired amendments through.
That won't work. Just go to the Kenyan public and campaign for your No. And don't confine yourself only to the North Rift. Go and preach your message also to Coast, Nyanza, Western, Nairobi, Central, Eastern, and North Eastern provinces. After all, if you are sure you have a sound argument, what's to fear?
gwarigi@ke.nationmedia.com
SOURCE: Sunday Nation, 25th April 2010
---------------------------------------------
Land the next big hurdle in the way of new law
Unlike divisive aspects such as devolution and representation, the land debate has assumed regional and ethnic dimensions
By Gakuu Mathenge
The land question that has agonised generations is back, threatening to become the biggest hurdle for the Proposed Constitution.
Provisions on the Land Chapter (Article 59) attracted some of the sharpest protests and amendment calls, at the Naivasha consensus retreat by the Parliamentary Select Committee, and during debate in Parliament last week.
Few chapters, including the Bill of Rights, have attracted as much passion, almost bordering on panic, like the Land Chapter.
Unlike traditional divisive aspects as devolution and representation, usually debated along party lines, land debate has assumed regional and ethnic dimensions, with some of the harshest adjectives reserved for the most revolutionary provision in the Land Chapter: the proposal for creation of a National Land Commission to take over administrative and technical functions from the Ministry of Lands.
The passions and patterns on support and opposition of the land provisions are a throwback to the heady days of Lancaster Constitutional Conference in London in the early 1960s that pitted Kanu against Kadu delegates. Indeed, some delegates like former minister John Keen and AR Khalif, among others, refused to sign the final document.
In 2005, land was one of the issues seized on by the opponents of the Draft Constitution to defeat it.
One of the amendment Motions defeated in Parliament last week was from one of the leading opponents of the proposals in the Land Chapter - Chepalungu MP Isaac Ruto.
Irregular Allocations
Ruto sought to reverse the powers of the proposed National Land Commission (NLC) to repossess illegally acquired land without compensation.
NLC will also have powers to establish a national data bank on all aspects of land – ownership and transactions, collection of revenue on behalf of Government, review and resolution of historical injustices, including repossession of public land stolen by individuals over the years.
Others who have lined up against the draft over concerns in the Land Chapter are MPs and leaders from the Coast and Rift Valley, among them former President Moi, Agriculture Minister William Ruto and Co-operative Development Assistant Minister Jebii Kilimo, among others.
Moi last week condemned the document as “bordering on debauchery”.
Lobbies like Kenyans for Equitable Land Laws, Kenya Land Alliance (Kela), Kenya Association of Manufacturers among others, have opposed the land provisions. “The Committee of Experts deliberately ignored all our submissions to the PSC consensus building meetings in Naivasha. We have no choice but to oppose this document,” said Kela spokesperson Chris Foot.
The land proposals are consistent with the National Land Policy hat was passed by Parliament and adopted by the Cabinet last year.
The policy proposed the creation of the National Land Commission and that it be domiciled in the Constitution, along the lines of the Kenya Revenue Authority.
“The National Land Commission shall be a constitutional body. An Act of Parliament, taking into account the need for broad representation, expertise, integrity and equity, shall define its composition. The nominees shall be vetted by Parliament and appointed by the President,” the policy states.
Land Commission's role of spearheading consolidation of all land laws to overhaul decades of decadence at Ardhi House was first proposed by a commission appointed by Moi in 1999, under chairmanship of former Attorney General Charles Njonjo.
Radical Reforms
The Njonjo Commission's report, that described the Ministry of Lands as “rotten and dead” recommended the National Land Authority along the lines of Kenya Revenue Authority, and cancellation of all title deeds to grabbed land, among other radical reforms.
“The Constitution should be amended to recognise title deeds of land that was acquired illegally. Besides taking over key departments of the ministry, the authority will operate branches in every district answerable to people and not the State,” the Njonjo Commission, officially known as Commission of Inquiry into Land System in Kenya, stated.
It was not until a decade later, last year, that the National Land Policy finally became a reality, when Parliament and Cabinet endorsed it.
Land Commission Role
Functions of the proposed Land Commission include:
Hold title to and manage public land on behalf of Government
Exercise powers of compulsory acquisition, and development control on behalf of State and local authorities
Offer technical advice to proposed district and community land boards
Levy, collect and manage all land revenues except rates, which shall be collected by district authorities
SOURCE: Sunday Standard, 11th April 2010
4 comments:
Recently, a minister from the Rift approached a the senior politicians in ODM with a proposal. He wanted the PM to prevail upon Jim Orengo to release the title for the grabbed immigration land so that he could sell. The deal? In exchange for the land, he said he could make peace with the PM. The PM showed him the middle finger and called his bluff. So when you hear of 'enemy number one', know that it is not on principles but grabbed property.
1.Can somebody tell us who has corrupted Eldoret politics for personal gain? 2. Which powerful Cabinet minister grabbed 11.5 acres in the municipality recently? 3. Who grabbed a house belonging to the District Education Officer at Elgon View estate? 4. Whose PA grabbed the Mayors House at Elgon View estate? 5. Whose company grabbed part of City Hall and planned to construct a Petrol Station right next/infront of it? 6. Who grabbed land meant for a municipal Nursery School? 7. Who owns Somok company which has grabbed more than 20 other plots within Eldoret? 8. Who engineered the removal of the former mayor and the election of an incompetent/ sycophants Form 2 drop out mayor? The answers to these questions are in public domain around RV and if you also get access to them then you are likely to agree that “All that glitters is not gold.” Also, a Mswahili has a saying that goes “Kikulacho kinguoni mwako” Haya, have a wonderful day/night and while at it please think of the future of Eldoret.
I recently talked to my father, he is an educated man. But to hear him allege that the proposed constitution will allow the govt (read "Kokoek" ) grab their land made me so sad. The same sentiments are very common going by callers on popular Kale radio station ( of late I have resolved to switch-off from the said station for sake of my peace). Of course this is hearsay fed by wave of propaganda and deliberate mis-information to the public. Quite pathetic, if not a tragedy. I have read the doc three times over. Who will deliver our people from such unhealthy phobias? Pray, why do they imagine they are the only ones who own land in Kenya, and that other communities, even the specific individuals who crafted the laws themselves, are not interested in protecting their property rights?
Tenai
for the NO camp they have their own reasons,for instance abortion issue an health worker can also be a morgue attendant,land those who did grab the land let them carry their own cross,why should a religion be superior than the others?????????AT THE END OF THE DAY WE ARE KENYANS AND WE SHOULD KNOW WHAT MAKES OUR NATION SO WE REGISTER AND VOTER MAY BE WILLIAM KIPCHIRCHIR ARAP SAMOEI HAS A POINT.........
Post a Comment