House team at pains to probe bribery claims

By ALEX NDEGWA

Allegations of bribery and extortion against MPs have forced Parliament’s Committee of Privileges into launching the first disciplinary probe in a decade.

Mutito MP Kiema Kilonzo has vowed to resign from his parliamentary seat if bribery allegations levelled against him by Finance Assistant Minister Oburu Odinga are proved.

Speaker Kenneth Marende ordered Oburu to furnish his office with evidence of the claims and equally report the alleged incident to the Police Commissioner.

Marende gave similar directions to MPs Martha Karua (Gichugu) and Millie Odhiambo (nominated), who claimed some of their colleagues were compromised to vote against an attempt to regulate interest rates banks charge on loans.

The Speaker warned members that no privileges of Parliament shield any person from criminal prosecution.

Millie alleged MPs were offered Sh50,000 bribes at a luncheon ahead of the vote. Karua claimed two colleagues told her PNU MPs were paid at Panafric Hotel while ODM MPs received their bribes at Gazebo.

Privileges committee

Ironically, the two are members of the Committee of Privileges, which will probe the corruption claims. The Speaker chairs the 10-member team.

Committee members include Attorney General Githu Muigai, Justice Minister Eugene Wamalwa, Education minister Mutula Kilonzo, Assistant minister Peter Munya, and MPs James Gesami, Abdi Nuh, Fred Kapondi, and Chris Okemo.

During the charged session on Thursday, Munya accused Karua of making reckless blanket condemnation. Munya told the House he attended the Panafric meeting and Karua’s claims gave the impression he, too, was compromised. "I did not receive any bribe," the Tigania East MP said.

Yet another unnamed member of the Health Committee has been accused of demanding Sh10 million during an investigation ostensibly to clear pharmaceutical firms alleged to be selling counterfeit drugs.

These are the latest in a string of allegations of corruption that have rocked the Tenth Parliament, which Karua once described as the "biggest auction House in Africa".

Apparently, claims of MPs on the take in cash-for-laws or questions or Motions have grown louder that they can no longer be ignored.

"Without commenting on the veracity or otherwise of these yet unproven claims, I wish to state categorically that in my capacity as the Speaker of the National Assembly, I do not and shall not condone the use of this House or the membership in it for purposes of, or as avenues for corruption or other criminal conduct," Marende warned.

The spotlight now turns on the Committee of Privileges, established under the National Assembly (Powers and Privileges) Act, whether it would speedily get down to the bottom of the claims that have tarnished the reputation of the House.

Alleged breach

According to the Act, the House committee shall, either of its own motion or as a result of a complaint by any person, inquire into any alleged breach by any member of the Assembly of the Code of Conduct issued under Section 9.

The probe shall also be into any conduct of any member within the precincts of the assembly (other than the chamber), which is alleged to have been intended or likely to reflect adversely on the dignity or integrity of the assembly or contrary to the best interests of the assembly.

After the inquiry, the Act says, the committee is to report its findings to the assembly together with such recommendations as it thinks appropriate.

According to rules adopted by the House in 1966, every report by the Committee of Privileges shall, as soon as possible after it has been completes, be tabled by a member of the probe team.

If the report recommends disciplinary action, a member of the committee after giving at least one day’s notice shall move for its adoption. The debate shall, however, be conducted behind closed doors.

"No amendment may be moved, other than an amendment of the disciplinary action recommended by the report, or an amendment to the effect that the report be referred back to the Committee of Privileges for further inquiry," the rules state.

Formal reprimand

Disciplinary action recommended may be formal reprimand at the Bar with or without exclusion, for a period not exceeding one month, from the specified facilities of Parliament Building.

Another sanction is suspension from the House for a period not exceeding 16 days. "In the event of the House adopting any recommendation of any such report for disciplinary action, with or without amendment, Mr Speaker shall forthwith take action accordingly," the rules conclude.

The Act states no proceedings or decision of the Assembly or the Committee of Privileges shall be questioned in any court. However if the report does not recommend any disciplinary action there shall be no further proceedings.

The last time Parliament’s disciplinary organ took action against errant members was in 2001.

Then National Development Party MPs Ochilo Ayacko and Shem Ochuodho were suspended from the House for 10 days after they were found guilty of engaging in a physical brawl within the precincts of the Parliament.

In a report tabled by committee member George Anyona, the disciplinary team found the two, who belonged to different factions of the party, "guilty of gross misconduct".

During the period of suspension, the two legislators forfeited all their parliamentary earnings, including salary and allowances.