On graft, Uhuru can’t eat his cake and have it

The recent arrest of Samburu Governor Moses Lenolkulal on suspicion of corruption and misuse of public funds is yet another of how far we have to go in order to make devolution work for Kenyans. The governor will have his day in court, as mandated by the Constitution. But the damage has already been done. What the government alleges that the governor and his collaborators did is enough grounds for any self-respecting public official to resign. Except that this is Kenya, and no one resigns from office. And given the track record of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Governor Lenolkulal has a strong incentive to hang tight. In due course the case will be thrown out, on account of shoddy investigations and lack of evidence.

After several months of President Uhuru Kenyatta’s declared war on corruption, it is still unclear what his theory of change is. Let me explain. You see, if you want to change a system – like Kenyatta is trying to do by ending endemic corruption in the public sector – you need to understand how specific actions lead to specific outcomes. That is what I mean by theory of change. Does Kenyatta believe that all we have to do to end corruption in the country is to prosecute everyone suspected of graft? If that is the case, do we have the capacity to do so? What would that mean for a political system as thoroughly corrupt as ours? How many governors, Cabinet Secretaries, or Members of Parliament would survive a serious effort to jail all those convicted of corruption? What are possible alternatives to this approach to fighting graft? Is corruption a law enforcement or political issue?