Content area
Full text
(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.)
INTRODUCTION
In 2002, Kenya's ruling political party since independence in 1963, KANU, was defeated in the elections by the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) headed by Mwai Kibaki. One of NARC's most important commitments, together with the replacement of Kenya's 1962 independence constitution, was to fight corruption (Branch et al. 2010; Wrong 2009). In particular the new government undertook to investigate and ensure the recovery of all public lands illegally allocated by the outgoing government (Kibaki 2003). In exercise of the powers conferred on the president by Section 3 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1962, a Commission of Inquiry into the Illegal and Irregular Allocation of Public Land chaired by the lawyer Paul Ndung'u was appointed to investigate this issue. The commission's report (RoK 2004, hereafter 'the Ndung'u report') was presented to President Kibaki in December 2004, and released six months later only after widespread accusations of government censorship in failing to make it public (Africog 2009: 11). 1 The 244-page report, supported by two annexes of 976 and 797 pages, sets out in forensic detail the illegal land awards made over the years to the families of Presidents Kenyatta and Moi, numerous former ministers, members of parliament and civil servants, as well as to individuals in the military and the judiciary. Despite the detail provided in the annexes, it is admitted that the report is incomplete because of the lack of cooperation with which the commission met (Ndung'u 2011 int.; Africog 2009). It provides a snapshot of only a proportion of the illegal/irregular land allocations that have taken place (Aronson 2011 int.; Lamba 2011 int.) The report recommended that a large majority of land titles acquired in this way should be revoked and recommended the rectification of others (RoK 2004: 83-5).
Although it has been widely discussed in the Kenyan media and its findings taken up by leading human rights groups (see Africog 2009; KNCHR & KLA 2006), the Ndung'u report has received less academic attention than it deserves (but see Boone 2012; Kanyinga 2005; Klopp 2008; Southall 2005). In addition, although the economic and social costs of widespread land corruption are likely to be far higher than the overall costs of better-known corruption scandals such as Anglo-Leasing...