Ringera and Corruption

One of the tactics to employ when debating is to constantly change the topic, misinterprete questions raised, form your 'own' questions and pretend that those new questions are exactly what your opponents asked and then proceed to answer them. It is a tactic I have used over the years to get the better of anybody in an argument. I am particularly at ease with a careless opponent who thinks there is such a thing a synonmns - two or more words meaning the 'same' thing. That is because I strongly believe in the power of words and have never entertained the thought that two words could ever mean the same thing.

So here we have Ringera. I do not think he has chosen this approach on his own. There must be some amateur behind him. I see traces of mistakes that can only be made by some man trying to learn the ropes as he goes along. For an analysis of their tactics pleasetune in another time.

Ringera was all over the media complaining that he was being accused of being corrupt. He must have known that would be a hard sell because he pinned the charge on the pro-government Daily Nation. Then he listed many cases but left out the names for Mutula Kilonzo to name in parliament this afternoon. That is because Ringera knew that if he named anybody at his press conference, it would both prejudice his case and open him up for private defamation suits by highly resourceful people. So he chose to exploit the freedom guaranteed MPs. I thought that was very mean. However as I shall show, this may well be his biggest mistake. The strange thing with doors is that once open people inside get out and those out get in and in no particular order!

I do not recall anybody ever accusing Ringera of corruption. God forbid! The man earns 2.5 million per month and thanks to his law office partner Kiraitu Murungi, he has a parachute deal that would make those Wall Street upstarts turn red with envy. If one were to start somewhere, then Ringera's judgement would be brought under review:

1. How could a man whose job is to fight corruption not ask Kiraitu Murungi to recuse himself from negotiations and signing of his contract on the grounds that they had worked together as partners in one law firm which they still owned;

2. One of the most important prerequisutes for becoming the Director of Kenya Anti Corruption Commission is a high degree of personal integrity and decorum. Since a large number of people including the majority of parliamentarians have expressed doubts about his commitment to corruption, does Ringera still think he has the integrity the job requires?

Ringera must have thought of all the foregoing and decided he was still qualified. So a decision was made to fight it out. Hence the statement and the further spilling of the beans in parliament by Mutula Kilonzo.

The spilling of beans will be easily dismissed as a poor attempt at blackmail. Already 90% of the MPs and ministers on the list have not been 'vocal' at all and can deny any vested interests.

There is another angle to the whole thing: Most of the MPs and ministers are from Raila Odinga's ODM. That confirms the contention that Ringera has been using KACC as a tool in partisan politics. Missing is the name of Amos Kimunya, George Saitoti and others associated with some of the most recent mega corruption deals. Common with the missing is their closeness to President Kibaki.

There are simple observations one can make:

1. Nobody is on record accusing Ringera of not placing people under investigation. Since no known person made that accusation, I want to assume Ringera has done it himself. In other words it is Ringera who is accusing Ringera of not investigating people. It is the same Ringera who then proceeds to answer his own accusations by causing the names of MPs and ministers to be tabled in parliament by Mutula Kilonzo.

2. It does not matter how many names Ringera tables in parliament. It will not explain the apparent willful incompetence and laziness on his part.

Finally the two committees that have recommended his removal specifically stated that they only addressed the process used to reappoint him and at no time did they discuss or comment on his performance - something they said belongs to the KACC Board.

When RCB is Down

I know whenever RCB goes under. That is because the hits on this site rise. It gives me an idea. Perhaps I should migrate this blog and set up a forum?