Home Blog

Woman loses Sh500,000 from her Co-operative Bank account under unclear circumstances

0

By Correspondent

A Nairobi businesswoman has asked the police to investigate an unauthorised transfer of Sh500,000 from her bank account at Co-operative Bank Kimathi Street Branch in Nairobi.

In her report to the Banking Fraud Investigation Unit of the DCI, she claimed the money disappeared without her knowledge while her account details at the bank were fraudulently altered.

In a formal complaint addressed to the Director of the Banking Fraud Investigation Unit, the businesswoman said she discovered the missing funds on June 23, 2026, when she attempted to transfer money from her bank account to her M-Pesa account.

She said the transaction failed to proceed as expected, prompting her to review her account, where she discovered that Sh500,000 had already been transferred to an account held in Kenya Commercial Bank to a firm whose name has been withheld for legal purposes – transactions she neither authorised nor knows the recipient account holders.

The complainant said she immediately contacted the bank’s customer care service and the branch manager, who assured her the matter would be treated as urgent and advised her to visit Co-operative Bank Kimathi Branch.

While pursuing the matter, she said she also discovered that the email address linked to her bank account had been changed to an old email address without her consent, raising fears that her account may have been compromised.

On June 24, she visited the branch, filled out a formal complaint form, and met the branch manager, who promised to escalate the case to the relevant department for investigation and provide feedback.

However, the woman says she has not received any update from the bank despite the lapse of more than two weeks.

She has since reported the matter to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) Railways Unit and is now seeking the intervention of the Banking Fraud Investigation Unit.

In her complaint, she urged investigators to trace the unauthorised withdrawals, identify those responsible, recover the stolen funds, and ensure the money is refunded to her account.

She also wants investigators and the bank to establish how her account details, including the registered email address, were altered without her authorisation and to outline measures that will prevent similar incidents in future.

The case highlights growing concerns over cyber-enabled banking fraud and unauthorised access to customers’ accounts, as investigators continue to probe the circumstances surrounding the alleged loss.

Co-operative Bank said they are pursuing the matter.

BFIU officials said they had moved to court and obtained orders to freeze accounts that were used in the transactions.

The team handling the saga said they have recorded statements from various parties that were involved in the transactions.

Attempts to get comment from the bank were unfruitful as our calls went unanswered.

Why Developing Countries, NGOs and Climate Implementers Must Prepare for a More Competitive Funding Era

0

By Simon Okola
Founder, Agenda Beyond Borders

Climate finance is changing. The latest GEF-9 replenishment is not just another funding announcement; it is a warning signal to developing countries, NGOs, CBOs, faith-based organisations, county institutions, climate enterprises and local implementers.

The message is clear: the future of climate finance will be more competitive, more selective and more evidence-driven.

In April 2026, the Global Environment Facility’s ninth replenishment, commonly referred to as GEF-9, secured approximately USD 3.9 billion. This is a significant decline from the record USD 5.33 billion raised under GEF-8. At first glance, this may appear to be a normal donor-cycle challenge. But a deeper reading suggests something more important: global environmental and climate finance is entering a tighter political and financial environment.

For organisations working in climate finance, project design, MEAL, donor readiness and implementation, this shift has serious implications. Good intentions will no longer be enough. Urgent community needs will no longer be enough. Climate relevance alone will no longer be enough.

The organisations that will succeed in the next era of climate finance are those that can demonstrate strong evidence, credible implementation systems, bankable project pipelines, measurable impact, co-financing potential and the ability to manage risk.

GEF-9 is therefore not only about the GEF. It is about the changing rules of climate finance.

1. The headline figure hides a deeper financing reality

The headline number is already important. A replenishment of approximately USD 3.9 billion represents about a 27 percent reduction compared to GEF-8. In nominal terms, this is a drop of roughly USD 1.43 billion from the previous cycle.

However, the real issue is not only the size of the replenishment. The bigger concern is the composition of the resources behind it.

GEF-9 is not supported only by fresh donor pledges. It also relies on carry-over balances, arrears, investment income and reflows from non-grant instruments. This matters because fresh pledges represent new political commitment, while carry-overs and reflows partly reflect recycled or accumulated resources.

That distinction is important.

Fresh pledges signal confidence and political willingness from donor governments. Recycled resources may help close the accounting gap, but they do not necessarily show growing donor appetite. In practical terms, GEF-9 suggests that multilateral environmental finance is being stretched at a time when demand for climate and environmental support is increasing.

For developing countries and implementers, the implication is direct: competition for grant-based climate and environmental finance will intensify.

It will no longer be enough to present a project as climate-relevant. Institutions will need to explain why their projects are strategically necessary, technically sound, financially credible and implementation-ready.

2. The climate allocation shift is a major policy signal

One of the most important changes in GEF-9 is the reduced share allocated to the climate change focal area. The climate change focal area reportedly declines from 16 percent under GEF-8 to 9 percent under GEF-9, making it the smallest focal area.

This is not a minor technical adjustment. It is a major policy signal.

Some contributors have argued that the GEF should focus more strongly on non-UNFCCC environmental agreements because dedicated climate finance institutions, especially the Green Climate Fund, already exist. In principle, this argument has some logic. The GEF has a broad environmental mandate covering biodiversity, land degradation, international waters, chemicals and waste, and climate change.

The GEF also argues that climate benefits will still be delivered through integrated programming, mitigation co-benefits and blended finance. That may be true. Many biodiversity, land restoration, water and ecosystem projects can generate strong climate benefits.

But there is a real accountability concern.

When climate outcomes are embedded inside multi-objective programmes, they can become harder to track, attribute and report. This matters for countries working to meet their commitments under the Paris Agreement. It also matters for transparency, MRV systems and reporting under the Enhanced Transparency Framework.

For African countries, least developed countries and small island developing states, the lesson is clear: climate finance is becoming less automatic and more integrated.

That creates opportunities, but only for institutions that can design projects with multiple benefits while still demonstrating climate relevance with precision.

3. Vulnerability alone will not unlock finance

One positive signal from GEF-9 is the protection of resources for least developed countries and small island developing states. Approximately 43 percent of STAR allocations are expected to be ring-fenced for LDCs and SIDS combined.

This is important. In a constrained replenishment environment, protecting resources for the most vulnerable countries is a meaningful recognition of climate and environmental justice.

However, the outcome remains incomplete.

The proposal to replace GDP as the core allocation index with a multidimensional vulnerability index did not fully succeed. GDP remains a major driver of country envelopes. This is a serious limitation because GDP does not fully capture climate vulnerability, exposure, ecological fragility, debt pressure, institutional capacity gaps or the true cost of adaptation.

For climate-vulnerable countries, especially in Africa, the challenge remains that need and vulnerability do not always translate into predictable finance.

A country may be exposed to droughts, floods, food insecurity, ecosystem degradation and climate-related displacement, yet still struggle to access adequate concessional finance.

This is why climate finance readiness is becoming so important.

Vulnerability must be translated into credible investment plans, strong concept notes, measurable indicators, costed interventions, implementation capacity and evidence-based pipelines.

In the next climate finance era, vulnerability will matter. But readiness will determine access.

4. Blended finance is growing, but it is not a universal solution

GEF-9 also confirms the growing importance of blended finance and non-grant instruments. The Non-Grant Instrument share is expected to rise from 7 percent to 10 percent of the envelope.

This reflects a wider shift across the climate finance architecture. As grant resources come under pressure, donors and climate funds are increasingly emphasising leverage, guarantees, concessional loans, private capital, mobilisation ratios and investment partnerships.

This direction is understandable. Public finance is limited, while climate needs are enormous. Blended finance can help scale investment in renewable energy, clean transport, green infrastructure, climate-smart value chains, water systems and nature-based enterprises.

But blended finance should not be treated as a magic solution.

Many urgent climate priorities do not generate immediate commercial returns. Adaptation, community resilience, ecosystem restoration, early warning systems, loss and damage responses, institutional capacity-building, gender-responsive programming and local MEAL systems often require grants or highly concessional finance.

If the climate finance system becomes too focused on leverage and private capital, it risks underfunding the interventions that matter most to vulnerable communities.

The real question is not whether blended finance is good or bad. The real question is: which financial instrument is appropriate for which climate problem?

Revenue-generating projects may require blended structures. Public-good interventions may require grants. Policy reforms may require technical assistance. Community resilience may require predictable local finance.

Strong climate finance design means matching the right financial instrument to the right development challenge.

5. What GEF-9 signals for the Green Climate Fund

The GEF and the Green Climate Fund are different institutions with different mandates. But they depend on the same fundamental reality: donor willingness to pledge and deliver resources.

That is why GEF-9 matters for the future of the GCF.

As donor countries face fiscal pressure, domestic political demands, security spending, debt challenges and competing global priorities, future climate finance replenishments may become more difficult. The next phase of GCF financing is likely to face a more demanding pledging environment.

Donors may place stronger emphasis on private sector mobilisation, co-financing, financial innovation, country ownership, risk management and measurable transformation.

Projects that cannot demonstrate strong evidence, strong economic logic and strong delivery systems may struggle.

For African institutions, this means one thing: preparation must begin before funding calls are announced.

Too many organisations wait until a call for proposals is open before they start designing a project. That approach will not work in a tighter climate finance environment.

Institutions must begin building climate finance pipelines now. They must develop bankable concepts, strengthen data systems, prepare logframes, build partnerships, map donors, assess risks and document community-level evidence.

In the next era of climate finance, readiness will become a competitive advantage.

6. The bigger shift: from expansion to selectivity

GEF-9 may represent more than a difficult replenishment. It may reflect a structural turning point in the political economy of climate finance.

Several pressures are converging at the same time: rising debt, defence and security spending, domestic political backlash against aid, energy costs, migration politics, industrial policy priorities and competition between climate, biodiversity, humanitarian and development finance.

In this environment, donor governments are likely to become more selective.

They will ask harder questions about value for money, co-financing, impact, sustainability, governance and risk. They will demand stronger justification for every dollar committed.

This does not mean climate finance will disappear. But it does mean the rules of access are changing.

The future will favour institutions that can answer five questions clearly:

  1. What problem are you solving?
  2. Where is the evidence?
  3. Why is public finance needed?
  4. How will the project generate measurable impact?
  5. What systems prove that you can deliver?

These are not just technical questions. They are strategic questions. They separate ordinary project ideas from fundable climate investments.

7. What this means for NGOs, CBOs and local implementers

For NGOs, CBOs, faith-based organisations, youth-led organisations and local climate actors, the implications are direct.

Many local organisations have strong community trust, deep contextual knowledge and real solutions. But they often lack the systems that donors and climate finance institutions require. Their ideas may be important, but they are not always packaged in a funder-ready way.

This must change.

Local organisations that want to access climate finance must move from activity-based thinking to investment-ready project design.

They must strengthen their theory of change, problem evidence, baseline data, budgets, risk analysis, gender integration, safeguarding systems, MRV frameworks, sustainability plans and partnership models.

They must also understand the difference between a good community activity and a fundable climate finance project.

A good activity may plant trees.
A fundable climate project explains survival rates, carbon benefits, watershed impact, livelihood outcomes, gender inclusion, governance structure, maintenance systems and long-term financing.

A good activity may train youth.
A fundable climate project links youth skills to green jobs, enterprise creation, climate adaptation, measurable income outcomes and market demand.

A good activity may support farmers.
A fundable climate project demonstrates climate risk, productivity benefits, resilience outcomes, value chain linkages, emissions implications and scalability.

This is the level of readiness the new climate finance environment will demand.

8. The way forward: readiness, evidence and investable pipelines

The conclusion from GEF-9 is not that climate finance is ending. The conclusion is that climate finance is becoming more disciplined.

Public finance will become more contested. Grant resources will become more precious. Blended finance will become more prominent. Donors will ask for stronger proof. Climate funds will prioritise projects that are integrated, scalable, measurable and financially credible.

For developing countries and local implementers, the response should not be panic. It should be preparation.

We need stronger national and subnational climate finance pipelines. We need county-level and community-level projects that are technically sound and investment-ready. We need better MEAL systems, stronger MRV frameworks, credible budgets, bankable concepts and clearer links between climate action and development outcomes.

Above all, we must defend the purpose of public climate finance.

Private capital has an important role to play, but it cannot replace public responsibility. Mobilisation, leverage and alignment are important, but they should not become substitutes for predictable, accessible and concessional public finance for developing countries.

GEF-9 is therefore both a warning and an opportunity.

It warns us that the climate finance landscape is tightening. But it also gives serious institutions a chance to prepare better, design smarter and position themselves more strategically.

At Agenda Beyond Borders, our work is built around this reality. We support organisations to become donor-ready, climate finance-ready and evidence-ready. We help translate strong ideas into fundable concepts, credible proposals, MEAL frameworks, donor pipelines and investment-ready climate programmes.

The future of climate finance will not belong to those who only ask for funding.

It will belong to those who can prove impact, manage risk, structure finance and deliver transformation.

That is the new climate finance discipline. And the time to prepare is now.

About the Author

Simon Okola is the Founder of Agenda Beyond Borders, a climate finance, MEAL and donor-readiness advisory platform supporting NGOs, CBOs, development actors and local implementers to design fundable, evidence-based and investment-ready programmes.

Through Agenda Beyond Borders, he supports organisations in climate finance readiness, donor mapping, proposal development, MEAL systems, MRV frameworks, concept note development and project fundability reviews.

Call to Action

If your organisation is preparing to access climate finance, this is the time to strengthen your readiness.

Agenda Beyond Borders can support you to review your project idea, strengthen your donor-readiness systems, develop fundable concept notes, build MEAL frameworks and prepare stronger climate finance pipelines.

Contact Agenda Beyond Borders:
Website: www.agendabeyondborders.org
Email: info@agendabeyondborders.org
WhatsApp: +254736733500

Sifuna’s sacking: Too little too late

0

By Anderson Ojwang

The Orange Democratic Movement party leader, Dr Oburu Oginga, could have failed to effectively apply the common phrase “strike the rod while it is still hot” in his fight with the immediate former Secretary General Edwin Sifuna.

The decision by the Office of the Registrar of Political Parties to effect the sacking of the Nairobi Senator as ODM Secretary General came too little too late in the battle.

The decision will not have any change on the litmus paper but instead trigger a political moment not only in the party but within the Luhya community and nationally.

In a letter dated 9th July 2026 signed by J.C. Lorionokou, effecting the removal of Sifuna as Secretary General to have been in line with the Political Parties Act and the ODM constitution, the Sifuna political train had already left the station.

“Upon the review of the documents submitted by the party and lack of response from Sifuna, we note that the removal of the Secretary General was in line with the Political Parties Act and the ODM constitution. This office has effected the change and updated the party records,” it read in parts.

Strike when the rod is hot

Dr Oburu’s faction failed to hit the rod while it was still hot and allowed it to cool down. And now there is no turning back, as on Sunday July 26th, Sifuna will have a homecoming rally at the historic Posta Ground in Bungoma, where the community will bless him to seek the presidency. A new chapter and a new vehicle.

Trans Nzoia Governor George Natembeya, on Monday after a 10-hour meeting, announced the programme for the event where the elders and other leaders will bless and release Sifuna to run for the presidency.

He said the Bungoma homecoming rally will be used to unveil Sifuna’s presidential intent and undergo blessing from the community elders and leadership.

“We will be in Bungoma for a homecoming. All leaders will converge in Bungoma on that day. In Bungoma, the elders will bless our son, Sifuna, to go out in search of the presidency,” he said.

Realignment

On Thursday, Natembeya resigned from DAP-K party to form a political alliance with Sifuna’s Linda Mwananchi group and to campaign for his presidential bid.

He said the Monday meeting was to consult and discuss politics and the future of Western Kenya as they head to next year’s general elections.

Natembeya said it was incumbent upon the Luhya community to discuss the future of the community and not relegate it to outsiders.

“We have started to plan our politics, and today we have agreed to start the journey with our people. We will have a meeting in Trans Nzoia on 25th July and a homecoming the next day on 26th in Bungoma,” he said.

In a move aimed at locking the Luhya votes into one basket, Natembeya said the community leaders will then embark on campaigns in all 38 constituencies to rally support for Sifuna.

“We will have meetings in every constituency in the Luhya community, while Sifuna will be traversing the country. We will traverse 38 constituencies in Western Kenya. Our MPs are in Ruto’s camp, so we declare war on them. We will be in one political party in next year’s election,” he said.

The irony

Oburu, who was recently confirmed as the party leader, with the party constitution stating that the party leader is the automatic presidential candidate, left ODM limping after he declared that he would defend his Siaya senatorial seat.

For the first time in 20 years after ODM’s formation, it will not present a presidential candidate, while in the past, it has had a candidate in the late Raila Amolo Odinga.

ODM is looking forward to the pre-election coalition with President William Ruto’s UDA and have already declared support for Ruto’s second term.

Oburu has been flip-flopping over the post of Deputy President, and the Kenya Kwanza lineup of Ruto and his deputy Kindiki Kithure could be on the 2027 ballot.

The colour and offices

Sifuna and his Linda Mwananchi brigades have not been using the ODM colours of orange but have been uniquely blue on their posters.

The faction has not been using the ODM slogans in the rallies, an indication that they had parted ways and built a new home away from the Raila Odinga-founded party.

Recently, Siaya Governor James Orengo was in Mombasa where he met local county branch leaders and aspirants ahead of 2027.

Orengo wrote: “We have officially touched down at the Coast, and the reception has been nothing short of phenomenal! I am deeply honoured by the warm, high-powered welcome from a distinguished Kwale County delegation led by my brothers and national pillars: Sheikh Juma Ngao (Founder and President of the Kenya Muslim National Advisory Council), Hon. Hassan Mohamed Mwanyoha (Former MP for Matuga and the immediate Kwale ODM Chairperson), and Hon. Ashu Mohamed (Mombasa County Women Aspirant). Rejoining the fold to bolster our ranks were our formidable Mombasa leaders, Hon. Hisham Mwidau and Hon. Samba, signalling a united, unwavering front ahead of our week-long Coastal Tour. When we promised to return, we meant it. We are here to fulfil that pledge, touch base with the grassroots, and solidly anchor the Linda Mwananchi Movement across the coastal region. The energy on the ground is palpable, the resolve is unshakable, and the message is clear: the Coast is fully aligned with our progressive vision. The march for economic liberation and true devolution continues.”

Own goal

ODM could have scored an own goal by sacking Sifuna, as it now remains confined in Nyanza while Linda Mwananchi traverses the country and gains traction.

Similarly, the group is enjoying defections from ODM into its folds and is likely to slice a huge chunk of the party cake, leaving it clutching at the tin.

The Oburu wing is currently held in Nyanza, holding series of women empowerment programmes.

The sacking will only add impetus and drive sympathy to Sifuna in his backyard, and it is only a matter of time before he has his last laugh on Oburu and his team.

The call for benevolent dictatorship, a contrast to the Odinga family ideal

0

By Anderson Ojwang

At the altar and comfort of power, right inside State House, the contrast in the Jaramogi Oginga Odinga family showed up.

They say a coin has two sides, and for decades, the only known side of the family coin aligned to the world was the emancipation of democracy and human rights.

For decades, the Jaramogi family sacrificed and laid their lives for a free, fair, and democratic space in Kenya.

But the eldest son, Dr Oburu Oginga, took a different path from his father and younger brother, the late Raila Amolo Odinga, and worked with subsequent regimes, holding senior positions in the government until his father died in 1994, when he was elected Bondo MP.

And through the agitation, the family paid bitter and huge prices, with the late Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, the country’s first Vice President, resigning from the late Mzee Jomo Kenyatta’s administration.

Oginga went ahead to write a book, Not Yet Uhuru, that details his misgivings about the new post-colonial administration.

The Synopsis of the Book Not Yet Uhuru

The 1967 autobiography by Kenya’s first Vice President argues that independence (uhuru) merely replaced colonial rulers with a neocolonial elite.

It details his fight against British rule, his disillusionment with Jomo Kenyatta, and the betrayal of the independence dream.

The book’s core themes include:

The Neocolonial Betrayal: Odinga details how the promise of land redistribution to ordinary Kenyans was subverted. Instead, political elites used buying companies to hoard large tracts of land previously owned by white settlers, leaving the masses landless and economically disempowered.

The Kenyatta Feud: The book chronicles Odinga’s complicated relationship with Jomo Kenyatta. He outlines his vital fight for Kenyatta’s release from British detention, only to later face betrayal as Kenyatta aligned with foreign interests and abandoned socialist, pro-mass principles.

State Repression: It documents the stifling of political opposition, including the suppression of progressive voices and the tragic 1965 assassination of freedom fighter Pio Gama Pinto. These events prompted Odinga to resign as Vice President in 1966 to form an opposition party, the Kenya People’s Union (KPU).

Odinga spent most of his time fighting for democratic space and human rights, which eventually culminated in the repealing of Section 2A in 1997 to allow the first multi-party election.

Apart from Odinga, his son, the late Raila Amolo Odinga, was detained and jailed for years over his struggle for a democratic space in the country.

Raila’s struggle culminated in the 2010 Constitution for the country and often sacrificed for the nation.

The current Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) leader, Oburu, on Wednesday rewound the clock when he urged President William Ruto to adopt what he described as “benevolent dictatorship” when making difficult decisions.

The Call

On Wednesday, while at State House, Oburu, who is currently a close ally of President William Ruto and engaged in a pre-election coalition with Ruto’s UDA party, did not mince his words.

“I encouraged the President to occasionally employ a level of ‘benevolent dictatorship’ to stand firm, cut through the political noise, and make the hard, bold decisions necessary to achieve the absolute best for all Kenyans,” Oburu said.

He said bold leadership was necessary to secure Kenya’s economic future and offered President Ruto candid advice on leadership, urging him to remain steadfast in pursuing policies that serve the country’s long-term interests.

The veteran politician even went ahead to suggest that a “little dictatorship” would not be a bad idea, arguing that decisive leadership is sometimes necessary to ensure critical national programmes are implemented.

“We have been in government, and I was an Assistant Minister of Finance. We tried to move, but the private interests around who want to benefit from small infrastructure, which does not take the country anywhere, always come in to put pressure on the government, making it not to progress. Sometimes there is too much democracy; there should be a little benevolent dictatorship so that some things can move. Mr President, I don’t want to say that you should be a dictator; I am not saying that,” he said.

Reactions

Oburu has come under a barrage of criticism over his call, with leaders arguing that he was watering down the fruits of the Odinga family’s struggle.

Siaya Governor James Orengo termed the call as a national shame by the ODM leadership.

“It is a national shame to hear the ODM Linda Ground faction beg William Ruto to become a ‘benevolent dictator’,” he wrote.

Orengo claimed that President Ruto was already a dictator and wondered what Oburu was up to in his new political venture.

“Let’s be clear: Ruto is already a dictator. We see it every day in the forced abductions, the trumped-up charges against dissenting voices, the forced passage of the punitive Finance Bill, and the illegal fire sale of our public assets,” he said.

Orengo said the letter “D” in ODM stands for Democracy, and Oburu was betraying the course of the struggle by the Jaramogi family.

“It is a betrayal of the highest order for these words to come from the Jaramogi Oginga Odinga family, a family whose blood, sweat, and tears bought the very freedom we enjoy today,” he wrote.

Orengo said Oburu had abandoned the legacy path left behind by the Odingas and was reinventing the wheel.

“To abandon that legacy is to spit on the sacrifices of our liberation heroes. Today, we stood with the Mijikenda elders at the Coast, and their message was loud, clear, and heartbreaking,” he wrote.

Lawmakers Convene Green Investment Dialogue in Kisumu to Unlock Climate Financing

0

By James Okoth

Members of Parliament drawn from both the Senate and the National Assembly are convening in Kisumu City this morning for a high-level strategic dialogue aimed at strengthening collaboration with international development partners, financial institutions, and the private sector to mobilise robust climate finance across the country.

The two-day forum, dubbed the Kenya Parliamentary Green Investment Dialogue (GID) 2026, being held at the Acacia Premier Hotel, is convened under the Parliamentarians for Climate Finance (PCF) project.

The event is backed by the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and organised in partnership with the Climate Parliament, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), and the Parliamentary Steering Committee on Climate Finance.

Co-chaired by Senator Moses Kajwang’ and Njoro lawmaker, Hon. Charity Kathambi Chepkwony, this year’s dialogue marks a deliberate shift from policy exploration to direct legislative action and accountability. It is aimed at building directly upon the foundational policy roadmap established during the inaugural dialogue held in Mombasa in July 2025.

With Kenya facing mounting climate pressures, including erratic rainfall, rising temperatures, and prolonged droughts, lawmakers are seeking concrete pathways to bridge the gap between national climate ambitions and actual investment flows.

“Kenya continues to face mounting climate pressures, from erratic rainfall to rising temperatures, yet finance and investment flows remain significantly below what is required. This event will focus on turning policy into structured, investment-ready realities,” the dialogue organisers noted in a brief to participants.

While Kenya’s updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) set aggressive targets for emissions reduction, current financing remains significantly below what is required.

The core priorities anchoring this year’s agenda include the establishment of Green Energy Zones (GEZs), which involve de-risking community-scale mini-grids, industrial parks, and Special Economic Zones to aggregate energy demand and attract blended finance.

The forum will also focus on the Clean Cooking Transition, which seeks to unlock concessional capital and first-loss guarantees to transition public institutions away from biomass.

A primary focal point of the dialogue is Kenya’s institutional energy challenge. Approximately 90% of the country’s 97,000 public facilities—predominantly schools—still rely entirely on firewood for cooking, consuming an estimated 1.3 million tonnes of wood annually.

To address this, the Parliamentary Steering Committee has formally endorsed the Programme for Accelerating Clean Cooking Transition in Kenya (PACCT). This framework targets GCF support to transition institutions to electric cooking solutions through innovative Energy as a Service (EaaS) models.

Along with other participants, lawmakers are scheduled to experience first-hand the circular economy at Dunga Beach. The critical field visit to Dunga Beach is aimed at granting the lawmakers a face-to-face experience of how an invasive environmental nightmare caused by the water hyacinth has been transformed into an economic engine – a water hyacinth-to-biogas project managed by Biogas International.

Under the initiative, the water hyacinth, which has long choked Lake Victoria’s aquatic life and paralysed local fishing, is now being harvested and combined with fish and food waste.

Lawmakers will also be taken through how anaerobic digestion through the Flexi Biogas system cleanly converts this destructive biomass into high-quality organic biofertiliser and renewable biogas.

By utilising this clean energy source, the local community has successfully displaced traditional firewood, saving local trees, curbing hazardous smoke inhalation, and lowering household costs.

As part of the dialogue, lawmakers will also conduct another field site visit to Nyawara Girls High School to witness a hybrid clean cooking model in action. By introducing a 300-litre electric cookstove alongside traditional firewood, the school managed to drop its termly firewood expenditure from Kshs 150,000 to Kshs 90,000, illustrating a scalable blueprint for green institutional management.

During the forum, legislators are also scheduled to participate in capacity-building sessions covering Carbon Markets, Article 6 Oversight, and Digital Climate Monitoring and Accountability Tools (CMAT).

The final sessions will bring together investors, MPs, and development partners for guided drafting exercises. The outcomes of this final session are expected to feed directly into a legislative roadmap that the lawmakers will champion in Parliament, including a Motion on institutional clean cooking currently being spearheaded by Senator Hamida Ali Kibwana.

Ruto’s Kalenjin power takeover script may come to haunt Wetang’ula and Mudavadi with the emergence of Sifuna

0

By Anderson Ojwang

In 2005, during the constitutional referendum, then Kanu Secretary General William Ruto developed a power takeover script from the nose of then immediate former President Daniel Arap Moi.

In Moi’s power script for the Kalenjin community, he told the community to listen to then former Cabinet Ministers Henry Kosgey and the late Nicholas Biwott as the community spokespersons.

In President Moi, he handed over the power baton to the two leaders to lead the community into any future political negotiations and asked the community to ignore Ruto.

But Ruto, who became a cog in the Orange movement against the Wako draft constitution and a student of the late Raila Amolo Odinga, rebelled and challenged the new Moi power matrix.

Ruto, with the support of Raila, organised a political ceremony at Eldoret Sports Club, where he was installed as a Kalenjin elder and subsequently the community spokesperson.

Ruto scored in his battle to galvanise the Kalenjin community and became their leader and finally rode to the presidency.

The script replay

Currently in Luhya land, the National Assembly Speaker Dr Moses Wetang’ula and Prime Cabinet Secretary Dr Musalia Mudavadi have been the mouthpieces of the community in the political dispensation.

Already the duo have declared presidential interest for the 2032 race and are supporting Ruto’s re-election plan.

Ahead of the 2022 general elections, the two leaders entered into a political alliance with Ruto to form the Kenya Kwanza Coalition and negotiated on behalf of the community.

Mudavadi and Wetang’ula have been leading President Ruto’s second-term re-election campaigns in Western Kenya but have started witnessing resistance from the community over the emergence of ODM Secretary General Edwin Sifuna as a potential presidential candidate in the 2027 general elections.

Musalia and Wetang’ula have already declared presidential intent for 2032 and will be supporting President Ruto’s re-election.

“In 2013, I traversed Western Kenya with Raila and the same in 2017. In 2022, I saw ahead and came with Ruto. We want to unite the Luhya and seek alliances with the Luo and the Kalenjin communities,” Wetang’ula said.

The Luhya declaration, June 26th

The June 26th 2026, on a Sunday in Bungoma County, will mark a new political dispensation for the Luhya community.

A homecoming for Sifuna and a day Luhya elders and the community will converge to bless and release him to the world to seek the presidency.

Trans Nzoia Governor, after a recent meeting, announced the homecoming and the important ceremony for Sifuna by the community before he goes out to seek the presidency.

He said the Bungoma homecoming rally will be used to unveil Sifuna’s presidential intent and undergo blessing from the community elders and leadership.

“We will be in Bungoma for a homecoming. All leaders will converge in Bungoma on that day. In Bungoma, the elders will bless our son, Sifuna, to go out in search of the presidency,” he said.

Sifuna’s script is similar to Ruto’s, who after his installation declared his presidential ambition and went ahead to contest for the ODM presidential nomination against Raila, Mudavadi, Najib Balala, and the late Joe Njaga.

And now Sifuna is emerging as one of the possible presidential contenders, and the Bungoma homecoming will mark a new chapter in his political journey.

Last Monday, leaders from the Luhya community in the opposition converged in Trans Nzoia in a meeting hosted by Governor George Natembeya and included Sifuna, Vihiga Senator Godfrey Osotsi, among others.

Natembeya said the meeting was to consult and discuss politics and the future of Western Kenya as they head to next year’s general elections.

Natembeya said it was incumbent upon the Luhya community to discuss the future of the community and not relegate it to outsiders.

“We have started to plan our politics, and today we have agreed to start the journey with our people. We will have a meeting in Trans Nzoia on 25th July and a homecoming the next day on 26th in Bungoma,” he said.

The plan

In a move aimed at locking the Luhya votes into one basket, Natembeya said the community leaders will then embark on campaigns in all 38 constituencies to rally support for Sifuna.

“We will have meetings in every constituency in the Luhya community, while Sifuna will be traversing the country. We will traverse 38 constituencies in Western Kenya. Our MPs are in Ruto’s camp, so we declare war on them. We will be in one political party in next year’s election,” he said.

President Ruto has mapped Luhya land as one of his vote blocks, and the entry of Sifuna is complicating the 2027 arithmetic.

I will not let you down

For the first time, Sifuna came out purposeful and declared to the Luhya community that he will not let them down.

Sifuna has to contend with the harsh reality of overcoming the elusive Luhya unity, which for decades has been a mirage.

He thanked the community and the leaders for standing by him in his political quest.

“We were together in a 10-hour meeting with these leaders. I want to thank Natembeya. He has brought us together to speak and consult. I need Natembeya in my journey. I will not let you down. We are coming home to Bungoma, and I have traversed this country. They want leadership change. I am confident,” he said.

Sifuna’s emergence

Sifuna’s sudden rise has been because of his opposition to the broad-based government and his alleged sacking by the Dr Oburu Oginga-led faction as Secretary General.

“That is where the ODM Secretary General, Sifuna, saw the vacuum and took the opportunity. The truth is Sifuna has come out when there is opportunity, and the age factor is on his side. The Luhya community is big. Which ODM leader has come to Mt Kenya and people turn up in huge numbers if it is not Sifuna? Sifuna is accepted across the board. I have put my ambition aside. Sifuna Tosha,” Murang’a Governor Irungu Kangata said.

President Ruto’s script may be unfolding in Luhya land, and it is only a matter of time before he comes face to face in contest with his own script.

The critic Mbadi wins Ruto’s heart, to get space in the President’s book

0

By Anderson Ojwang

The once fiercest critic of President William Ruto and his government, then Orange Democratic Movement National Chairman John Mbadi, has today emerged as the blue-eyed boy and the most trusted lieutenant.

Mbadi has walked himself into the heart of the President, such that on Wednesday President Ruto openly said the National Treasury Cabinet Secretary will be given space in his book.

The President emotionally lavished praise on Mbadi for helping stabilise the ship.

“Today, John Mbadi, National Treasury Cabinet Secretary, is providing leadership that has never been witnessed. I can confirm to you, John, that when I write my book, you will have ample space on what you and I have discussed. And your team at the Treasury, of course, including all the other actors that have taken this to the future,” Ruto said.

The President said the country had made huge strides in its economic recovery and thanked those responsible.

“We can proudly say today that in three years we were staring at default, and we had dollar reserves for only two and a half months of import cover, that was about 5.7 billion dollars of import cover. Today, our foreign exchange reserve is going to seven months of import cover. We are almost tripling our foreign exchange reserve. That is extraordinary. I want to thank these great men who have assisted me. Numbers are beginning to show,” he said.

Let’s give Ruto his skunk

After the 2022 general election and President Ruto’s appointment of his first cabinet, Mbadi, while contributing in the Assembly, asked the legislators to either reject 60 percent of the appointments or give Ruto his skunk.

“What was informing the appointments of these members to the cabinet? This was a cabinet informed by political expediency,” he said.

Mbadi said the President had appointed 2027 regional campaign coordinators.

“The President is telling us to give him a cabinet which is not going to function. He is ready to run the government machineries from State House using advisors. We have a choice whether to reject 60 percent or give President Ruto his skunk,” he said.

He said the cabinet was least qualified and never merited to lead the country.

“The cabinet is deficient in academic, integrity, professionalism, competence, and experience. Very many people with cases. Some were received from office on matters of corruption,” he said.

No betrayal but loyalty

After the formation of the broad-based government and the subsequent appointment of Mbadi as Treasury Cabinet Secretary, the once fiery critic went overnight from Saul to Paul.

Mbadi pledged his loyalty to President Ruto, saying nothing will make him break his trust in the President.

In 2024, at a function in Ndhiwa, Mbadi recognised the confidence and risk the President took to appoint him, making it hard for him to betray him.

“The President can give you any ministry but not the Ministry of Finance. The kind of confidence and the risk that he (Ruto) took to appoint me makes it very difficult for me to betray him,” he said.

Mbadi said he will not betray the President but will remain loyal to his course in delivering service to Kenyans.

“What I want is to work for him (Ruto), to make things that are not working work. Once we have corrected and made things work, we will come and tell Kenyans that we want you to give us another opportunity to continue working,” he said.

Expel Sifuna

Mbadi never wasted words in calling for Edwin Sifuna’s expulsion from ODM as Secretary General over what he viewed as his obstruction to the broad-based government coalition and opposition to President Ruto’s regime.

Mbadi, on several occasions, questioned Sifuna’s continued stay in ODM, arguing that the Nairobi Senator was already conflicted and effectively serving the interests of other political forces.

“Someone like Sifuna will not remain in ODM because already he is conflicted. He is now selling the agenda of someone else. Why are you pretending? You cannot keep him in the party; he is gone. Allow him to go,” Mbadi said.

Uhuru Kenyatta

Mbadi has not spared former President Uhuru Kenyatta over what he claimed as ‘fake’ support for Raila Odinga’s presidential bid in the 2022 general elections.

Mbadi claimed Uhuru played Raila in the race to State House and that the Luo community should support President Ruto’s re-election as President.

Stability in the ministry

Mbadi, in his two years in office, has developed a new approach and strategy through public engagement, which has thawed public opposition to the Finance Bill.

A gifted orator, Mbadi has tackled public and emerging issues, creating confidence and repositioning the President’s agenda.

“The government is stable. I don’t understand how anyone can claim it is failing,” Mbadi said.

Mbadi has dismissed criticism of Ruto’s administration as politically motivated and unfair.

Mbadi said those attacking the current government overlook the progress being made in key sectors.

“The critics calling for the President’s removal fail to provide valid justifications for their stance, asserting that the government has addressed long-standing issues that have plagued critical sectors for years,” he said.

The defender

Currently, Mbadi stands out as the main and leading defender of President Ruto’s administration. He has outfoxed those in UDA and the broad-based government to become the biblical Peter among the President’s disciples.

“Some people say President Ruto’s government must go, yet when asked why, they claim nothing is happening,” said Mbadi. “But for a decade before Ruto, there were constant complaints about tea, coffee, sugar, and dairy. Today, you don’t hear about those issues because this administration has tried to fix them.”

Mbadi said the agriculture sector was in crisis before Ruto’s presidency but has since seen significant improvements.

“The same applies to the health sector, where the current government has invested more than any other administration in Kenya’s history, a fact he claims remains unrecognised. There are people who are opposing the President today simply because his name sounds strange. It’s not because negative things are happening in this country that have never happened before,” he said.

Tutam

Currently, Mbadi has been engaged in economic empowerment programmes aimed at selling President Ruto’s second-term agenda.

In Nyanza, Mbadi has been traversing every corner and leading in fundraising and campaigning for the President.

“In 2027, UDA and ODM must work together. I have been chairman of ODM for ten years. Looking at the dynamics of politics in this country, we don’t have a choice. The two parties must collaborate – if not for anything else, just to lead the unity of Kenya,” he said.

In Mbadi, Ruto got a true soldier, and indeed, he rightly deserves a space in his book.

Political rivalry rocks North Rift as President Political rivalry rocks North Rift as President Ruto’s allies in supremacy battle

0

By Anderson Ojwang

Political rivalries could be unfolding in the North Rift, the home turf of President William Ruto.

While President Ruto is traversing the country and building alliances ahead of the 2027 general elections, all is not well in his backyard of North Rift.

The political unity witnessed during the 2022 general election has currently been put to test and could be undermining Ruto’s 2027 political strategy and campaigns.

Interestingly, South and Central Rift have remained calm, but the battle over the post-2027 elections and the supremacy battle clouding President Ruto’s agenda is heating up in North Rift.

What is cooking?

Among those sparring are his key appointees in the government: Internal Security Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen from Marakwet and the Principal Secretary for the Treasury, Dr Kiptoo, a Keiyo.

The battle has been escalated down to the elected leaders, who have rolled up their sleeves in a fierce contest.

2027 politics and the kingpin

Kericho Senator Aaron Cheruiyot was shocked by the political fights and rising political temperatures in the North Rift region.

The Senate Majority Leader appealed to the leaders to resolve the differences internally without washing their dirty linen in public.

He was concerned over political tension between Uasin Gishu Senator Jackson Mandago and Governor Jonathan Bii Chelilim.

“As leaders, you should have sorted the differences internally without bringing the issues out in the open to the people,” he said.

What is the problem?

What could be happening at the President’s backyard of North Rift? Why is there fire and rising political tension in the region at a time when President William Ruto is consolidating other regions?

While President Ruto is busy building bridges and seeking votes across the country, at his home turf, fire is consuming his political foundation and threatening to undermine it.

At the backyard of President William Ruto in North Rift, a fierce battle has broken out over what could have been precipitated by the post-2027 elections and supremacy battle.

Battle lines drawn

The battle lines have been drawn and do not only pit the two top leaders from the region – Internal Security Cabinet Secretary Kipchumba Murkomen against Treasury Principal Secretary Dr Kiptoo – but are fast spreading to other elected leaders.

The two leaders hold the most crucial positions in President Ruto’s administration and have been viewed as the face of the Kalenjin community from the North Rift.

Uasin Gishu Senator Mandago has accused Murkomen of being preoccupied with presidential ambition and kingpin aspirations.

But Murkomen dismissed the allegation, saying he supports every elected leader from the region, including Mandago.

“For me, I am not looking for any vote. My job is to support the President and those who have been elected,” he said.

He said the Kalenjin community should focus on President Ruto’s second term and not sideshows.

Murkomen wondered why there was a campaign for “kingpin” and “queenpin.”

“Let us support Ruto. That is the agenda we have now. Let us forget what is in the forest; its time is still far away,” he said.

Murkomen said he will not be bothered by the attacks but was committed to supporting President Ruto.

“If I hear someone saying Murkomen is bad, I only say thank you. Because it is God’s love and will that I am where I am today,” he said.

The fight

Kesses MP Julius Rutto accused Murkomen of waging war on PS Dr Kiptoo over his development programmes in the county.

“We have a problem. For those people whom the President has appointed, and if you are a Cabinet Secretary like that one of Internal Security, your duty is also to bring Kenyans together. Your work is to support the President’s agenda and other elected leaders,” he said.

He said Murkomen was engaging in local politics instead of serving Kenyans and creating confusion in the community.

“When you see the CS has forgotten about his role and he has come back to engage in local politics. Today you are in Kericho creating confusion and chaos, and then you move to Bomet. In Keiyo, you are fighting the Principal Secretary of the National Treasury, Dr Chris Kiptoo,” he said.

Rutto said the PS was engaged in planning the national treasury and the economy while Murkomen was waging unnecessary war against him.

“Dr Kiptoo is not engaged in politics but planning the national treasury and helping grow the economy. What is wrong if Kiptoo takes development to the people? Why are you feeling jealous of him? What is wrong if the PS has the support of people at home? The PS is only doing the noble duty of development at home. It is common fact that the local leadership and the community support Kiptoo for his development programmes,” he said.

The MP accused the CS of recently visiting Uasin Gishu with a view to causing political confusion.

“Recently you came to our county and tried to cause confusion by calling us tribal. Senator Mandago, when he was the governor, employed all communities. We had two CECs from Marakwet,” he said.

He accused Murkomen of only employing people from his region in the recent police recruitment exercise.

“In the recent police recruitment, records show that you only employed people from your area and ignored North Rift,” he claimed.

Rebuttal

But Keiyo South MP Gideon Kimaiyo, Murkomen’s ally, said they will not allow any form of attack on the Cabinet Secretary.

“I want to tell those who want to play with Murkomen. Murkomen is our son. There are some leaders who want to undermine Murkomen,” he warned.

He said attempts to undermine Murkomen will be rebuffed at all cost.

“Even though Murkomen is a national leader, he is our leader here at home. We will not allow some people to undermine Murkomen. I want to tell those leaders, if you see us silent, know that Murkomen also has his home and people,” he said.

How comedy replaced political violence, thuggery in Migori County

0

By Anderson Ojwang

Migori County for decades was known as the mother and father of political violence and thuggery. The language best and most spoken in the county was violence.

Bloodbath and political deaths were the order of the day and never became news. It was normalised.

Political events were punctuated by violence and thuggery. Goons ran havoc, and nearly all political gatherings were disrupted.

Even the Orange Democratic Movement party leader, the late Raila Amolo Odinga, was not spared. Respect was thrown out through the window.

Victims

In 2017, ODM luminaries, then Mombasa Governor Hassan Joho, his Kisumu counterpart Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o, among others, tasted the wrath of Migori.

Some had to hide under the table to survive as violence erupted at the party’s function at Migori Stadium, and that marked the last time several ODM luminaries attended a political function in the county.

Governor Ochilo Ayacko and former Cabinet Minister the late Dalmas Otieno Anyango, during the battle for Rongo Constituency, turned the area into Darfur – a war zone.

Ayacko and the immediate former Governor Okoth Obado were often embroiled in running battles.

But with the exit of Obado, the political violence and thuggery transferred to between Ayacko and Suna West MP Peter Masara, who is also eyeing the gubernatorial seat.

Ayacko-Masara battle

Earlier in the year, after three years of calm, two days of political violence rocked Migori town following Ayacko and Masara’s engagement in a superiority battle.

At a funeral in the area, Ayacko got a dose of his own medicine and was forced to seek protection from the police station after chaos descended at the funeral they both attended.

At the funeral, Ochilo and Masara fought over protocol, with the latter demanding that he speak first before inviting the governor to speak.

Commotion broke out over the tussle on who should speak first, and the tussle over the microphone forced the mourners to flee and police to intervene.

Ochilo later went to report the incident at a local police station and accused Masara of allegedly orchestrating violence against him at the funeral.

Both Ochilo and Masara recorded statements with the police over the violence, with County Police Boss Samwel Boit saying the fracas began over a confrontation on who should speak first.

“The chaos broke out over who should speak first at the funeral, and when Masara attempted to take the microphone from Ochilo, violence broke out,” he said.

Ochilo blamed Masara for the chaos and asked him to campaign in peace instead of engaging in violence.

“I got the opportunity to condole with the family, but the area MP came and created chaos. He allegedly brought 500 youths armed with crude weapons. But as a governor who is peace-loving, I opted not to engage in political violence.”

But Masara denied this, instead accusing Ochilo of getting police protection to intimidate his opponents.

“When the governor arrived, and before he could even stay for 20 minutes, he took over the microphone, saying he wants to invite me to speak in my constituency. That is not protocol. The protocol requires that I am the one to invite him and not vice versa. I am the one to invite him in my constituency. He went for police reinforcement from Migori Central Police Station, and four land cruisers carrying officers were brought to the funeral, but they only protected Ochilo.”

Comedy

Uriri MP Mark Nyamita changed the chapter of Migori politics when he ventured into comedy-laced politics, christening Governor Ayacko with names such as “Oyundi” – a small lazy bird that only appears at mealtime and doesn’t want to eat.

Ayacko, in turn, named Nyamita as “Chiwawa” – a small pet dog known for noise but cannot bite – and “Othuogo” (shortness) because of his height.

The use of symbolism in their speeches and figures of speech became the political engagement, and violence took a back seat.

Nyamita said: “Ayacko recently called me Chiwawa. Chiwawa is an alert dog. And that is why I am alerting you of corruption cases. Ayacko is a German shepherd because he is used to pangas and violence.”

The bye moment

Nyamita has developed a political phrase and salutation that is gaining popularity with the electorate and audiences.

In his new phrase, Nyamita engages the audience to wave “bye” to Ayacko in 2027.

In the phrase, Nyamita says “Ochilo Ayacko bye” and the audience responds with a wave, saying “bye,” and the salutation is concluded with a catchy statement: “Dhi dala koso odhi? (Going home or not going home?)” and the crowd breaks out in laughter with a response: “Dhi dala (Going home).”

Nyamita may have coined the phrase and the salute in his political quest to become the third governor of Migori.

That is why when Nyamita usually rises to speak, he says that.

But Ayacko is not taking the jibe lying down and has repackaged himself as the grandson of Sinakuru Kukulubaga ma Dogma in a fierce battle with Nyamita and his opponents.

The banter

The Nyamita and Ayacko banter has been on development, with each questioning the other’s performance.

And now, with the elections 14 months away, Migori will be the centre of theatre and laughter.

Selective name-dropping and “untouchable officials” in the Ruaraka land saga shows it’s not about justice but politics

0

The court record tells a story of institutions, not a single personality

Few public controversies in recent years have generated as much political debate as the Ruaraka land saga. Yet beneath the headlines, accusations and campaign speeches lies a more complicated reality, one reflected in the official court record.

The dispute that has occupied courts, investigators and policymakers was never about a single individual. It involved multiple public institutions, statutory agencies and government offices, each playing a distinct role in a process that culminated in the payment of billions of shillings in compensation.

The Environment and Land Court reference and the subsequent appeal revolve around the actions of the National Land Commission, the Ministry of Education, the National Treasury, land administration agencies and other public bodies involved in the acquisition and compensation process. The courts examined questions of land ownership, compulsory acquisition, due diligence, valuation and the use of public funds.

Accountability in government is rarely a one-person affair

Major government decisions do not originate from a single office. They pass through ministries, accounting officers, technical departments, legal advisers, oversight agencies and statutory approval processes.

The Ruaraka compensation process followed the same path.

The National Land Commission conducted the compulsory acquisition. Valuations were undertaken. Government agencies exchanged correspondence before public funds were processed and compensation paid. It was only afterwards that oversight bodies questioned both the legality of the acquisition and the payment.

The court proceedings reflect that institutional chain. They examine the conduct of public bodies exercising statutory mandates rather than the actions of one individual.

The difference between legal responsibility and political narratives

Public debate rarely follows the same path as legal proceedings.

Courts are guided by evidence, documents and statutory obligations. Politics is driven by personalities, messaging and public perception.

While the litigation concerns a network of institutions and private entities, much of the public discourse has increasingly centred on individual political figures instead of the broader decision-making framework.

This is not to suggest that public officials should be insulated from scrutiny. Rather, accountability is most credible when it reflects the complete institutional record.

What the current debate leaves out

One striking feature of the renewed debate is how little attention is paid to the broader governmental framework within which the disputed transactions occurred.

Complex institutional processes have increasingly been reduced to discussions about a handful of political personalities, even though the official record points to a much wider chain of decision-making.

At the same time, the focus of investigations appears to be shifting.

As the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission intensifies efforts to trace the compensation money, Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi welcomed the move, posting on X:

“Right step in the right direction. Sue the lawyers who received the money… do proper tracing. Congratulations @EACCKenya.”

His remarks reflect the growing view that accountability should extend beyond the approval of compensation to everyone who benefited from the transaction.

PSs Belio Kipsang and Kamau Thugge: Missing from the conversation?

The compensation process unfolded through multiple government offices, including the education and treasury sectors, each with statutory responsibilities in public finance and administration.

Yet recent public debate has largely revolved around Fred Matiang’i, while comparatively little attention has been directed at other senior officials who occupied key offices during the period, including former Treasury Principal Secretary Kamau Thugge and former Education Principal Secretary Belio Kipsang, both of whom continue to serve in senior public positions.

Whether this reflects political messaging, media framing or other factors is open to public debate. What is clear from the court record is that the dispute itself concerns institutional processes rather than the actions of a single office holder.

The Ruaraka land saga, Fred Matiang’i and 2027

The renewed political focus on the Ruaraka land saga comes at a time when Fred Matiang’i has emerged as one of the country’s leading opposition figures and a potential presidential candidate in the 2027 election.

That timing has inevitably fuelled debate about whether politics is shaping public perceptions of the case.

Regardless of those differing views, one principle remains constant: public accountability is strongest when it follows the documentary record, applies consistently across institutions and individuals, and avoids reducing complex government decisions to the actions of a single public figure.