President Uhuru Kenyatta’s family, the political dynasty that has dominated Kenyan politics since independence, for many years secretly owned a web of offshore companies in Panama and the British Virgin Islands, according to a new leak of documents known as the Pandora Papers.

The Kenyattas’ offshore secrets were discovered among almost 12 million documents, largely made up of administrative paperwork from the archives of 14 law firms and agencies that specialise in offshore company formations.

Other world leaders found in the files include the King of Jordan, the prime minister of the Czech Republic Andrej Babiš and Gabon’s President Ali Bongo Ondimba.

The documents were obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and seen by more than 600 journalists, including reporters at Finance Uncovered and Africa Uncensored, as part of an investigation that took many months and spanned 117 countries. Though no reliable estimates of their net worth have been published, the Kenyattas are regularly reported to be one of the richest families in the country.

The Kenyattas’ offshore secrets were discovered among almost 12 million documents, largely made up of administrative paperwork from the archives of 14 law firms and agencies that specialise in offshore company formations.

They are well known in Kenya as the owners of a vast business empire, including significant interests in the banking, insurance and media sectors, as well as hotels, agricultural land and the large Brookside dairy on the outskirts of Nairobi.

But what has not been known is their activity through tax and secrecy havens, maintained by a network of bankers, advisers, offshore service providers and front figures.

Seven members of the Kenyatta family are revealed through the Pandora Papers as being variously connected to 11 offshore companies and foundations.

The documents reveal that family members have used offshore companies to own three properties in the United Kingdom. One, a flat near Westminster in London, now worth an estimated £1m, was until this summer rented out to a British Member of Parliament, although she did not know who owned it.

The Pandora Papers also show that Muhoho Kenyatta, the president’s younger brother who manages large sections of the family’s businesses, owned an offshore company with a portfolio of cash, stocks and bonds worth $31.6m in 2016.

Other documents in the leak show a foundation set up in Panama in 2003 for the president’s now 88 year old mother, “Mama” Ngina Kenyatta. Upon her death, all the assets held in the foundation were to pass to her son, Uhuru.

The Pandora Papers contain only a handful of clues about the purpose of the Kenyattas’ offshore interests or what funds and assets they might have placed in these secretive entities.

One document simply says a company in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) had been set up by Kenyatta family members with “savings from their family and their activities”.

In 2018, President Kenyatta (pictured below in Nairobi last week) was asked about his family wealth during an interview on the BBC’s Hardtalk programme. He said: “I have always stated, what we own, what we have, is open to the public. As a public servant, I am supposed to make my wealth known and we declare every year.

The Pandora Papers also show that Muhoho Kenyatta, the president’s younger brother who manages large sections of the family’s businesses, owned an offshore company with a portfolio of cash, stocks and bonds worth $31.6m in 2016

“And I have always said: ‘If there is an instance where somebody can say that what we have done or obtained has not been legitimate,’ say so: we are ready to face any court.”

Jack Blum, an American financial crime lawyer and former staffer on the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said: “If you see that a prominent political family has set up offshore arrangements it certainly would pique one’s interests. You would really have to begin to investigate further because the question would be: Have state assets… been moved and used for the benefit of the individuals involved?”

However, Blum added: “Now, can we say with certainty that the simple use of [offshore companies] is evidence of some kind of criminal activity? I would have to say ‘No’. You have to do a lot more work.”

The Pandora Papers show no evidence that state assets have been stolen or hidden in offshore entities controlled by the Kenyattas.

We tried to contact President Uhuru Kenyatta, his brother Muhoho, his mother Ngina and all relevant members of the Kenyatta family, as well as the president’s office in Nairobi. We asked why they had set up complex corporate structures in some of the world’s top secrecy havens, how much money they had taken offshore and where that money came from. We also asked whether they still used the entities and if so what assets they currently contain.

No-one acknowledged or responded to our letters, emails, phone calls and texts.

There is nothing unlawful about using secrecy structures or making overseas investments. Many wealthy families choose to spread their investments overseas, particularly when their home country faces political or economic turmoil. This is known as capital flight.

However, capital flight — whether lawful and illicit — often drains local investment and increases inequality.

Attiya Waris, Professor of Fiscal Law at the University of Nairobi, said that when ruling elites are discovered to have parked cash offshore, it “is a signal to the rest of the economy that they can do the same”.

She said: “The kind of knowledge on how to do this circulates among professional classes such as lawyers and accountants and they use it to implement the system for others, drawing even the middle classes into engaging with capital flight.”

The Pandora Papers contain only a handful of clues about the purpose of the Kenyattas’ offshore interests or what funds and assets they might have placed in these secretive entities.

Transparency and anti-corruption campaigners have long argued public officials should fully disclose their assets and earnings.

Waris said while complete transparency was never realistic, the concept itself is critical, particularly when countries are trying to rebuild themselves in the wake of the global pandemic.

“The greater the disparities in wealth are in a country, the more you have social problems,” she added.

Under Kenyan law, President Kenyatta is required to make asset declarations for him and his wife, though they are not made public. However, as in most other countries with such requirements, asset disclosure rules do not extend to the wider family.

The findings from the Pandora Papers come as Kenya enters an election period. President Kenyatta is constitutionally bound to step down from office in 2022 after eight years in office — two terms that have seen improved infrastructure yet concerns about inequality and national debt.

First Family

President Kenyatta has carefully nurtured the reputation of the country’s “first family”. It is a family whose history is tied inextricably to the country’s independence and a business empire employing thousands of people.

Uhuru’s father, Jomo Kenyatta, swept to presidential power as a near-penniless independence activist in 1963, ushering in the birth of a new republic.

His status and reputation as the father of the nation grew. So too did his family’s wealth.

But by the time he died in 1978, there were already murmurs.

As noted in a now declassified report by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), written days after Jomo’s death, there were allegations of controversial land dealings involving the Kenyattas.

The report said funds provided by foreign governments — earmarked to pay for redistribution of land from colonial settlers back to landless Kenyans — had instead allegedly been used by the Kenyattas and their associates to buy land for themselves.

US intelligence officers wrote that there was “growing public disenchantment with the Kenyatta clan’s economic monopoly”.

While Jomo Kenyatta himself owned only about half a dozen properties, on roughly 4,000 hectares of land, his fourth wife Mama Ngina owned at least 115,000 hectares including a large ranch, two tea plantations and three sisal farms, the report said.

The Pandora Papers show that in the late 1990s, Swiss wealth advisers had begun helping with the financial affairs of Mama Ngina and other members of her family.

The Swiss advisers, in turn, used an offshore law firm called Alemán, Cordero, Galindo & Lee — or Alcogal.

The Pandora Papers include a leak of thousands of documents from Alcogal.

They show that in 1999, Alcogal incorporated a BVI registered company called Milrun International Ltd for Mama Ngina, a minority shareholder, and her two daughters.

Alcogal also provided the registered office for Milrun and supplied Alcogal staffers to act as the company’s official directors.

The result, explained in the diagram below, was an entirely anonymous company, with an address and directors that could not be traced back to the true beneficial owners.

This company was used a year later to buy an apartment thousands of miles from Kenya and Panama, in Westminster, central London, for £280,000.

The Pandora Papers show that the Kenyatta daughters still owned Milrun until at least 2017. We asked them if they still owned the company but they did not respond.

Today, Milrun is still listed on UK Land Registry records as the proprietor of the apartment — now estimated to be worth £1m.

Until this summer, Emma Hardy, a British Labour party MP, rented the apartment when away from her constituency on parliamentary business. As she did so, she lawfully reclaimed £2,600 a month in rent expenses from state funds.

Attiya Waris, Professor of Fiscal Law at the University of Nairobi, said that when ruling elites are discovered to have parked cash offshore, it “is a signal to the rest of the economy that they can do the same”.

After Ms Hardy was shown the findings from the Pandora Papers, a spokesperson for the MP said: “Emma had absolutely no knowledge of this. She signed a standard tenancy agreement through a reliable agency approved by the independent organisation that administers MPs’ accommodation costs. She is shocked at what this investigation has uncovered, and believes it shows why more transparency is urgently needed.”

In December 2002 Mwai Kibaki was elected Kenya’s third president, defeating Uhuru Kenyatta. It triggered a mood change among the country’s elites as Kibaki promised an anti-corruption drive.

“The era of ‘anything goes’ is gone forever,” Kibaki said at his inauguration rally. “Corruption will now cease to be a way of life in Kenya.”

In the wake of these remarks, there was a rush of money leaving the country. There were disputed allegations that Kibaki’s predecessor as president, the deeply unpopular Daniel arap Moi, had been among those sending money abroad, in part using offshore structures and Swiss banks.

Uhuru had been Moi’s choice to succeed him and his defeat was a blow for the Kenyattas.

It was around this time in 2003 that a trust-like entity called Varies Foundation was formed in Panama, again with the assistance of the Swiss wealth advisers and Alcogal, the Pandora Papers show.

The documents show that Mama Ngina was the beneficiary, and that upon her death this secret foundation was to be run for the financial benefit of her son, Uhuru.

The Pandora Papers do not show what funds, if any, were held by Varies. According to searches of public files in Panama, the foundation is still active. However, it has not paid local regulatory taxes in the Central American country since 2014, suggesting it may now be in disuse.

A spokesperson for Mama Ngina Kenyatta did not respond to our questions.

President Kenyatta’s press office did not respond to any of our questions, including those about his offshore inheritance.

Secrecy haven

Another member of the Kenyatta family named in the Pandora Papers is Udi Gecaga, former brother-in-law to Uhuru Kenyatta. The 76-year-old today has another link to the president through his son, Jomo Gecaga, who serves as his personal secretary.

Gecaga’s fortunes had risen quickly under president Jomo Kenyatta after Lonrho, a powerful and controversial British conglomerate, with land and mining interests throughout post-colonial Africa, picked him out to be a senior executive.

Gecaga was flown to London and offered a huge sum to take the job on account of his influence within the Kenyatta family, according to a biography of Lonrho’s late chairman Tiny Rowland by journalist Tom Bower. Rowland wrote out a cheque for a five-figure sum and handed it to Gecaga: “Is this enough?… It’s for you and your family. Take care of the political problems.”

Later, Rowland occasionally said he eventually wanted Gecaga to succeed him as chairman, but within days of the death of Jomo Kenyatta in 1978, the Lonrho boss demanded his dismissal. He was eventually replaced by a close associate of Kenyatta’s successor, Moi.

Gecaga’s name appears only fleetingly in the Pandora Papers, but further investigations have shown he was no stranger to offshore investments. While he worked at Lonrho, an exotic corporate entity called Blim Securities Anstalt, formed in Liechtenstein in 1977, bought a large mansion an hour’s drive from London, which became his family home. In 1999, Blim Securities also bought an apartment near in the upmarket London neighbourhood of Knightsbridge.

An anstalt is an obscure type of trust in Liechtenstein, one of the world’s top secrecy havens.

Neither Udi Gecaga nor his son Jomo responded to our questions.

In response to questions, a spokesperson for Alcogal said it leaves clients when it suspects clients are involved in money laundering. The company added it has “a robust compliance department, comprising around 20 professionals with high-level education, that receive ongoing training in compliance according to the highest industry levels.”

The company added: “It is equally important to note that corporate providers are not legally responsible for the activities of the companies which they incorporate. While no corporate service provider or financial institution is infallible, we have always acted according to the law, and have cooperated in all respects with competent authorities.”

Having received no response from the Kenyatta family, Pandora Papers journalists searched public records in the BVI and Panama to establish whether the entities linked to the Kenyatta family were still active.

Three of the four Panamanian foundations are active and one is suspended. However, none of the four have paid the required regulatory taxes in Panama since 2014, suggesting they may have fallen into disuse.

Of the seven BVI companies we examined, one was struck off the corporate register in 2014, five were struck off between 2018 and 2021, and one remains active. A company that has been struck off the BVI register is not dissolved, and can, if required, be reinstated once outstanding regulatory fees are paid.

UPDATE October 4 2021:

On October 4, a day after our investigation was published, President Kenyatta issued a statement to say: “My attention has been drawn to comments surrounding the Pandora Papers. Whilst I will respond comprehensively on my return from my State Visit to the Americas, let me say this:

“That these reports will go a long way in enhancing the financial transparency and openness that we require in Kenya and around the globe. The movement of illicit funds, proceeds of crime and corruption thrive in an environment of secrecy and darkness.

“The Pandora Papers and subsequent follow up audits will lift that veil of secrecy and darkness for those who can not explain their assets or wealth. Thank you.”

–

* Graphics by Clement Kumalija
* Editing by Ted Jeory and Nick Mathiason
* This story was updated to include President Kenyatta’s public statement on October 4.

Kenya’s constitution classifies all land in Kenya as either public, community-owned or private. More than 65 per cent of Kenya’s landmass is estimated to be community land. Such land is occupied and used mainly by the pastoralist communities in the northern drylands of Kenya. This area produces roughly 89 per cent of the beef produced in the country; mutton and chevron are not included in the government statistics. Beef is by far the most popular meat consumed in Kenya. It represents more than 70 per cent of all the meat consumed by volume due to urbanisation and a growing demand from the middle class in Kenyan cities.

Pastoralism, as practiced on the unregistered community lands by the indigenous people in Kenya, is of significant economic worth. The annual national pastoralist livestock offtake was valued at US$0.189 billion, while the yearly meat offtake was estimated at 154,968 tonnes and valued at US$0.389 billion. There is consensus that pastoralism contributes about 13 per cent of Kenya’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), with approximately 13 million people directly benefiting from the livestock value chain. Over 75 per cent of cattle herds in Kenya are kept by pastoralists, who supply the bulk of the meat consumed.

But the economic contributions of pastoralists are hardly reflected in the government’s strategies or national development plans. As a result, pastoralism continues to face setbacks that hinder the realisation of its full potential. Further, the absence of accurate or, in some cases, the use of outdated data and inappropriate valuation methods, leads to an underestimation of the contribution of pastoralists to the economy.

The constitution protects a person’s right to own property individually or in association with others without any form of discrimination. Further, the state cannot deprive any person of their property or interest in a property unless it is in accordance with the constitution and the established statutory law.  In the case where land, whether registered or not, is compulsorily acquired by the state for a public purpose or in the public interest, the constitution requires that it be done on the principles of just compensation and prompt payment of its total value.

Pastoralists rarely obtain just compensation for land acquired compulsorily by the state because the system of community land valuation is unjust towards the people.

Community land governance

The Land Act 2012 is the primary framework that governs public and private land administration and management while community land governance is addressed under the Community Land Act 2016.  The Community Land Act repealed the Land (Group Representatives) Act (Cap 287) and the Trust Lands Act (Cap 288), which previously provided for the administration and management of community lands in Kenya.

The Community Land Act defines a community as a consciously distinct and organised group of users of the community land who are citizens of Kenya and share common attributes. These attributes are common ancestry, similar culture or unique mode of livelihood, socio-economic or other similar common interests, geographical space, ecological space, or ethnicity.

Pastoralists rarely obtain just compensation for land acquired compulsorily by the state because the system of community land valuation is unjust towards the people.

The Community Land Act 2016 provides for the recognition, protection, and registration of community land rights. Community land in Kenya is owned and vests the power to appropriate in the community. The Act further stipulates that the communities shall hold the communal land as family or clan land, reserve land, or any other category of land recognised under the Act or other written law. In addition, community land can be held in land tenure systems such as customary, freehold, leasehold or any other tenure system recognised by law. Community land includes all land owned by the former group ranches, community forests, grazing areas, shrines, land traditionally held by hunter-gatherer communities, land lawfully held as trust land by the county governments, and any other land legally declared to be community land by law.

Any parcel of community land that is not registered under the Community Land Act remains unregistered community land to be held in trust by the county governments on behalf of the communities. The county is prohibited by the Community Land Act from selling, transferring or disposing of any parcel of unregistered community land or even converting it into private Land.

Compulsory land acquisition

The statutory provisions under the Land Act 2012 guide the determination of compensation for compulsorily acquired community land rights. In addition, subsidiary legislation in the form of rules to guide assessment for just compensation has been developed by the National Land Commission (NLC) and approved by the national parliament.

The Kenyan government introduced an unfair adjustment to the Land Value Index Laws Amendment Bill 2019 that was hurriedly passed by both houses (the National Assembly and the Senate) and assented to by the president. The Land Value Amendment Bill aimed to amend various sections of the Land Act 2012, the Land Registration Act 2012, the Prevention, Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons and Affected Communities Act, and provide for the assessment of Land Value Index with regard to compulsory land acquisition. Pastoralist communities raised concerns through the Kenya ASAL Advocacy Group (KAAG) regarding the amendment’s serious implications for the just and fair compensation for pastoralist rangelands.

The amendment effectively entrenched unfair government policies and practices that include zero-rating the value of pastureland and legitimised unjust compensation practices of acquiring community land by keeping secret the full appreciation of the rangeland value. 

Moreover, parliament passed the Land Value Index amendment law without the usual scrutiny by the members of the Pastoralist Parliamentary Group (PPG). The PPG is the largest parliamentary caucus representing the pastoralist communities of 15 counties in Kenya. The members of the national parliament founded the PPG to provide political leadership and protect and safeguard the interests of the pastoralist people at the national level.

By the passing such laws and policies, the government routinely undervalues and undermines pastoralism as a system of production and main source of livelihood in the drylands. Government statistics undervalue land used by the pastoralists, contributing to higher poverty indices and environmental degradation in the pastoralist region. Government-generated indices and valuation models do not capture the total value of rangelands and their uses, violating the constitutional protection of the pastoralist communities’ right to its common property.

Valuation practice in Kenya

The valuation practice in Kenya is governed by the Valuers Act Cap 532, which provides a Valuers Registration Board that regulates registered valuers’ activities and conduct. Any person registered by the board must be a full member of the Institution of Surveyors of Kenya (ISK).

Being members of the ISK, valuers in Kenya are required to subscribe to the International Valuation Standards (IVS) set by the International Valuation Standards Council. These standards specify the concepts, approaches, and bases for undertaking valuation in Kenya. The standards, guidelines, principles, and ideas are expected to promote consistency and transparency in valuation practice in Kenya. The standards prescribe three approaches that underpin these valuation methods: the market approach, the income approach and the cost approach.

The government’s statistics undervalue land used by the pastoralists, contributing to higher poverty indices and environmental degradation in the pastoralist region.

The market approach derives the value of an asset by comparing the asset with comparable (similar) assets for which sale price information is available. It assumes all assets are sold and bought in an open market. The income approach establishes value by converting future cash flow from an asset to a single present value, taking account of time value for money. It assumes assets are held for investment purposes.

The cost approach seeks to determine the value of an asset using the economic principle that a buyer will pay no more for an asset than the cost to obtain an asset of equal utility, whether by purchase or by construction in normal circumstances. Based on the foundations of these approaches, the following valuation methods have been variably applied in the valuation of assets in Kenya: Direct Sales Comparison (Comparable); Income Capitalization (Investment); Profits (Accounts); Replacement Cost; Reproduction Cost; summation (Contractors).

Valuation in community rangelands in Kenya

What is to be valued?

Valuation of community lands can be located from the constitution’s definition, which, as stated earlier, holds that community land include land registered in the name of group representatives (group ranches); land lawfully transferred to a specific community or declared to be community land by an Act of Parliament; land lawfully held, managed or used by specific communities as community forests, grazing areas or shrines; ancestral lands and lands traditionally occupied by hunter-gatherer communities; and land lawfully held as trust land by the county governments. On the face of it, the issue seems straightforward enough, but the practical disaggregation of attributes and interests in context is complex and displays excellent heterogeneity.

Turkana community system

The topography of Turkana County is varied, comprising of lowlands, plains, and mountains. The soils are sandy, volcanic, clay, alluvial and mixed types. There is fertile farming land (both irrigated and non-irrigated) on the lower Turkwel river basin, grazing pasture lands, forests, wildlife areas, caves and historical sites, mining and petroleum production areas, fishing sites, and beekeeping sites. Land use outside the urban areas varies depending on the ecological and geological characteristics, cultural and traditional practices, and government and non-governmental influences.

Significant land use practices include livestock keeping, fishing, subsistence farming, beekeeping, hunting and gathering, mining, cultural ceremonies and social gatherings, worship, tourism, and forestry. These uses may change depending on the seasons and climatic conditions.

Farming land is, for instance, converted to grazing land during the dry season and after crops have been harvested. The physical extent of community land is not defined by conventional administrative or cadastral boundaries but on cultural, use and control bases. Cultural definitions of boundaries vary depending on the rights under consideration. For instance, the more significant territorial boundary includes the areas occupied by the nineteen (19) Turkana subgroups (the outer boundary). Each of the subgroups also has its boundaries within the area that is covered by the external boundary. Families also have their boundaries defined by trees under the Ekwar system.  Individuals also have control areas known as Eree. 

The Turkana cultural property rights over this land are a continuum that includes territorial control, and ownership is collective. All subgroup use and control, family use and control, Individual use and control, individual ownership and control in irrigation schemes, access for members across and within subgroup-controlled areas, access and use by neighbours and friends of families for some resources such as water from wells (Akare) and use by neighbouring communities outside the territorial boundary, migratory rights, all these rights are exercised within customary rules and regulations that are not in writing but are well known and respected by all community members.

Community land ownership and management in Marsabit County

The land within Marsabit County comprises diverse landscapes, including high altitude mountains with rain forests, other forests, farmlands, grasslands, deserts, lakeshores and desert oases. The landscapes are characterised by volcanic, loamy, sandy and clay soils, and rock outcrops. Significant land uses vary across these landscapes and include livestock keeping, fishing, subsistence farming, hunting and gathering, social and cultural activities including traditional religious practices, extraction of traditional medicines and herbs, forestry, tourism and wildlife.

Some areas have mixed uses, like agro-pastoralism, while others have a specific use such as pastoralism. The land outside the municipal territory is traditionally owned by four specific ethnic communities: Borana, Rendille, Gabra and El Molo. Each of these communities has different territorial zones that they have historically controlled and used. The boundaries of the territorial zones are identified by geographical features that are historically acknowledged and known and respected by all. The land is not under a formal cadastral and land administration system.

Each of the communities has a different cultural background and clear customary rules governing land use and occupation.

Despite the various communities having distinct land control and ownership rights, they have developed reciprocal use rights for pastureland and water resources. The elders of the respective communities administer the customary practices. The clans, families and individuals in these communities have collective ownership rights, occupation rights, and user rights for pasture and other natural resources in the rangelands.

Families also have their boundaries defined by trees under the Ekwar system.

The community exercises control over any settlements even though it practices pastoralism that is characterised by temporary settlements. As a rule, communities may not graze in one area for more than three months continuously to avoid degradation. Permanent settlements are mainly found in the urban areas and market centres.

Neighbouring communities have mobile access and use rights subject to the customary rules and regulations of the host communities that are often overseen by individual elders appointed by the community’s traditional council. The various landscapes have different uses at different times. For instance, the desert is used for grazing during the rainy season, whereas the highlands are used for grazing during the dry season. All communities share the oases through appointed community regulators. At times cultural events affect land use. For instance, the circumcision period among the Rendille community may dictate where the animals, especially the camels, will be allowed to graze. The land is viewed as a symbol of community identity and the physical features of historical and cultural events.

The Dheda system of the Borana of Isiolo County

The Merti rangeland comprises the areas outside Isiolo central, which are largely dry season grazing areas. There are also wet season grazing areas, small subsistence farming areas, several small pastoralist towns with markets, and one growing urban settlement. The Borana people classify areas using the term Dheda.

The landscape is primarily savannah grassland with some hills and plateaus and varying vegetation cover. The soils are mainly sandy and mixed soils. The dominant land use is livestock keeping, complemented by small-scale subsistence farming along the Ewaso Nyiro riverbank, social amenities, and cultural and traditional shrines. In addition to these uses, the land is the central defining feature for community identity and the foundation of the traditional livestock production system (pastoralism).

The boundaries for the rangelands are determined by geographical features that are historically recognised by the communities, such as hills, seasonal rivers, rangeland water points and other types of rangeland resources related to pasture within each Dheda.

The clans, families and individuals in these communities have collective ownership rights, occupation rights, and user rights for pasture and other natural resources in the rangelands.

The rangeland is mainly occupied and controlled by the Borana community. The clans, families and individuals do not have direct control over the rangelands. Elders govern it on the basis of customary rules and regulations. Families and individual members have user and access rights.  Community members cannot dispose of land by sale or exchange since the land is considered an intergenerational community asset. Neighbouring communities from Marsabit, Wajir, Garissa and Samburu have migratory use and access rights that are defined by the Borana community’s rules and regulations. These rights are seasonal, and the neighbouring communities cannot establish permanent settlements in the grazing areas.

There are community boreholes situated in different locations to provide water for both livestock and people. They are controlled by elders to avoid use during unauthorised seasons or as a disincentive to permanent settlement. This ensures that the grazing patterns are maintained to prevent land degradation or depletion of pasture before the onset of the rainy seasons.

From the case studies of these three communities, it is clear that the subject of valuation should vary across these different communities taking into account their specific customs and practices, the physical attributes of the land, and the region’s economic activities. The valuation should have legal, economic, social, cultural and environmental dimensions that will vary depending on the purpose, the community’s context, and timing. Community land valuation variables are not only influenced by the host community but also by the interests of neighbouring communities, including access, user rights and their social-economic activities. Some of these variables, such as those related to culture and spiritual practices, may not be directly quantifiable in the national valuation framework.

Neighbouring communities from Marsabit, Wajir, Garissa and Samburu have migratory use and access rights that are defined to the Borana community’s rules and regulations.

Besides state interests and frameworks, the rights and tenure arrangements that comprise the subject of valuation also contain several bundles that include individual, family, clan, ethnic subgroup, ethnic group and neighbouring ethnic groups. In the process of valuation, the physical scope should be ascertained by social mapping that considers cultural and social dynamics. However, the government’s current cadastral system does not allow for this. 

In light of the foregoing, it is necessary to review how community land valuation for the purposes of compulsory land acquisition is done in Kenya. Whether relying on real estate background, livelihood safeguards or ecological management, the statutes that guide valuation in the case of compulsory community land acquisition by the state must adopt new guidelines that comply with constitutional requirements and legal and policy changes.

Equality in leadership will remain elusive in northern Kenya as long as powerful sultans continue to promote negotiated democracy as the preferred method of electing political leaders. Negotiated democracy is unconstitutional and does not respect the two-thirds gender rule that promotes equality in decision-making. It is a power-sharing agreement where political positions are distributed ahead of the elections, allegedly to prevent election-related conflicts. (Although, as Dalle Abraham observes, negotiated democracy “does not bring about the expected harmony.”)

There is a Somali proverb that says, “Women have no tribe” from which derives the unspoken rule that women cannot represent their clans and tribes in Wajir County politics. Among the 30 elected Members of the County Assembly and the six Members of Parliament, with the exception of the Women Representative, none is a woman.

The process of negotiation includes all the clans in Wajir but leaves out women, who are not part of the council of sultans. The main Somali clans residing in Wajir are the Ogaden, the Ajuran and the Dagodia. To illustrate, the Dagodia clan, the largest of the clans in Wajir, has a council of sultans who are drawn from the ten Dagodia sub-clans. Each of the sub-clans has its own sultan who is (s)elected by consensus by the clan elders. (The Wabar is the leader and unifying factor of the Dagodia community that also occupies parts of Ethiopia and Somalia. The incumbent, Wabar Abdille Abdi, visited Kenya from his home in Ethiopia in November 2019. This was Wabar Abdille’s first visit to Kenya where he was awarded the highest head of state commendation, the Chief of the Order of the Burning Spear (O.B.S.), by President Uhuru Kenyatta “for his role in ensuring cross-border peace and unity in the region.”)

As we approach the 2022 elections, every clan in Wajir has already chosen its sultan who will be responsible for the selection of suitable political contestants from within the clan to represent it at the ballot to compete against the representatives of the other clans. The Fai clan council of Ugas (sub-clan leaders) recently released a statement on Facebook that they will soon kickstart a series of activities to identify suitable political leaders from among their sub-clans to run in the 2022 elections.

Equality in leadership will remain elusive in northern Kenya as long as powerful sultans continue to promote negotiated democracy as the preferred method of electing political leaders.

Every aspirant must write an application letter to the clan sultan and pay KSh50,000 if vying for the position of Member of the County Assembly. The non-refundable amount rises to KShs200,000 for a parliamentary seat and to KShs1 million for the governorship. In 2017, six women aspirants interested in MCA seats (including Hon. Fatuma Ibrahim, currently a member of the East African Legislative Assembly) tried to go through the process by applying and paying the required amount but they were all turned down and advised to run for the position of Women Representative instead.

One such aspirant is Ms. Fatuma Sheikh Abass who had served two terms as a nominated Member of the County Assembly under the NARC-Kenya umbrella before attempting to vie for the MCA seat in Elben Ward, Wajir East, in 2017. Abbas went through the selection process but was rejected by the council of sultans which decided to hand-pick a male aspirant based on the belief that a clan cannot be represented by a woman at the County Assembly. But Ms. Abass remains undeterred and will be standing again in the same ward in the 2022 elections with the support of the members of the Wajir Women Council that was created in 2021 by Ms. Rukia Abdullahi Barrow, chairperson of the Wajir branch of Maendeleo Ya Wanawake. The Women Council has representatives from the eight sub-counties and strongly supports the participation of women in elective leadership.

The council is encouraging women aspirants not to be intimidated by the curses pronounced against them by their clan sultans in a bid to force them to step aside in favour of male aspirants. The council is also creating awareness among women at the grassroots level to encourage them to support fellow women who wish to run for elective leadership. But the newly created council has no resources, and it has yet to draw up a resource mobilisation strategy.

A meeting bringing together women aspirants from across Wajir was convened in mid-September 2021 by Women Inclusive Network (WIN), a local community-based organization that supports women’s participation in elective leadership. The objective of the meeting was to engage clan elders on the question of support for women aspirants. Saying that he supported women in leadership, one of the elders, Abdi Kule Hassan, a member of the Fai sub-clan Ugas, explained that his own wife, Asha Abdi Dere had been an MCA aspirant for Wagberi ward in the 2013 elections. He said, “Even though she was not selected in the process, I decided to encourage her to go up to the ballot and she got 240 votes out of 5,886 votes. Only forty women voted for her and majority of her voters were men. I have accepted now that its women who don’t support each other.”

The council is encouraging women aspirants not to be intimidated by the curses pronounced against them by their clan sultans in a bid to force them to step aside in favour of male aspirants.

Another point of concern that was raised by one of the elders is that among the women nominated to the county assembly, a number were allegedly divorced due to work-family conflicts, where the workload and work-related travel left little time for family responsibilities.

Of the registered voters in Wajir County, 46 per cent, or almost half, are women but they are under-represented in decision-making at the county level and in the national assembly. This is because they tend to be exploited as voting machines whose role is limited to casting their vote for the candidate endorsed by the powerful sultans. Decisions are made on their behalf by the clan sultans, the council of elders and by their partners, and they are even transported to cast votes for preferred candidates in other polling stations. It has been noted that divorce rates go up during the election period because of women not being allowed to decide for themselves who to vote for or where to vote.

Ms. Ubah Abdikarim, a former nominated MCA for Township Ward, spoke about the level of illiteracy among women in the county and the lack of awareness that gender equality is a human right that is key to development. Ms. Abdikarim said, “As a woman leader, I fight for gender inclusiveness and equality in the county’s elected leadership and in resource sharing. I will encourage women aspirants to continue seeking elective political posts in the wards and to be part of the decision making regardless of the barriers.”

According to Kenya National Bureau of Statistics reports, at 76 per cent, Wajir County has the second highest illiteracy rate in the country after Turkana County where the rate is 82 per cent. Only 22 per cent of women have received any education and because of this, women are assisted voters during elections, enjoying no privacy at the ballot. Their illiteracy places them in a situation where they are forced to loudly state their preferred candidate in the presence of the candidates’ agents and IEBC (Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission) officials. There is a lot fear and intimidation since the ballot is not secret. Most times clan representatives act as watchdogs, observing the women through the windows of the polling stations in order to report back if they vote contrary to the decisions of the sultans.

But the educated women of northern Kenya are increasingly questioning why they are being side-lined by an oppressive culture and open bias that denies them their constitutional right to vie for political leadership to serve their communities. They question the motives behind the sultans’ preference for male aspirants. For the sultans, however educated, strong and vocal a woman is, she is still regarded as a “weak” leader who cannot deliver to their expectations. A less educated male candidate is still preferable in their eyes.

Moreover, allegations that the wife of the impeached former governor of Wajir usurped and misused the powers of the office have not helped the case for women. The accusations have been used to promote the view that women politicians would be no better than corrupt male politicians.

Only 22 per cent of women have received any education and because of this, women are assisted voters during elections, enjoying no privacy at the ballot.

Politics is all about financial stability, but women aspirants are not as financially powerful as their male counterparts. During the electoral period money is essential for logistics and the production of campaign materials but most women aspirants have low visibility because of lack of funds.

The system of negotiated democracy has been normalized and fully accepted by the northern counties, and particularly by the communities in Wajir County. Negotiated democracy has killed the hope of true democracy in northern Kenya. It is an unconstitutional process that does not consider the voters’ interests but benefits the few powerful sultans who select loyalist candidates in return for lucrative contracts for their companies and businesses.

It is the hope of every woman aspirant in northern Kenya that the day will come when women will receive the same support from their councils of elders as their male counterparts. For now, women leaders have no choice but to unite all women at the grassroots to support women leadership. As we head into the 2022 elections, most women aspirants are inspired to change the narrative and to win against the negative and oppressive cultural belief that women cannot lead their communities.