FREE ENTERPRISE AND PROPERTY OWNERSHIP RIGHTS-THE WAY FORWARD FOR KENYA.

        In response to various recent debates on the question of land ownership by the Kenyatta family, I had penned my views on this subject and posted them to the Disqus page of a local daily to which I received some negative responses that in my view were not informed by realities pertaining to land issues after Kenya attained independence. I take this opportunity to share the same views here with other readers who may wish to have some glimpse of the situation prevailing during the period following Kenya’s independence and hope that we can have some appreciation of the opportunities and challenges that existed at that moment in time as Kenya became an independent state. The views expressed here are my personal and based entirely on my own observations and experiences as I was fortunate to have lived, worked and interacted with members of the farming community from both the pre and post independence era of Kenya including many prominent political personalities with whom I had the opportunity to work in the various senior positions I held in the Kenya Farmers’ Association spanning a long period of time from the begriming of 1958 to 1986 and as Board Chairman for a short period in 2003.

     I found it somewhat unfair for a section of the Kenyans society to put Uhuru Kenyatta on notice seeking explanation from him about his alleged ownership of land in Kenya since it is a well known fact that he may not really own much or any of the land that has been a pet subject of his many of his critics, not for lack of knowledge about the truth but simply and unfortunately to discredit him his family and the community that he belongs to.  

      Who had the money at Independence? Of course it was Kenyatta, the bureaucrats who formed the nucleus of his system of governance and those appointed to senior positions in the Provincial administration and other civil service positions at the starts of the journey to Nationhood.

For those who are familiar with the Report of the Commission of Inquiry, commonly known as the Ndegwa commission report some may be aware that what ails this country today is the result of certain recommendations that were contained in that report and allowed to take their course unchecked. If for example, the office of the Ombudsman had been established and empowered as had been recommended in that report things may have been different, but unfortunately that did not happen.

      To understand the issue of land ownership it is also equally important to understand the economics of land at the time of independence and at present before forming opinions of real time wealth of those who are now owners of large tracts of land around the country.

     The price of land per acre soon after independence was as low as KES. 300/- and to demonstrate this case to those who may not be aware of it, around the year 1968 one of the best large scale mixed farms in Molo area of Nakuru district was sold by its former white British owner to Settlement Fund Trustees on a "lock stock and barrel" basis at an agreed valuation of UK Pounds 31 per acre at a time when the exchange rate was below KES.20. During that period of our history there was more land available for sale on the market than there were buyers. There were obviously less buyers and this was simply because of the low levels of wealth possession in the hands of Kenyan people.   

     Those who were around at the time and had the money, took advantage and acquired much of the land on a "willing buyer willing seller" basis and later acquired more land in ways that now appear to many as “questionable”.

     However those who now stand accused of having allocated state land to themselves or their close political allies and supporters, had the legal authority to do so and therefore there is very little that anybody can now do to “undo” what is now perceived as acts of abuse of power. Under the old political dispensation the Heads of State wielded enormous powers and enjoyed full immunity against any kind of prosecution, both civil or criminal .Therefore any attempts to “remove skeletons from the closet”  by any state constituted commission, such as the land commission  or any investigating authority with the view and hope of redressing the “historical injustices” will be an exercise in futility.           

      Large tracts of land in Kenya are still owned by non indigenous owners who were granted titles by the former colonial administration and the same titles are still being honored by the Independent Kenyan state as a sign of respect for the rule of law and upholding the sanctity of the titles held by the owners. For anyone to expect revocation of titles granted by our own Independent Kenyan state and suggest redistribution of such land to the ever growing demands for land from the landless multitudes is to say the least an unlikely proposition, unless we are prepared to shift to some other outdated and unworkable ideological order. Such experiment miserably failed in one of our neighboring state to which we cannot subscribe.

     For the present and any future leadership of the Republic of Kenya it will not only be undesirable but an impossible task to initiate radical reforms to our land laws that may be expected to address and resolve any “alleged or real historical injustices” as have been and continue to be articulated by those opposed to land ownership policy of this country. Expecting any radical change is perhaps, like wishing the sun to rise from the West to East. Socialism as practiced in some communist states including the so called ‘Islamic Socialism” invented and championed by leaders such as Bhutto of Pakistan and Gaddafi of Libya had promised great hopes of equitable distribution of resources to all, have remained ideals that never translated into realism and remain buried in the past.

     Fair access to resources, equal opportunities and free enterprise with the elimination of the greatest vices in the form of corruption, ethnicity and marginalization of disadvantaged groups is the only sure way forward for a prosperous and peaceful Kenyan nation.

     Whereas the letter and spirit of the new constitution hold out great promise for the future of Kenya and its people, its full implementation and respect for the rule of law remain the greatest challenges for many Kenyans. The events witnessed in recent weeks with several leadership squabbles and greed for money in the first 100 days of President Uhuru Kenyatta’s leadership are to say the least greatly disappointing. The plight of the critical mass of the ordinary Kenyans appears to have been placed on the back burner for now, a sad development indeed.