EMBU GOVERNOR STILL ON MURKY GROUND AFTER ANOTHER IMPEACHMENT MOTION DETAILED INFO ON HIS DEFENCE

Luck seems to have run out for one Embu governor Martin Wambora after another motion on his impeachment hit the floor .Below is a full statement on his defence.

PRESS STATEMENT DEVOLUTION ON TRIAL THE FACTS BEHIND MY IMPEACHMENT AS THE GOVERNOR OF EMBU COUNTY After the judgement by the 3 judge bench sitting in Kerugoya High Court annulled my impeachment on 16th April, 2014, Kenyans from all walks of life, have written and called to inquire what really transpired. The following are the allegations/accusations that are holding Embu County Government hostage. For each alleged accusation I have provided facts which reflect the truth. What transpired:- First off, the main issues involve procurement of maize seeds worth KES 3.52milion, which the Embu County Assembly alleges did not germinate; rehabilitation of Embu Stadium, where actually no money has been used to date; purchasing of County Government motor vehicles without any reference to County tender Committee notwithstanding that there was already in existence of Government supply Branch Contracts for motor vehicles; and finally an accusation that there is no tender committee in Embu County Government. The following are the details as per the facts presented on the ground: FIRST ACCUSATION That the office of the Governor authorized the procurement of DK 8031 maize variety worth KES 3.52 million instead of the KDV-1 and KDV-6 variety requested by the County Director of Agriculture. THE TRUTH ▷ The procurement of the said maize seeds was not done by the Governor. That is the job of county procurement officials following the requisition by the then County Accounting Officer, in line with the existing procurement legal provisions which ensured that the quotations were very competitive and that the lowest bidder was awarded. As for the maize variety the tender committee argued that the three varieties, DK 8031, KDV–1 and KDV-6 are all suitable for Embu soil. ▷ The second accusation on this score, that the seeds did not germinate and that I am to blame, is as absurd. First, the failure of seeds to geminate is not a procurement procedural issue. Second, failure of germination could have been caused by a myriad reasons ranging from weather to storage and topography – none of which has anything to do with a County Governor! ▷ Since MCAs have also accused me of launching the distribution of maize seeds before the confirmation of minutes of the tender committee that had earlier approved the purchase, you must wonder how my action has anything to do with procurement. ▷ It is unfair for the County Assembly to blame me for the detailed procurement movements and record keeping as these clearly are functions of junior officials in the procurement department. SECOND ACCUSATION That the Office of the Governor awarded tender for rehabilitation of the stadium before receiving bills of quantities and for commencing the rehabilitation before sufficient funds were available. THE TRUTH ▷ First and foremost, not a single shilling has been paid to date in the construction or rehabilitation of the said stadium, and thus no money has been lost. ▷ As for the procurement process and the issue of bills of quantities, the Public Procurement and Disposal Act of 2005, Section 27(2) places procurement responsibility on the respective Accounting Officer and the procurement officials. I am still awaiting the report of Ethics and anti-corruption commission to know what transpired. ▷ As for the accusation about the insufficiency of funds to do the job, here is the position. Embu County’s printed budget provided KES8 million while Embu County Executive Committee had decided to re-allocate additional funds needed for Phase One of upgrading the stadium through the 2013/2014 supplementary budget, and this measure is within the budgetary legal provision notwithstanding that the County Assembly dis-allowed the re-allocation proposal. THIRD ACCUSATION The Governor authorized purchase of new county vehicles without any reference to county tender committee. THE TRUTH ▷ The County Assembly of Embu did not take into account the existence of Government Supply Branch Contracts for motor vehicles. In view of these contracts, ministries of the Central Government or the County Supply Department do not have to float their own tenders when purchasing official motor vehicles. They just order from the firms that have been awarded the tenders by the Central Government. That is what my supplies official did. ▷ Therefore, in purchasing the vehicles the county procurement department did not violate procurement procedures as it used existing and valid Government Supply Branch Contracts in respect to the vehicles purchased from CMC Motors Ltd and Toyota Kenya Ltd. ▷ In this respect, county officials, including the Governor, only expressed their preference of motor vehicles as stipulated on engine capacities (CC) regulations set by the Salaries and Remuneration Commission. FOURTH ACCUSATION The issue of omissions/commissions in the report of the auditor-general for the period March-June 2013. THE TRUTH ▷ These violations involving procurement of rehabilitation works, furnishing, equipping county executives/assembly and purchase of Toyota prado, Reg. No KBU 683T, were undertaken by Interim Transitional Authority Officials who were funded directly by Transitional Authority should take responsibility for omissions and commissions they may have committed as cited in the Audit Report in line with Article 226(5) of the Constitution of Kenya. FIFTH ACCUSATION Nonexistence of a tender Committee for the County Executive. THE TRUTH ▷ It is surprising for the County Assembly to say there is no tender committee in the County Government while at the same time they make numerous references to the said committee in their accusations against me. ▷ From March 2013 to date, we have had the following tender committees in the Embu County Government: • The Transitional Authority appointed procurement committee 1. • The Transitional Authority appointed procurement committee 2. • Principal Officers Procurement Committee. • Chief Officers Procurement Committee. ▷ It is important to note that in January 2014, certain county officials plucked out from the files their appointment letters to the County Tender Committee for fear of being suspended by Embu County Public Service Board following a directive by County Assembly of Embu to have all the then members of the tender committee suspended. This explains why County Assembly of Embu thinks there was no tender committee for County Executives in January 2014. SIXTH ACCUSATION The Governor violated the Public Finance Management Act. THE TRUTH ▷ The accusations under the Public Finance Management Act are exactly the same as the ones under the Public Procurement and Disposal Act, to which I have already addressed. No wonder the County Assembly of Embu is quoting Section 121 of the Public Finance Management Act, which in turn only refers to the Public Procurement and Disposal Act that has been covered above. ▷ The Embu County Assembly has not yet received the report it requested from the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission in January 2014. Yet, for a strange reason, they have made conclusions on the same procurement issues without the benefit of EACC Report. SEVENTH ACCUSATION That the Governor violated the Constitution of Kenya: (Articles 179(4)) & (179(6)) THE TRUTH ▷ While it is true that the Governor is the Chief Executive of the County (Article 179 (4)) and that members of the County Executive Committee are accountable to the County Governor for the performance of their functions and exercise of their powers, (Article 179(6)) these constitutional provisions do not make the County Governor culpable of personal omissions and commissions by CECs or any other holder of a public office. In line with Article 226(5) of the Constitution of Kenya, the said Article reads as follows:- “If the holder of a public office, including a political office, directs or approves the use of public funds contrary to law or instructions, the person is liable for any loss arising from that use and shall make good the loss, whether the person remains the holder of the office or not.” In CONCLUSION, it is important to note the constitutional threshold for impeachment of a Governor, which according to Article 181(1) states as follows: “A County Governor may be removed from office on any of the following grounds – a) Gross violation of the Constitution. b) A convicted crime. c) Abuse of office or gross misconduct or d) Physical or mental incapacity to perform the functions of office of the County Governor” The accusations leveled against me do not meet the threshold for impeachment. The genesis of my problems emanated from the County Executive exposure of financial and employment irregularities by the Embu County Assembly whereby the elected MCAs were receiving from the County Assembly Coffers and paying KES 40,000 per MCA per month for ungazetted ward offices and KES 50,000 per MCA per month for unapproved ward employees without any legal framework. Office of the Controller of Budget, Salaries and Remunerations Commission and Transitional Authority have reprimanded the County Assembly in respect of the said irregularities. Finally, it is evident from the foregoing that there is no loss of money from Embu County Treasury Coffers that can be attributed to me. While appreciating the oversight role of the County Assembly, the Constitution of Kenya does not allow the County Assembly of Embu to perform the roles of investigators, prosecutors and judges. The said roles should be performed by respective competent Public Agencies. Martin Wambora Governor, Embu County

Tags: LOCAL NEWS