The Government has taken note of the continued debate on media coverage of the contents of the Waki report on post election violence. The Government wishes to make a very strong statement concerning logically and untenable statements on pages 121 and 122 of the report.

The report has a section on the awful Naivasha attacks which occurred between 27 and 30th January, 2008 in retaliation of the violence witnessed from early January, 2008 after the announcement of the Presidential results.

In the report on page 121 concerning Naivasha revenge attack the report says:

“The commission has also evidence that Government and political leaders in Nairobi including key office holders at the highest level of Government may have directly participated in preparation of the attacks. Central to that planning were two meetings held in State House and Nairobi Safari Club in the run up to the election with involvement of senior members of Government and other Prominent Kikuyu personality.”

Please note that the last sentence refers to meetings allegedly held in the run up to the elections which means way before the general election and way before the outbreak of violence in January, 2008. Also note the report also says, key office holders at the highest level of Government may have directly participated in the preparation of the attack. The report uses the word may to show they are not sure that this actually really occurred. This is in contrast to the rest of the report which is conclusive in its allegations.

To this end, the Government wishes to make the following clear:-

1. How can a meeting have been held in state house before the general election, say in September, October, etc, have planned for revenge attacks that had not yet occurred and which were to occur in January 2008. These allegations are not only logically untenable but ridiculous at best.
   
   
2. The President has never at any time held meetings with any person, to plan violence, at State house or anywhere else in the world. This wild allegation is being repeated so as to paint a perception that the President and State House were involved in post election violence.
   
   
3. Media editors and commentators should, in lieu of this, paint the right picture and stop riding on an agenda of casting aspersions at State House and in relation to the Presidency, based on flawed arguments.
   
   
4. We see this trend of assigning blame to President Kibaki, also on page 30 of the report, which says that
   “Power has been personalized around the Presidency and this has been increased by changes in the Constitution under each President since independence”
   This is untrue because in the five years of President Mwai Kibaki’s first term, there was NOT single constitutional change.
   
   
5. This Press statement offers a serious perspective by government on very serious allegations and we hope that media will not ignore this argument but will give it the coverage it requires and not bury it within other stories.
   
   

Finally, as we continue debating the Waki Commission report, let us embrace none inflammatory language and promote peace, none violence and reconciliation.



Dr. Alfred N. Mutua, EBS
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS SECRETARY &
GOVERNMENT SPOKESPERSON


23rd October 2008