Without doubt, the star of the October 12-13 international conference on anti-corruption that brought together delegates from more than 90 countries to Kenya was Georgian Prime Minister Zhurab Zhvania. He was remarkable in his clarity on anti-corruption efforts, expressing his willingness to take on the high and mighty as a way to tame corruption in Georgia. He did not mince his words in a typical bureaucratic and diplomatic manner as most leaders do, winning over the vast majority of the audience. He said anti-corruption efforts must be multi-faceted, including political, social and legal censure, especially since finding the evidence to sustain a legal charge can be hard to come by.

His statement that serious circumstantial information against a minister or top civil servant was a reflection on him directly as prime minister and therefore merited political action through suspension from office until investigations were complete, brought thunderous applause from the audience perhaps reflecting on the differences between Kenya's fight against graft and Georgia's. Mr Zhvania described how on taking office he reduced the size of his staff from 600 to 90, recruiting new and highly qualified people as a way to bring in reformers to implement the changes required.

He talked of how he dismissed 20 of the 23 generals in the military and how he scrapped the entire traffic police unit which was the most obvious corruption machine in the country. The leader emphasised that one cannot have reforms without reformers, a statement that has begun to emerge strongly in Kenya and which Mr Justice Aaron Ringera also endorsed. One of the most important tools for fighting corruption, he declared, was a Freedom of Information Act that strips away the secrecy in and of government, on which grand corruption thrives.

This in Kenya would mean the discarding of the Official Secrets Act that some top officials love and throw in the faces of potential whistle blowers on corruption attempts. But critically, for us in Kenya, it would also mean ensuring that the declarations of wealth introduced last year be made public.

By the end of the conference, participants remarked that this was the approach that Kenya, and Africa needed to tackle corruption. The meeting was an outstanding success, having been organised by the Department of Governance, Transparency International-Kenya, and Transparency International Secretariat in Berlin. The fact that so many leaders in politics, civil society and anti-corruption commissions from across the world agreed to come to Kenya attests to the international recognition that Kenya has gained - even if only slightly - from the days of the Moi regime. It is unimaginable that a conference of this nature could have been held in Kenya two years ago.

The presence of so many leaders was a tribute to the international credibility that Ethics and Governance permanent secretary John Githongo brings to the anti-corruption struggle. The gathering included the Prime Minister of Norway, who reminded the audience that fighting corruption is not done for the sake of it, but to reduce poverty and realise economic and social rights.

Others were the Mexican minister for Public Administration, who together with his president is responsible for taking action against public officials who engage in corruption, the Peruvian Speaker of the National Assembly and the chairman of the Parliamentary Oversight Committee, and the Norwegian Minister for International Development.

There were five leaders of anti-corruption agencies from Pakistan, Malawi, Zambia, Indonesia, Guatemala, and South Korea who were all relatively new in their positions, reflecting the start-stop-start nature of anti-corruption efforts across the world.

President Kibaki got the ball rolling by reaffirming his personal commitment to leading the fight against corruption. He stated that like any battle, the war must be led from the front by generals so that officers and foot soldiers can carry it on. Justice minister Kiraitu Murungi repeated his clear and unequivocal attack on corruption saying: "We must not feed corruption by hiding it away."

He also reiterated his oft-quoted view that the networks of corruption still existed and were clearly operating within the State bureaucracy. He stated that corruption must be at "the top of the development agenda, since it destroys everything including the fabric of society." And he is right, since State tolerance of corruption makes nonsense of any efforts geared to improving human rights record, security and eradicating poverty.
But was this meeting simply an attempt at public relations on anti-corruption? What lessons were learnt, if any?

Mr Zhvania spelt it out clearly that anti-corruption efforts need a strong, concerted and determined approach, without fear of making mistakes, to succeed. It needs strong will, clarity of mission and decisiveness. And it needs political and legal action. Some in the audience attributed his direct and total approach to anti-corruption crusade to the fact that he is only 41 years-old.

But the Prime minister explained the approach was a direct result of having watched the slow but sure collapse of the Shevardnadze regime in Georgia of which he had been a part of and which had come to power following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Mr Shevardnadze had come to power with massive popular support, promising to reform and rebuild Georgia and its overwhelming corruption problem. Some of his advisors, such as Mr Zhvania, urged him to move quickly on corruption before the window of opportunity closed.

But Mr Shevardnadze was indecisive, allowing the return of the networks of corruption and endemic corruption. It was so big a problem that it infected Mr Shevardnadze himself, and he attempted to steal the November 2003 election to remain in office. He had to be forced out in what became known as the "Rose Revolution" because thousands of protesters carried roses to symbolise their peaceful intentions.

On becoming prime minister, Mr Zhvania vowed not to make the mistakes of his mentor and moved fast before the window of opportunity closed. His radical approach has borne fruits, not just in terms of massive political support but also economically, as both domestic and international investors increased their confidence in the country. Moreover, his war on graft has reduced some of the costs that arise with irregular deals, making life a lot more affordable. The government has also recovered some stolen assets, adding to its capacity to realise economic and social rights.

Notably, many Kenyan ministers and senior civil servants were not fully engaged in the conference, despite the presence of the international VIPs. Indeed, some of the foreign guests, such as the Norwegian minister for International Development, organised important side meetings during the conference, something that our ministers, many of whom either did not attend or only made technical appearances, would have gained from.

But perhaps the enduring lesson for us is the immensity of the gap between official rhetoric and actual implementation. The rhetoric is spot on, and if Kenya were to be judged from the number of official speeches and pronouncements made against corruption, I am sure we would be at the top of Transparency International's Perception Index. Given some of President Kibaki's actions, such as restoring Mr Githongo to State House, only but a small minority in this country do not recognise his depth and personal commitment to the crusade.

The problem is the considerable public doubt on the commitment of some of the key players in his Government - both political and bureaucratic - to anti-corruption measures. This apparent lack of commitment is gauged by the immense defensiveness and discomfort exhibited when "new" corruption is discussed and by statements that attempt to whitewash scandals such as Anglo Leasing.

It is expressed in the lack of consistency in dealing with circumstantial evidence to force key people around the Anglo Leasing scandal to step aside like Mr Shem Ochuodho and Mr Maurice Dantas of Kenya Pipeline were. They were suspended, not because they engaged in corruption, but to facilitate free investigations.

The lack of commitment is shown by the refusal or time wasting tactics employed whenever questions of expenditures in ministries - especially with regard to the buying of luxurious vehicles at the tax payer's expense - are raised.

Make no mistake: The line between wasteful expenditure of taxpayer's money to buy vehicles worth Sh15 million each for Government officials and official corruption is thin. The mindset that focuses on entitlements in office and using taxpayer's money unreasonably is extremely close to the one that dispenses of the pretence of buying items and simply pocketing the money directly.

As stated by the Norwegian prime minister, Mr Zhvania and Mr Githongo, the window of opportunity to fight official corruption is very small. Mr Githongo suggests 24 months. I think that is too much and the revival of grand corruption in Kenya; through such scandals as Anglo Leasing; attests to the very real possibility that our window of opportunity has closed.

Information in the public domain suggests that the officials who signed the paperwork with a fictitious entity called Anglo Leasing should be charged, at the very least, with criminal negligence and attempt to commit fraud. But this has not been done. Yet there is a real possibility that doing so could lead to further evidence of the real people behind Anglo Leasing.

Similarly, it is not enough for Mr Murungi to continuously complain about the inherited civil servants who facilitate corruption and are an obstacle to reform. For he is a minister, and a powerful one at that, who should act to bring about change instead of just complain like a civil society activist.

That is the challenge before us today. For Kenyans to reap the benefits of all this anti-corruption talk, then the litmus test is the final dismantling of the networks of corruption inherited from the Moi regime which seem to have found a comfortable home within the ranks of the Government.

Only then can we feel confident that the more than US $1 billion stacked abroad from our taxes from the past regime's will bear solid fruit as a dividend on the war against corruption. Only then will we begin to trust the Government to close the door on irregular and illegal allocations of public land and plots.

Time is short but with strength, clarity and leadership, we can still turn this boat called Kenya around.

* Maina Kiai is the Kenya National Human Rights Commission chairman. This article first appeared in the Daily Nation and is reposted here with permission of the author. Please send comments to