MPs doubt committees’ ability on Westgate probe

Nairobi. MPs Tuesday evening questioned the ability of their counterparts in the Defence and the National Security committees to investigate the attack at Westgate Shopping Mall and the reaction by the security agencies.

Angered that the chairmen of the two committees had cleared the Kenya Defence Forces of accusations that they looted, the MPs asked Speaker Justin Muturi to rule on how much MPs should publicly say about on-going investigations.

Mr Muturi will make the ruling today.

National Security Committee chairman Asman Kamama and his Defence counterpart Ndung’u Gethenji were criticised last week after saying the KDF didn’t loot yet pictures emerged less than 24 hours later showing soldiers taking things from the mall.

The concerns came hours after the second day of meetings between the joint committee and the heads of the defence forces, the police and the intelligence service.

The matter was first raised by Rachel Shebesh (Nairobi County, TNA) who complained that even as the Justice and Legal Affairs team investigates the affairs of the Judiciary, some MPs have sprung to former registrar Gladys Shollei’s defence in public.

“There has been a tendency for members to discuss deliberations of committees before the committees have concluded the investigations and before that report has been tabled in this House,” said Ms Shebesh. She said her concern was that because a lot of MPs are new and not very familiar with the House rules, they might not realise that whatever they were doing was in breach of the law.

Saying he didn’t doubt the ability of the committee to investigate the matter, David Ochieng’ (Ugenya, ODM) said his concern was whether it is the job of MPs to investigate on-going issues given that the police are still at Westgate. “What I wanted your guidance on was whether committees of this House, in matters of security should engage in what I would call ‘primary investigations’.

Should we allow this House to get evidence on what transpired before, during and after the attack in terms of knowing what needed to be done, who did what…?” he asked.

“Do we have the competence to read or to engage in forensic investigations? Do we have competence to engage in taking primary evidence from persons we are calling before us in a matter such as this?