CORRUPTION Syndromes of Corruption

172 Syndromes of Corruption
2004). But the new government faces severe problems and resource constraints,
and both Kibaki and a major segment of his political backing only
recently split from KANU itself. A decade of multiparty elections may
actually have intensified corruption in significant ways, as we shall see.
Helping oneself: corruption with impunity
Monopoly-style corruption by the President and his cronies was not the
only kind of corruption to occur in Kenya during the Moi era. So-called
petty corruption took place in everyday encounters; foreign investors and
multinational corporations were involved as well, at times through
bribery and extortion at high levels, and also through preferential access
to resources. But the ability of the President and his allies to plunder the
economy was the most significant corruption problem from the standpoint
of development and justice. Corruption had been common under
Kenyatta, but the Moi years brought a change. Before, major corruption
had generally consisted of padding budgets, or of percentages paid as
kickbacks and bribes, in connection with legitimate development projects.
As Moi’s regime took hold, however, the projects themselves were
more and more dubious, conceived and funded essentially to benefit the
President and his clients (Ross, 1992: 433).
Both the power to extract corrupt gains and the weakness of political
and legal constraints derived from Moi’s dominant position. Numerous
cases were investigated by special commissions but few punishments
resulted, and the resulting reports were generally never published
(Human Rights Watch, 2002: 3–4). In contrast to Influence Market
cases, legitimate business was often the target of corrupt schemes, not
the instigator. There was no doubt who was in charge in Kenya; unlike
Elite Cartel cases, patronage and corrupt elite networks added to Moi’s
backing but his rule did not depend upon them. There were no powerful
oligarchs outside Moi’s circle to plunder the weak state or build economic
bases of their own. Instead, Moi and top figures used monopoly power to
enrich themselves, allowed lesser allies to create and exploit smaller
corrupt advantages, and used patronage to keep society politically dependent
and fragmented along tribal lines.
The President and his cronies exploited both politics and the economy.
In the Goldenberg scandal of the early 1990s a politically favored businessman
claimed tax breaks on fictitious exports of gold and jewels. State
officials and KANU leaders allegedly shared the spoils. Thanks to their
protection no official accounting of the losses, or of culpability, was made
until late 2003, when a commission of inquiry held widely reported public
hearings. Other cases of theft from the public sector, often involving both