KENYA/NEPAD: KENYA COMPLETES APRM SELF-ASSESSMENT

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 NAIROBI 004507

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

STATE FOR AF/E, AF/EPS, EB/IFD, EB/ODF
LONDON AND PARIS FOR AFRICA WATCHERS
TREASURY FOR ANNE ALIKONIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAID ECIN ECON PGOV SOCI KE NEPAD APRM
SUBJECT: KENYA/NEPAD: KENYA COMPLETES APRM SELF-ASSESSMENT
REPORT ON GOVERNANCE

Ref: Nairobi 868

Sensitive-but-unclassified. Not for release outside USG
channels.

1 . (SBU) Summary: Kenya has completed its African Peer
Review Mechanism (APRM) self-assessment report. A follow-
on visit by an external APRM review team confirmed that the
report was carried out transparently, with broad
stakeholder participation, and without undue government
interference. The next step in the APRM process for Kenya
involves the formal presentation in late December to the
Kenyan president of the self-assessment and review team
reports, together with an action plan for implementing the
recommendations for reform emanating from those documents.
While the APRM in Kenya's case is providing a useful
conduit for citizens to criticize their government and the
way they are governed, it appears to be more about process
than tangible results. End summary.


2. (U) Though late by several months, Kenya has completed
the self-assessment launched in February under the African
Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). Reftel provides background
on Kenya's APRM effort, which springs from the AU's New
Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD). Under the
APRM, Kenya is one of the first four countries of 24 to
subject itself to self-assessment, along with Ghana
(completed),Rwanda (completed),and Mauritius (pending
shortly). Nigeria is also reported to be undergoing a self-
assessment due for completion in December, and South Africa
has just launched its self-assessment.

--------------
Self-Assessment: An Audit on Governance
--------------


3. (U) Kenya's self-assessment, described reftel as "an
audit on how we are governing ourselves today," aimed to
gather and collate the views of a wide array of Kenyan
"stakeholders" on the country's (and especially the
government's) performance in four thematic areas:

-- Democracy and Political Governance;
-- Socio-Economic Development;
-- Macro-economic Governance;
-- Corporate Governance.


4. (U) The self-assessment was conducted on the ground by
four local independent think tanks each of which covered
one thematic area. The data collection consisted of
provincial fora (akin to townhall meetings),focus group
discussions at the district level, household-based surveys,
and interviews with experts and opinion leaders around the
country. The effort was overseen by a 33-member APRM
Governing Council and a full-time NEPAD Secretariat based
in the Ministry of Planning and National Development. It
ran on a KSh 65 million ($867,000) budget funded roughly
half by the government and half by donors, including the UK
and UNDP. All disbursements were administered by UNDP for
greater transparency and accountability.


5. (SBU) Embassy Econ/C attended the day-long "National
Stakeholders Forum" which brought together around a
thousand delegates from around the country on September 16.
The forum marked the end of the self-assessment phase of
the APRM, and culminated in the adoption of the several
hundred page self-assessment report, as a well as a
National Program of Action, with the latter listing
recommendations for specific reforms based on the findings
of the former.


6. (U) Neither document is yet available publicly, but
summaries of each indicate the exercise provided a genuine
opportunity for Kenyan citizens to criticize and voice
concerns about how they are governed. According to press
reports, the self-assessment report highlights that an
overwhelming majority of Kenyans see corruption as a major
problem for development and that over two thirds believe
their government lacks the political will to fight
corruption. The summary recommendations range from the
hopelessly broad ("Create an enabling environment for
political participation of all citizens") to the more
usefully specific ("Modernize information management
systems in the Judiciary").

--------------
Self-Assessment Gets Assessed - Externally
--------------


7. (U) The completion of the self-assessment report was
followed quickly on October 2 by the arrival of an 18-
person strong delegation led by Mozambican educator Graca
Machel, spouse of former South African President Nelson
Mandela (who accompanied her) and a member of the 7-person
Panel of Eminent Persons supervising the APRM initiative
continent-wide. The purpose of the nearly two-week long
visit was to verify and assess the methodologies and
findings of Kenya's self-assessment report.


8. (SBU) Machel's external review team confirmed the
sentiments of local observers and diplomats that the self-
assessment was carried out in a professional, impartial
manner without government interference. Briefing donors on
October 13, she said the self-assessment was "very candid,
very open" both in terms of the report, and in the follow-
up discussions her team was holding around the country.
Upon her departure the next day, Machal went so far in her
praise of Kenya's self-assessment process that she claimed
in was one-sided in not sufficiently noting the country's
strengths.

--------------
Rumors of Interference Prove False
--------------


9. (SBU) The only snafu in Kenya's self-assessment process
occurred in August when the Chairperson of the country's
APRM Governing Council attempted to sue the Minister of
Planning and National Development after being dismissed
along with two allies on the council for attempting to gain
direct access to APRM funding, held in an account by the
UNDP. Details remain hazy, but in the end, the suit was
thrown out of court, and the 30 other Council members sided
firmly with the Ministry. It would appear that the Chair,
the colorful Orie Rogo Manduli of the National Council for
NGOs, either misunderstood the Council's role in how the
self-assessment was to be conducted, or was simply trying
to make a power play for control of the budget for her own
ends. Leading donors, including the UK, concur that the
government acted properly in dismissing Manduli and did not
interfere in the substance of the self-assessment effort.


10. (SBU) As noted reftel, the APRM process is somewhat
convoluted and long-winded. In her briefing for donors,
Graca Machal reviewed the next steps in the process for
Kenya:

-- The external APRM team will write its report on Kenya's
self-assessment, probably end October/early November.
-- This report, with the self-assessment attached, will be
submitted for comments to the Kenyan president and the
country's APRM Governing Council.
-- In late December, the final report will be presented by
the lead panelist (Machal presumably) to the Kenyan
president at the APRM Forum in Abuja. At this stage, the
entire APRM report and self-assessment will become a public
document.
-- Thereafter, with the report completed and now public,
the Kenyan leadership should mobilize support domestically
for implementation of the recommendations contained in the
report's National Program of Action.
-- Kenya's self-assessment report and its implementation of
the action program will undergo "peer review" at the next
APRM forum, which will take place early in 2006.

--------------
Comment
--------------


11. (SBU) In her briefing for donors, Machal argued that
the process of the APRM self-assessment is valuable in and
of itself because it provides a conduit for direct dialogue
between governments and their citizens. This is indeed a
positive outcome of Kenya's APRM self-assessment, which by
all accounts was conducted in a thoroughly transparent
manner, free from government interference or sugar-coating.
The results are candid and frank. But overall, we wonder
whether the APRM will ever lead to tangible results, i.e.
to the kind of specific economic and governance reforms
that even casual observers understand are achievable now in
Kenya, and are badly needed. In short, the APRM in our
view fits a familiar pattern in Kenya - it's all about
process, and not enough about results. In fact, in this as
in other instances, we fear the process will be used as a
smokescreen to cover up the failure of the political
leadership to achieve real progress in improving service
delivery and reforming governance in Kenya.
Bellamy