How CS Rotich used his ‘sovereign power’ to fizzle 1B in a fresh scam

Treasury Cabinet Secretary Henry Rotich is on the spot over a new scandal involving malicious and fraudulent expenditure of tax payers money.

CS Henry Rotich is on the spot for spending Sh1 billion out of the emergency fund to support victims of floods last year without seeking parliamentary approval.

Image result for counting money gif

Auditor-General Edward Ouko says there is no evidence to show that Mr Rotich submitted to Parliament a detailed report on the payment in May 2018.

The public finance management law allows the Cabinet Secretary for Treasury to withdraw funds in times of emergency without MPs approvals, but on condition that the nod of Parliament is sought within two months after the withdrawal.

“The lack of parliamentary approval for such payments is contrary to section 21(1) of the Public Finance Management Act, 2012,” Mr Ouko says in audit opinion on the financial statements of the Contingencies Fund for the year ended June 30, 2018.

“If Parliament does not sit during the period referred to in subsection (1), or is not sitting at the end of that period and the Cabinet Secretary has not sought the approval of Parliament before the end of that period, the Cabinet Secretary shall seek the approval for the payment not later than fourteen days after Parliament next sits.”

The Auditor-General warns that non-compliance to the Public Finance Management Act, 2012 on this matter puts to risk the operations of the Contingencies Fund.

There is a danger that in future the Fund may be exhausted rendering it unable to meet its mandate, he says.

Mr Ouko says that during the year under review, an amount of Sh1,050,000,000 was paid out of the Contingencies Fund on May 29, 2018 for purposes of supporting countrywide flood response, supporting flood victims and cash release to families affected by landslides.

The fund management, says Mr Ouko, did not produce any evidence to show that Mr Rotich had presented an Appropriations Bill to Parliament for the payment and the replenishment of the Contingencies Fund.

He says that contrary to the provisions of the Public Finance Act, 2012, the management did not include in the financial statements, information on whether the funds so withdrawn were spent for the intended purpose or paid to the right persons.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *