Kenya: Monetary Policy Committee Meeting (27.03.2017)

Patiently waiting: Museveni and NRM will again amend the Constitution, this time to fit his aging body!

Since the 1986 overthrow of the Second Obote government and the ones that we’re running the government in the midst of civil war, President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni and his NRA came into power with guns and glamour. That has since then turned the power and eaten all of the state coffers. This has lead to many fallen soldiers, foreign affairs squabbles and foreign adventures of both mercenaries, armies and hired guns for other regents. The latest is sending battalions to the Equatorial Guinea on the merry of President Teodoro Obiang.

At this junction in 2017, there are talk of Age-Limit bill and ruling for life, like it matters. Like it is a viable concept and the truth to aspire to. That President Museveni been a wise man and used force, with brutal masterminding the escape from being one of the heroes of Obote’s return through FRONASA and into his own rebellion (NRA). Show’s the lack of integrity and will to sustain power by any means. Therefore, laws can be amended and adjusted to fit the paradigm of Museveni. That is the harsh realities of Uganda today, that laws are made to fit the ideas of Museveni and not of what could be the best for Ugandan prosperity. We could wish otherwise, but saying so is a lie!

In 1995 after 10 years in transitional government and one-party rule, as the former rebellious outfit and winners, made a pact with the people and such gave the President Museveni a legitimate rule. He gave a more honest and grander promise with a Constitution that even told the people how much longer he could rule, which the Article 105(2) said: “A person shall not be elected under this Constitution to hold office as President for more than two terms as prescribed by this article” (Constitution of 1995, 8 October 1995).

So after already been in power about 10 years, he was amending so he could legally rule another decade, the rebel and the former Defense Minister proved his skills of trading his water to gain more trust. Therefore, still at this time he was seen as a hero, even if he wasn’t believing in Multi-Party Democracy or in anything else then the Movement System and the National Resistance Movement own agenda that worked after his drum.

Even as deflections and decay of power came and the added promises of 10 Points Program and others, should have showed that the President had limits to his will to give to the public. The promises of wealth, of welfare and of educated citizenship was a pipe-dream. It sounded splendid in the woods, but when the gravy-train hit the State House, when the cronyism and family matters into the government, than the promises while carrying guns dwindled away.

President Museveni and the NRM, only gave the public Multi-Party democracy because the people voted for it twice, and with that in mind, the Constitution of 1995 had to be amended. The 2005 Amendments we’re also made so legally the President could stand again, as the 105(2) of 2005 states:

A person may be elected under this Constitution to hold office as President for one or more terms as prescribed by this article” (THE CONSTITUTION (AMENDMENT)ACT, 2005, 30th September 2005).

This was just done in the nick of time before the 2006 election, so he could have his official 3 term, even as he had ruled for 20 years by then. Before could go-on without anyone stopping him. The President amended not the laws for the betterment of the republic, but for his own greed for power. That people find it insulting to now have the age-limit discussion, has forgotten the path to power and the way the President used people to gain what he has today.

President Museveni has used anyone’s skill and anyone’s possibilities to his advantage, that he has has done since he left the University, since he joined the second Obote government. Therefore,

I teach [but not] about those things like age limit and I don’t know what – all those small topics of yours. I talk about the future of Africa. What should be done, not who. Because for you, you spend all the time on the who, the who, the who. For me, my issue is [the] what. So, because the age limit is; you are talking about the who now. NRM is not an anarchy group. Right now, am concentrating on alleviating poverty. That is my mission now. After poverty then we shall talk about those other topics that you are interested in” (The Observer – ‘President Museveni told journalists at Kawumu State Lodge in Luweero district yesterday’, 22.03.2017).

However, we have to talk about who and in particular Museveni, who has imposed himself on the citizens of Uganda for decades upon end. That is because he used all sorts or tactics and thinks people are stupid, as the NRM Kyankwanzi Conference of 2016 we’re working on ditching the age-limit, so that the President can be older than 75 years old. So that the current President can run again and be over 75 years.

Those who wants to be duped by the old man and live in ignorance. President Museveni, who has used all sorts of tactics to overstay, by both force and also laws. This has now been done over decades and by all means he will not leave. He will continue to use the Ugandan citizens as pawns, as he stays the king. He turns slowly tries to out maneuver the next of kin or the next Besigye. Since Museveni only believes in his vision, nobody else. Therefore, Museveni will not act differently, he will be more of the same.

There isn’t anything in his past that shows otherwise, unless your ignorant and is a Musevenist. Peace.

Opinion: The ghost of the tyrant Henry VIII’s laws surface as Brexit looms and Tories seeks more power to become sovereign!

The ways of the Tories government to notify and to become independent from Europe and European Union, opens up the doors into the darkest alleys of their history. They are re-entering the darkest hours of the United Kingdoms history, when they are thinking of using the legislation of the tyrant and king Henry the VIIIs, the Tudor reign and most famous king. Who used all sorts of laws to oppress and silence the ones who wasn’t follow his orders. Therefore, that the modern day Parliamentarians and the Cabinet under Prime Minister Theresa May thinking of unleashing the tyrants powers and extend their power. Show’s the lack of democratic flexibility of the current leadership in White Hall. When they cannot through consensus and through procedure, and parliamentary sessions with the elected leadership of the kingdom.

That seems hard as the Brexit, makes hurdles and ways the Government and Conservative Party didn’t anticipate, as they are continuing to postpone and unleash uncertainty on the public. Together with the extended use of time, as well as the government doesn’t reveal their ideal scenarios. So there isn’t public knowledge of how the current leadership and cabinet wants to succeed in their Brexit negotiations. The White Paper on the Brexit earlier this year, was more a wish-list, than an initial document saying what could be interfering and could be problematic. The interesting is that the House of Lords comes with better work and stronger paper assessing their legality and use of laws to become sovereign from European Union. Though, with warning effect if the Conservative Party plans to use the legislation of the tyrant Henry VIII. If anyone would have heard that Angela Merkel thought of using draconian laws of Nazi-Germany, it would have created havoc inside Germany and also abroad. The same should be happening, when the United Kingdom thinks of using Tudor Dynasty worst laws to break from Europe. There should be other ways to regain freedom and make it in a transparent and accountable way. Just take a look at what the House of Lords wrote!

What the Minister needs to do before Brexit:

The Minister sign a declaration in the Explanatory Memorandum to each statutory instrument amending the body of EU law stating whether the instrument does no more than necessary to ensure that the relevant aspect of EU law will continue to make sense in the UK following the UK’s exit from the EU, or that it does no more than necessary to implement the outcome of negotiations with the EU” (…) “The Explanatory Memorandum to each statutory instrument sets out clearly what the EU law in question currently does (before Brexit); what effect the amendments made by the statutory instrument will have on the law (as it will apply after Brexit) or what changes were made in the process of conversion; and why those amendments or changes were necessary” (HL Paper 123, P: 4, 2017).

Henry VIIIs legislation:

in the context of environmental legislation … it is particularly important that, where existing EU laws have been implemented into UK laws (either by way of primary or secondary legislation), these are in the main amended or repealed only by Parliament, or only after sufficient parliamentary scrutiny has been provided. It must only be in exceptional and limited circumstances that Henry VIII clauses are used to amend existing environmental legislation or that transposed by way of the GRB in secondary legislation” (HL Paper 123, P:15, 2017).

Should this occur, the UK will need to have a version of EU law, amended to fit the circumstances of a non-negotiated Brexit, put in place by the date of the UK’s exit from the EU. The Government must give careful consideration to what kind of contingency plan would be needed in order to deal with any rejection of the Brexit deal by either side” (HL Paper 123, P: 19, 2017).

We note, in addition, that the DPRRC has already considered the possibility of expanding the use of these strengthened scrutiny procedures. In the same report it states that “We have considered whether the strengthened scrutiny procedures covered in this Report might appropriately be made available in respect of delegated powers which, while they are not Henry VIII powers, nonetheless give Ministers discretion to legislate widely across important areas of public policy. This could provide Parliament with an enhanced scrutiny role over significant statutory instruments that would otherwise be subject only to the affirmative procedure. We draw this possibility to the attention of the House.” The ‘Great Repeal Bill’ would seem a suitable candidate for such an expanded use of a strengthened scrutiny procedure” (HL Paper 123, P: 32, 2017).

So if you thought the House of Lords reports devastating enough. There are enough of articles and words on the legislation that the Conservatives thinks of using. That the HM Government should not think again of using it. As the legacy of the king and his rule wasn’t in an hour of peace or justice. It was more of tyranny and devastation in the will of one man. Now the same could open as the altering of power from the chambers of Westminster, could easily damage the will of people to support the cabinet and the parliament. When they know that they can take the power without hesitation and without thinking vetoing the rule, as they continue to control the kingdom. Certainly, the people of United Kingdom, did not vote for the supremacy of the cabinet and parliament over the people. They have voted for the Parliament and their members to represent them and their interests. That is not withhold to take control and overrule the public, as the laws of Henry VIII does!

What Henry VIII did:

Yet, contrary to the popular perception, it was the Statute of Proclamations itself which demonstrated that in Tudor England there were at least perceived to be some limitations on royal power. The statutory programme of the Reformation Parliament changed England. Maybe it did give Henry VIII everything he wanted, but he needed Parliamentary consent. In the 1539 Parliament itself, the Act of Six Articles defined doctrinal matters as the king wished. Literally. His own handwriting covers the draft manuscript. In brief it was Catholicism, with the King replacing the Pope. And how did the Merrie Monarch, as Head of the Church, exercise his new powers? Shortly afterwards three Catholics were hanged drawn and quartered for treason: three Protestants were burnt alive for heresy. And they were dragged to their deaths, two by two along the filthy road; one martyr of each faith was carried on the hurdle side-by-side with the martyr of another” (Rt. Hon. Lord Judge, 2016).

Against use of Henry VIII:

Moreover, it hardly needs stressing that the proposed use of Henry VIII powers in legislating for Brexit would dramatically undercut the very basis on which its supporters sought this momentous change. The sovereignty of Parliament was central to the case of those campaigning to leave the EU. The use of Henry VIII powers attacks the foundations of this principle, strengthening the executive and weakening Parliament. Parliamentary sovereignty demands real Parliamentary scrutiny” (Liberty, 2017).

So when you have a King like Henry VIII and his legacy, that the a modern day Parliament wants to use his legislation and his use of powers. Proves the lost democratic values within the Parliament and White Hall. That they are revising their place in Europe, by going back in time to a King and his legislation, seems preposterous, still in our day and age. The Theresa May government doesn’t care about how and why, instead of the result. They don’t care if their ways of battling the uncertain with tools of tyrants, make them open the ways of tyranny.

Since this sort legislation and laws should have been turned away and only remembered for their aggressively attacks on society and giving powers to the king. That this is sort of function the Cabinet and Conservative Government seeks before notifying European Union and the Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.

Certainly, is this the legacy the parliament and Conservative Party of our day want to leave behind? That they resurfaced ghost draconian legislation to regain more power and give them ability to overpower and control the laws as they leave the European Union. So, the House of Lords and the House of Commons, should have the common sense and stop the laws and the applications made by the rule of Henry VIII time. That they are in the minds and considered proves the lacking trust they have in consensus and modern democratic values, as the Conservative Government thinks these sort of laws is in place when they repeal the EU legislation that is part of the UK laws of modern day Britain. Peace.

Reference:

HL Paper 123 – ‘The ‘Great Repeal Bill’ and delegated powers’ (07.03.2017), House of Lords, United Kingdom

Rt. Hon. Lord Judge – ‘Ceding Power to the Executive; the Resurrection of Henry VIII’ (12.04.2016)

Liberty – ‘Liberty’s Written Submissions to the House of Lords Constitution Committee Inquiry into the Legislative Process: Delegated Powers’ (January 2017)

Statement attributable to the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Sudan, Ms. Marta Ruedas, on Sudan opening a new humanitarian corridor for food aid into famine-struck South Sudan (26.03.2017)

Maj. Gen. Muhoozi, says “he has no ambition for Presidency”, but the meteorically rise seems like ploy to usher him in!

No, I do not have the ambition to be President. I am very happy being in the military and that is where I intend to stay for some time,” Maj Gen Muhoozi said (NBS TV Uganda, 31.01.2017).

Major. General Muhoozi Kainerubaga spoke out in an interview yesterday, not that it out of water now that he has gone through the ranks in the military, had years of specialized training in the United States and we’re running the Special Forces Command or the Flying Squad. That he is the son of the President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, do show that family matters and the reason for the meteorically rise. Maj. Gen. Kainerubaga can claim otherwise, but deep in his heart he knows that is the reason.

Muhoozi Kainrubaga has been a project in the making, that when revealed documentation from Gen. David Sejusa aka Tinyefuza who leaked it to the Daily Monitor. “Gen. Sejusa has kicked up a storm after the Daily Monitor last week published a letter he wrote to the director of the Internal Security Organisation, asking that he investigates claims of plots to assassinate top government officials opposed to the “Muhoozi Project”” (Splash Radio, 13.05.2013). So the questionable rise to power and to become a Senior Presidential Advisor after years inside the army. Therefore, the letter didn’t just stir troubles for Gen. Sejusa, but also closed the Daily Monitor after the release of the letter. Like the Government and Army didn’t like the release of this information.

So if the army and government didn’t like this internal plan come into the public. Than, why was their an issue with the closure of a newspaper and the leadership? One of who is today the Presidential Spokesperson Don Wanyama, who know is crony instead of an opposition voice inside the Monitor journalist.

In 2016 to the Observer he said:

As you heard, I don’t have the ambition to be president. I am very happy being in the military and that is where I intend to stay for some time. It [Muhoozi Project] doesn’t exist, non-existent – that is a red herring. You have never heard of a message where I promote myself, it is always from the promotions board. That is the process in the military” (David Muhumuza – The Observer, 25.05.2016).

So that the Maj. Gen. Muhoozi could easily now be the giant plan the President has in the making, as the years goes and his age sinks in, he needs somebody to carry the torch. Still, the Ugandan Republic isn’t a family company or LLC. Even if the President acts of the state funds and Bank of Uganda is his coffers.

That their has been less of questionable reporting of the acts of the Flying Squad or the Special Force Command as they have violently oppressed people, can be understood that the Maj. Gen. Muhoozi has even had a close relationship and it could be romantic with Journalist Sheila Nduhukire, who has traveled with the general to Somalia and other UPDF missions with him. So the comforting news instead of questing the UPDF and rise to power, haven’t really been there.

Therefore, the son of the President except for the dossier released by Gen. Sejusa has skated by and enjoyed the rise. While other in his generation haven’t gotten to his place or had the possibilities. They have all been left behind or is still in lower level in the army. If it wasn’t for being groomed and made ready for bigger stage. The army is also so he should be rougher and experienced in battle, as the father was a bush-warrior and general. The father wants the same for his son and therefore the Special Force Command was to check if he could do operations and could carry out assaults on the ones who needed to be silenced.

However, he continues to play the role of I have “no plan” and doesn’t want to be President. Still, the rise to power and the senior adviser role is made for him to be the next in line. Gen. Muhoozi, the Presidents son certainly has the initial hope to keep the torch lit. Still, this is not family business, even if the President acts like it is.

President Museveni as all fathers wants the best for his family and sons. That means that Gen. Muhoozi has gotten special treatment and own parts of the army to lead. Therefore, he went from Special Force Command into the Senior Adviser role, proves that the father wants him to learn the political game too. So that he knows the guns and commando operations. Now he will learn to venture into politics.

So this is yet another step into the reigns and the control of the National Resistance Movement, as the father and son plans away to make it natural change. How it will happen, but surely Gen. Muhoozi has no plans to dwindle into a village and be a farmer, just like the father has no plans to run one of his farms. As the NRM Regime plans to subtly subdue and suddenly over night change from Museveni to Muhoozi. Like we didn’t know and forgotten the dossier in 2013.

The Presidency in Uganda isn’t a family matter, even if the current President thinks so. He can even switch the constitution and amend it. So that Muhoozi by law has the rights, soon the President might do as they have worked for long change the age-limit. Museveni has no legitimacy and would use all tricks to stay in power. Therefore, using his son as sideshow could possibly be a sort of play of the old man. Still, he would also see that Muhoozi takes over for him when he is done.

We can just wait and see, if like the first lady becoming a minister in the cabinet, the son could soon in the next shuffle in Parliament become a Minister for Defense, so that he follows the family line. Museveni was a Minister for Defense, before becoming a rebel and going against the then Obote government. Peace.

IGAD: Nairobi Declaration on Durable Solutions for Somali Refugees and Reintegration of Returnees in Somalia (25.03.2017)

 

European Commission registers two European Citizens’ Initiatives on the rights of Union citizens after Brexit and rejects one on preventing Brexit (22.03.2017)

Brussels, 22 March 2017

The European Commission has today registered two European Citizens’ Initiatives concerning the rights of Union citizens in the context of the withdrawal of a Member State from the EU and rejected a third proposal entitled ‘Stop Brexit’.

The first invites the Commission to separate Union citizenship from Member State nationality in light of the UK withdrawal from the EU (“EU Citizenship for Europeans: United in Diversity in spite of jus soli and jus sanguinis”), and the second calls on the Commission to uphold the right of Union citizens to move and reside freely within the European Union (“Retaining European Citizenship”). At the same time, the Commission has rejected as inadmissible a third proposal calling on the Commission to prevent the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU (“Stop Brexit”).

The Commission’s decisions concern the legal admissibility of the proposed initiatives. At this stage, the Commission has not examined the substance of the initiatives.

The Commission found that the “EU Citizenship for Europeans: United in Diversity in spite of jus soli and jus sanguinis” and the “Retaining European Citizenship” initiatives meet the conditions necessary for registration under the Regulation on European Citizens’ Initiatives. Both European initiatives call on the Commission to protect the status and rights of EU citizenship, in the context of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union. The Commission attaches great importance to the underlying issue of providing certainty and security to the 4 million citizens (3.2 million EU citizens in the UK and 1.2 million UK citizens in the EU) who are unsure of their future as a result of the decision of the UK to withdraw from the EU. While the Commission cannot propose secondary legislation aiming at granting EU citizenship to natural persons who do not hold the nationality of a Member State of the Union, the rights of EU citizens in the UK and the rights of UK citizens in the EU after the withdrawal of the UK will be at the core of the upcoming Article 50 negotiations. The Commission will do its upmost to prevent EU citizens from being used as bargaining chips in the negotiations with the UK.

In the case of the “Stop Brexit” initiative, the Commission found that the conditions for registration were not met. Article 50(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) explicitly allows any Member State to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements. While the Commission regrets the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, it respects the outcome of the referendum.

Next steps

The formal registration of the “Retaining European Citizenship initiative” will take place on 2 May and the registration of the “EU Citizenship for Europeans” initiative will take place on 27 March. In both cases, this will start a one-year process of collection of signatures in support of the proposed European Citizens’ Initiative by their organisers.

Background

European Citizens’ Initiatives were introduced with the Lisbon Treaty and launched as an agenda-setting tool in the hands of citizens in April 2012, upon the entry into force of the European Citizens’ Initiatives Regulation which implements the Treaty provisions. Under the Treaty, every citizen has the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union by way of a European Citizens’ Initiative. The procedures and conditions required for the citizens’ initiative should be clear, simple and user-friendly. The commitment of empowering citizens to deliver a better Europe was reiterated by President Juncker in his State of the Union address in September 2016.

The conditions for admissibility, as foreseen by the Regulation n° 211/2011 on the European Citizens’ Initiative, are that the proposed action does not manifestly fall outside the framework of the Commission’s powers to submit a proposal for a legal act for the purpose of implementing the Treaties, that it is not manifestly abusive, frivolous or vexatious and that it is not manifestly contrary to the values of the Union.

Once formally registered, a European Citizens’ Initiative allows one million citizens from at least one quarter of EU Member States to invite the European Commission to propose a legal act in areas where the Commission has the power to do so.

If – and only if – a registered European Citizens’ Initiative receives the signatures of one million validated statements of support from at least seven Member States within a period of one year from the time it was registered, the Commission must decide whether or not it would act, and explain the reasons for that choice.

KCCA letter: “Re: Installation of CCTV Cameras and re-organisation of the Boda-Boda Operations in Kampala” (23.03.2017)

REDD+ Kasigau Corridor Project: Lacking results and with questionable affiliations!

There are a December 2016 report written by Jutta Kill and published in parts by the European Union. The name of the Report are: “The Kasigau Corridor REDD+ Project in Kenya: A crash dive for Althelia Climate Fund”. This report tells a worrying story of how a project is a possible revenue source, instead of being there for climate change use or even local development. This sort of project and funding should be used for sort of projected land titles that saves the forests or create land that the owners can earn on instead of destroying the land. Something most of the REDD+ funds and projects is about, making sure the forest and the agricultural lands are kept and saved by the use of funding from donors and project builders.

One of the first hard-hitting quotes from the report are: “In addition, several reports document how land use restrictions imposed by the Kasigau Corridor REDD+ project hit pastoralists and ethnic Taita and Duruma communities particularly hard while these groups receive very few if any of the benefits the REDD+ project provides to local communities” (Jutta Kill, P: 4, 2016).

So if there are donors who seems to be positive to projects and development projects that isn’t being there for the locals, than why are they offering the monies and using the time to facilitate the project in Kenya?

The Taita Hills REDD+ Project in Kenya has been marketed by Althelia, the project developer Wildlife Works Carbon, institutional funders like the EIB and media supporting market-based environmentalism as the Fund’s signature investment. Wildlife Works Carbon has been operating the Kasigau Corridor REDD+ project in south-eastern Kenya since 2005” (Jutta Kill, P: 6, 2016). So with this in mind the Althelia has offered certain amount of money on the table, as this was the signature investment, even as it have no benefit for the local communities. The Althelia had done this: “For four of the projects, the Fund’s annual reports indicate that the investment is made in the form of loans whereas for the REDD+ project in Kenya, the 2015 audited financial report mentions an investment through an ‘Emission Reductions Purchase Agreement’ (ERPA). Four of the five projects are also covered by a US$133.8m loan guarantee that USAID has extended to the Althelia Climate Fund in 2014. As of 31 December 2015, investors had disbursed €18,36m of the €101m committed” (Jutta Kill, P: 5, 2016). So the development project are funded through loans that are guaranteed by the USAID, but extended into the Althelia Climate Fund, so the two are co-operating in the direct funding of the REDD+ Kenya. So they are rubber-stamping and giving faith to the projects.

The ‘Stand for Trees’ Initiative, a brainchild of Wildlife Works and supported by USAID, has become an important source of revenue – some say, a lifeline – for many private sector REDD+ projects” (Jutta Kill, P: 17, 2016). So that the Wildlife Works that works inside this REDD+ project, that are using the funds from USAID and EIB, are complicating it more as the other revelations that should worry the ones who cares about the environment and accountability of ones running it: “The Kasigau Corridor REDD+ project’s financial lifeline came from the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private sector arm of the World Bank, and BHP Billiton, the mining company with a record of severe environmental damage and forced displacement of communities that stretches back decades and continues to this day” (Jutta Kill, P: 18. 2016). So why would a mining company cares about an environmental project in Kenya, unless they we’re earning funds and getting profits on the project?

You can really understand the issues of the IFC and BHP Biliton involvement, when the local communities gets no benefit or contributing to the projects.

So when you have the Althelia Climate Fund, which is funded with loans from the World Bank private corporation branch IFC and the USAID loans, together in corporation of BHP Bilition, as the REDD+ Project in Kenya is in works with both Wildlife Works, as the ‘Save the Tree’ brainchild. As this was the Althelia signature project. That there are problematic forces in play when the EIB are supporting the REDD+ projects as well, either directly through loans like USAID or like IFC. Therefore, the many actors are surely paying and donating favorable loans so the owners of the fund and the ones living of it makes this the lifeline for the Wildlife Works, even as this one doesn’t have the impact on local communities.

Just as one key observation:

One of the most striking observations was how locally, people referred to Wildlife Works as “the company”. The reasons for this seemed twofold. For one part of “the community”, Wildlife Works is “the company” that instructs guards to confiscate cattle and goats; that prevents the poorest community members in the area from collecting even dry branches for firewood when “the company” itself runs a charcoal production business on the REDD+ project area; that puts up water tanks on residents’ land without even asking permission, let alone paying for the use of the land; that claims to dedicate initially 1/3 of carbon revenue sales to local community projects, but does so in a way that means benefits from these “community” projects are captured by local elites. For example, ranch shareholders who receive 1/3 of the revenue from the carbon credit sales might also sit on the “community development committees” that decide how the 50% of the profit from carbon credit sales” (Jutta Kill, P: 21, 2016).

Another insulting observation:

A carbon offset provider offering carbon credits from the Kasigau Corridor REDD+ project writes on its website that “committees determine what projects to undertake, prioritizing them by need and feasibility. ‘So many people have problems with water, so water projects—water tanks, water pipelines—always come first,’ said Pascal Kizaka, a local chief and committee board member” (…) “Exploring the location of one of the “water pipelines” advertised as an activity of the Wildlife Works Carbon REDD+ project revealed that far from what was suggested by the large placard outside the building (a One Vision Center), it seemed that the Wildlife Works contribution to the “water pipelines” project had been just the guttering along the side of the building’s roof and piping to connect the gutters with a water tank constructed by others. People also commented about bore holes put in by “the company” that had never provided any water” (Jutta Kill, P: 23, 2016).

So the Company, the Wildlife Works are supposed to provide water and pipelines. Still, there aren’t any who has been provided with the water, even as the REDD+ Committee Board Member Pascal Kizaka claims, as the locals and community says otherwise. This together with the lacking proof of the help with carbon credit sales and the control of land. This whole development project seems sketchy and a lifeline for Wildlife Works instead of being there for the local Kenyan Communities. Therefore, the use of IFC and Althelia Climate Fund, seems like way of misusing Carbon Tax and Carbon trading, instead of developing the Kasigau project for the Taita and Duruma communities. That deserves better and also deserves that when people and organizations comes in that they does not earn on their misfortune, but actually comes with projects serving them. If not this is just a way of fraudulent development industry, that no republic deserves. Peace.