Maximizing the Value and Impact of Recovered Assets Through Streamlined End-Use

Written by Lewis Kundai, CiFAR.

Background

Last month, the Kenyan Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) handed over proceeds from corruption recoveries, including 511.4 million shillings (USD 3.96 million) in cash and 35 title deeds for 18.71 acres valued at 5.5 billion shillings (USD 42.7 billion). This action highlights the agency’s focus on asset recovery as part of its anti-corruption efforts. These assets, particularly land, have been repurposed for social use in several instances, demonstrating progress in social reuse. However, important questions arise regarding the use of recovered funds, their oversight, and the beneficiaries.

When funds are returned to the National Treasury and the Consolidated Fund, how can we ensure they won’t be re-looted or mismanaged? How will their end use be monitored and audited? Were the victims, who suffered from the loss of these resources, compensated through services that were initially denied to them? Also, who decides how recovered assets are disposed of, and were civil society organizations involved in these decisions?

These concerns reveal gaps in the asset recovery framework in Kenya, although they don’t diminish the strides made in combating corruption.

What is Asset Management?

Asset management refers to the oversight and administration of assets seized, frozen, or confiscated during anti-corruption investigations. The key goal is to preserve the value of these assets and ensure they are used efficiently, transparently, and accountably for the benefit of victims and communities. This phase of the asset recovery process is crucial but often overlooked.

Effective asset management should:

  • Preserve the value of recovered assets
  • Protect assets from re-looting or misappropriation
  • Ensure assets benefit the victims or affected communities

To achieve this, the systems in place must be efficient, transparent, and accountable.

Global and Regional Standards

Globally, various principles and standards advocate for the proper disposal of recovered assets, ensuring they benefit those from whom they were stolen. These include, the Global Forum on Asset Recovery (GFAR) Principles, Civil Society Principles On The Role Of Victims In Asset Recovery and the Civil Society Principles for Accountable Asset Return. These guidelines stress the importance of identifying victims and affected communities and ensuring stakeholder inclusion, transparency, and accountability in asset utilization.

Regionally, the African Union’s Common African Position on Asset Recovery calls for strengthening frameworks for the management of recovered assets. It specifically recommends:

  • Creating or enhancing policies that ensure recovered assets are used for development or social investment projects that meet sustainable development goals.
  • Implementing strategies to enhance transparency and accountability in asset management, including monitoring by stakeholders.

These policies emphasize the need for a clear, unified approach to managing recovered assets, ensuring they benefit victims and communities, either directly or indirectly.

Asset Management in Kenya

Reports by CiFAR on Asset management in Kenya highlight similar issues, and underscores the need for a unified approach to management of recovered assets. Further, two key reports on the Social Re-Use of Recovered Assets in Kenya and on A Framework for the Distribution of Recovered Assets to Communities in Kenya highlight the importance of ensuring that recovered assets are reinvested or disposed of in ways that benefit affected communities as closely as possible.

What does this mean?

Recovering assets is just the first step. What happens post-confiscation, particularly regarding how these assets are used and who benefits from them, is equally important. Kenya could benefit from a national asset recovery policy that promotes a unified approach to asset management. A centralized register and transparent monitoring of assets would ensure they are used efficiently, benefiting those harmed by corruption while upholding accountability.

This approach would foster a transparent and accountable system where recovered assets can be traced, and stakeholders can actively participate in monitoring their use, reinforcing trust in the anti-corruption process.