An examination of the implementation and prioritization of the three-pronged anti-corruption strategy in Nairobi County, Kenya (2003-2011)

This study examined the factors which influenced the implementation and prioritization of the three-pronged strategy which the Government of Kenya adopted in 2003 to fight corruption. Despite its adoption, the prevalence of corruption in the country remained high as reported in the anti-corruption commission reports, corruption perception surveys, parliamentary reports and in the media. The widespread corruption was an indication that the strategy faced challenges in reducing it and this situation propelled this study to be conducted to make suggestions on how to address the problem. The objectives of this study were to; examine the factors which influenced the institutional efforts of implementing the strategy, to assess its prioritization and to draw modifications in its implementation. Bureaucratic Theory and Rational Choice Theory were used to demonstrate how public officials abused power and authority bestowed on them to make selfish decisions which adversely influenced the implementation of the strategy and reduction of corruption. This study was conducted in Nairobi County due to the high prevalence of reported mega corruption cases and the fact that the site provided the requisite population being the centre of most of the public and private entities where major public decisions were made. The study relied on a Survey method, primary data was collected using structured and unstructured questionnaires administered among the three categories of the respondents. A discussion guide containing keys issues related to the objectives of the study was also provided to steer the focus group discussions. Additionally, secondary data was obtained from published and unpublished academic materials, public documents and internet sources. Majority of the respondents (75%) indicated that Government had not succeeded in implementing the strategy while 89% were of the opinion that political and socio-economic factors significantly influenced the strategy’s implementation. Judiciary was blamed by 97.9% of the total respondents for failing to facilitate the implementation of the strategy. Civic Education was given the highest priority by 51% of the total respondents as very effective strategy for reducing corruption, followed by Prevention (26%), and Investigation strategy (21%). This study concluded that corruption was still rampant and Government should enhance reforms required to address the political and socio-economic shortcomings affecting the strategy. It should also introduce anti-corruption studies in academic institutions and develop a criterion of prioritizing the three prongs. Corrupt offenders should be seriously punished and the unexplained assets recovered to deter potential offenders.