The suspect class

If you can no longer trust what a CBK official tells you, why ask him about signatories? Won't his answer be dubious as well? Like asking the waiter if the samosa was cooked today - of course he'll say yes! @mungaikihanya

There are many things that we instinctively believe to be true about our public officials. Few of those things tend to be virtuous. The things we tend to remember about our public officials we have learnt from experience. While national opinion poll after national opinion poll continue to rank the most corrupt public institutions -- the National Police Service and the Ministry of Lands are notable champions in this regard -- our impression of the Central Bank of Kenya is largely positive even if, every now and then, weird things happen that the Bank can't explain.

Of the three public finance institutions, the other two being the National Treasury and the Kenya Revenue Authority, the Central Bank continues to enjoy a good press, especially now that it seems to have extricated itself from the messes created by Njuguna Ndung'u and Andrew Mulei. But some of us have far longer memories and we well remember that the Goldenberg swindle would not have succeeded for as long as it did if the Central bank hadn't played a key role. Of recent vintage are intrigues surrounding payments made in the NYS scam and the never-ending quest to award a tender to print Kenya's next-generation currency notes and coins.

It is likely that Patrick Njoroge is an honourable man and that Wallace Kantai is being forthcoming about the second billion-dollar Eurobond. But if Mr Njorge and Mr Kantai choose to share information about how the proceeds of the bond were managed, they should share information as fully as possible. It is not that we don't trust them -- we know well enough not to -- but that the moment they shared any information on the proceeds of the bond, those snippets would simply lead to more questions. It should have been full disclosure or radio silence and not this weird half-cocked attempt at transparency.

It seems that the Central Bank hasn't learnt the proper lessons from the debacle of the last Eurobond. We were not suspicious merely because we did not know when key transactions took place with regards to the proceeds of the bond: opening of bank accounts, deposits of proceeds, or transfer of proceeds to Kenya. We were also suspicious because the roles of the Central Bank, the National Treasury and the transaction advisers remained murky all through. With the new Eurobond, the same errors are being repeated by the National Treasury and the Central Bank.

A full accounting before our suspicions are confirmed may stave off a bad press. What did the Central Bank do and when did it do it? Did it depute key officers to do these things? How many third parties assisted the Central Bank in its role with the Eurobond? If we are wrong to ask these things, lt the Central Bank say so and justify itself. We no longer live in a world where public officials dealing with massive amounts of public funds are believed when they pronounce themselves on things and when they are vague about what it is they are saying, our suspicions deepen.