<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Kenya Corruption- Followup #1</title>
	<link>http://www.afriendlyletter.com/index.php/church-frauds-related-crimes/kenya-corruption-followup-1/</link>
	<description>Independent Quaker Journalism &#038; Commentary. By Chuck Fager.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 01:54:57 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Johan Maurer</title>
		<link>http://www.afriendlyletter.com/index.php/church-frauds-related-crimes/kenya-corruption-followup-1/#comment-472</link>
		<author>Johan Maurer</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:58:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.afriendlyletter.com/index.php/church-frauds-related-crimes/kenya-corruption-followup-1/#comment-472</guid>
		<description>It frustrates me when we Friends, with our testimony of integrity, operate as if our tiny scale renders us exempt from the normal scrutiny (imperfect as it may be) of journalism and the general public.

Four specific comments on Chuck's call for more transparency on corruption in the Quaker world, particularly in Kenya.

1) Cultural expectations don't excuse corruption, but they help explain the specific forms corruption takes in specific places. I'd argue that corruption I grew up hearing about in Cook County, Illinois, was just as "bad" as corruption in Kenya. Let's guard against an unintended implication that those of us outside Kenya (sheltered as we often are by the safety nets of affluence) are better than Kenyans.

2) I appreciated the efforts of Quakers in Kenya, including some involved with Friends United Meeting leadership, in proposing a set of ethical principles a few years ago. I covered it here: http://johanpdx.blogspot.com/2006/03/on-giving-and-receiving.htm --adding a few suggestions of my own. I also recommend reading the comments.

3) Here's a specific plea to Friends organizations drawn from my comments in that post, one that I wish I didn't have to keep making: "Don't appear to donors and potential donors to be a black box! Issue annual reports, make your financial reports easily available to the partner organizations as well as donors, report governance issues honestly and provide easy access to minutes of meetings. Model the practices you expect to see from your implementing partners." I've got a pile of correspondence with one new institution in Kenya documenting my inability to get straight answers about the institution's finances. Such information should be given SWIFTLY and GLADLY.

4) Our zeal to unmask corruption should not cause us to be less careful about reputations in Kenya than we would be about reputations in our own home town or meeting. One reason FUM representatives can't satisfy our every curiosity about corruption is that they may have had very solid suspicions but little or nothing in the way of proof. Without proof, we're flirting with libel. This was certainly my dilemma at times when I was at FUM. By the way, there were also at least two cases of Kenyan leaders repenting of shady practices directly to us, and working to make restitution. It does happen!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It frustrates me when we Friends, with our testimony of integrity, operate as if our tiny scale renders us exempt from the normal scrutiny (imperfect as it may be) of journalism and the general public.</p>
<p>Four specific comments on Chuck&#8217;s call for more transparency on corruption in the Quaker world, particularly in Kenya.</p>
<p>1) Cultural expectations don&#8217;t excuse corruption, but they help explain the specific forms corruption takes in specific places. I&#8217;d argue that corruption I grew up hearing about in Cook County, Illinois, was just as &#8220;bad&#8221; as corruption in Kenya. Let&#8217;s guard against an unintended implication that those of us outside Kenya (sheltered as we often are by the safety nets of affluence) are better than Kenyans.</p>
<p>2) I appreciated the efforts of Quakers in Kenya, including some involved with Friends United Meeting leadership, in proposing a set of ethical principles a few years ago. I covered it here: <a href="http://johanpdx.blogspot.com/2006/03/on-giving-and-receiving.htm" rel="nofollow">http://johanpdx.blogspot.com/2006/03/on-giving-and-receiving.htm</a> &#8211;adding a few suggestions of my own. I also recommend reading the comments.</p>
<p>3) Here&#8217;s a specific plea to Friends organizations drawn from my comments in that post, one that I wish I didn&#8217;t have to keep making: &#8220;Don&#8217;t appear to donors and potential donors to be a black box! Issue annual reports, make your financial reports easily available to the partner organizations as well as donors, report governance issues honestly and provide easy access to minutes of meetings. Model the practices you expect to see from your implementing partners.&#8221; I&#8217;ve got a pile of correspondence with one new institution in Kenya documenting my inability to get straight answers about the institution&#8217;s finances. Such information should be given SWIFTLY and GLADLY.</p>
<p>4) Our zeal to unmask corruption should not cause us to be less careful about reputations in Kenya than we would be about reputations in our own home town or meeting. One reason FUM representatives can&#8217;t satisfy our every curiosity about corruption is that they may have had very solid suspicions but little or nothing in the way of proof. Without proof, we&#8217;re flirting with libel. This was certainly my dilemma at times when I was at FUM. By the way, there were also at least two cases of Kenyan leaders repenting of shady practices directly to us, and working to make restitution. It does happen!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
