"The British are just another pack of  pharisee," says Yakobo Mutiti who wonders why a minister is banned while diplomatic relations is maintained with Kenya.
 
I am a Kenyan. I do not defend the Kenyan minister, neither do I have reason to support the regime of the Kenyan government.
 
One thing stands clear, however. The British government and its foreign office continue with the "holier than thou" attitude that has characterised the Commonwealth henpecking for a long time. Mr Murungaru came into office less than three years ago; the Kibaki government  has inherited a system that was ravaged and looted for over forty years. It has not been easy for the new government to dismantle the old structures and even the mentality.
 
When Britain tries to control or influence how the Kenyan government is run, or tries to interfere with the appointment of who should be in any position in government, this is hypocrisy of the highest order. Britain's problem with the current regime in Kenya is said to emanate from the fact that Kibaki's kitchen cabinet to which Murungaru has been said to belong moved at some point to shoot down some multi-million government tenders that have traditionally been reserved for British Multi-national companies.
 
The ministers argued that since Britain was in the lead in the putsch for transparency and accountability in regard to the running of Kenya government affairs, then they as well were to be subjected to healthy competition. In open bidding, the British companies were no match to those from Germany, Japan and China.
 
It does not make any sense for Britain to ban one minister and to continue with diplomatic ties with Kenya. If the British have clear evidence of corrupt practices on behalf of the minister, they should bring it out in the open, and lobby for his removal. If they are unable to influence the sacking of Murungaru just because they hate him, or he messed up their countrymen's fortunes, they must put up or shut up.