Maasai Mara University has been given two weeks to return before Parliament with current and former officials after MPs halted the examination of its latest audit reports over nine financial queries dating back to 2018.
The National Assembly Public Investments Committee on Governance and Education said it would not proceed with the 2023/24 and 2024/25 reports until the older matters raised by the Auditor-General are fully addressed.
The decision followed a difficult sitting in which Vice-Chancellor Prof. Peninah Aloo-Obudho faced strong criticism over the university’s failure to bring key officers expected to respond to detailed financial, procurement and legal questions.
The committee, chaired by Luanda MP Dick Maungu, is reviewing Auditor-General’s reports covering the 2018/19 to 2024/25 financial years.
MPs raised concern that the university had appeared before them without its substantive finance officer, procurement officer and legal officer. They also questioned the absence of officials from previous administrations who could shed light on matters arising from the years they served.
Kiminini MP Maurice Kaikai Bissau accused the Vice-Chancellor of making the committee’s work difficult instead of helping provide answers to the audit concerns.
“I’m really surprised that the VC has just decided to be hostile. This is a public investments committee, education and governance. It’s an audit committee, and we are here to interrogate each and every issue,” Kiminini MP Maurice Kaikai Bissau said.
Igembe Central MP Daniel Karitho also took issue with the composition of the university’s delegation, particularly the failure to bring the finance officer and members of the council.
“You came again and you expected a committee to listen to you without even the substantive finance officer who was supposed to be here and also the council,” he said.
Kasipul MP Boyd Were, the committee’s vice-chairman, then questioned the timing of the finance officer’s compulsory leave, noting that the officer had been removed from duty shortly before the university was scheduled to appear before MPs.
Prof Aloo-Obudho defended the decision, saying it had been made by the university council as part of an investigation that had been ongoing for some time.
“We did not send the finance officer on leave with crucial information. This is a process that has been going on from last year,” she said.
The explanation did little to ease the concerns of MPs, who noted that the finance officer had been placed on leave only two days before the appearance. They questioned how the university expected to respond to long-running financial queries without having the officer available.
The committee also questioned the failure to include procurement and legal officers in the delegation, given that some of the matters under review required technical explanations from the two departments.
Prof Aloo-Obudho said the university had understood the committee’s invitation differently. She explained that she had previously been warned against bringing a large number of officials to Parliament.
Bissau rejected the explanation, telling the Vice-Chancellor: “Your team is not well composed.”
As the exchange became more heated, Maungu reminded Prof Aloo-Obudho that the university was appearing before a parliamentary committee to account for public funds.
“This is a committee of Parliament, and you’re not here for tea, chai and mandazi, but we are here for serious business,” he said.
Maungu subsequently ordered the Vice-Chancellor to take an oath, referring to what he described as anger and outbursts during the proceedings.
The committee’s concerns centred on nine audit matters that have remained outstanding since 2018. Among them are doubtful contracted services, cash balances without supporting documents, irregular allowances and the overpayment of car allowances.
Other queries relate to bank balances that were left out of financial records, foreign travel and training costs that lacked supporting documents, irregular medical expenses and high employee costs.
The Auditor-General’s representative told the committee that the university had not formally responded to the outstanding matters.
Prof Aloo-Obudho challenged that position, saying she had documentation responding to issues raised between 2018 and 2022.
Maungu maintained that the committee first had to establish how the earlier audit matters were handled before examining the newer reports.
“If we never concluded it then, there’s no way we can discuss it now. We have to look at it from where it began,” he said.
The MPs also examined the role of the university’s former Vice-Chancellor, Prof Mary Walingo, who was in office from 2014 until August 2019.
The committee heard that the “Mara Heist” occurred in 2019 while Prof Walingo was in charge of the university. She told MPs that the current administration had not asked her to appear and assist in addressing questions linked to her time at the institution.
The discussion brought to the fore questions over how responsibility should be shared between the former and current administrations for audit issues that have remained unresolved over several years.
Prof Aloo-Obudho denied having any personal differences with Prof Walingo and apologised to the committee following the tense exchanges.
The committee ordered the university to engage the Auditor-General’s office and clear all nine outstanding queries before appearing again.
It further directed the institution to return in two weeks with the relevant current and former officials so that MPs can obtain answers from those directly involved during the periods under review.
The committee will only resume consideration of the 2023/24 and 2024/25 audit reports after the outstanding matters from the earlier years have been conclusively dealt with