The Kisumu Molasses plant

35 years since Dr Robert Ouko’s smoldering body was found by a herdsboy (13th February, 1990) near his farmhouse in Koru, many questions remain as to who murdered him and why but although much more is now known, the Kisumu Molasses corruption story remains a murky episode in the whole tragic affair.

It was the British Detective Superintendent John Troon who headed the New Scotland Yard team invited to Kenya by President Moi to investigate the murder of Dr Robert Ouko, who postulated the Kisumu Molasses corruption theory in his “Final Report’, although he accepted it was based on “circumstantial” and “tenuous” evidence.

The Kisumu Molasses Corruption theory

Troon’s theory as to a possible motive that could have led to the murder Dr Robert Ouko, was that Kenyan government ministers, through an intermediary, had sought to obtain ‘kick backs’ to allow a project to go forward to rehabilitate a molasses processing plant in Ouko’s Kisumu constituency and under his auspices as Minister for Trade. The theory ran that when the ‘kick backs’ were not forthcoming they supported alternative bids for the project and opposed Dr Ouko’s plans.

Central to Troon’s ‘Kisumu Molasses Corruption Theory’ was an allegation that at the time of his murder, Dr. Ouko was preparing a report into high level political corruption involving the Kisumu Molasses Project to be presented to President Moi and that it could have been in an attempt to obtain the report and stop this exposure that Dr Ouko was murdered, i.e., to silence him.

Domenico Airaghi and Marianne Briner-Mattern

The allegations that formed the basis for Troon’s theory were made by a Marianne Briner-Mattern and (to a certain extent) a Domenico Airaghi, who claimed to be directors of BAK International, a company based in Switzerland that had tendered to Ouko when he was Minister for Industry to re-start the Molasses Project in Kisumu.

Domenico Airaghi’s testimony, however, was that Briner-Mattern was not present at any meetings at which the alleged bribes were sought. He also directly contradicted Briner-Mattern’s open admission that the BAK Group was quite prepared to offer “commissions”.

No report, no documentation, no rivals

As for the “report”, no one, not even Marianne Briner-Mattern, ever claimed to have seen a corruption report on the Kisumu Molasses Project. No one else, including Airaghi, mentioned it in their testimony. And no corruption report was ever found.

The source for the ‘Kisumu Corruption Report’ theory was only and entirely Marianne Briner-Mattern. She, however, never produced reliable documented evidence to support her corruption report allegations. Giving testimony to the Parliamentary Select Committee investigation into Ouko’s murder in 2004, Brinner-Mattern made an incoherent statement in which she claimed the files had been on a beach in Tanzania and taken out to sea in speed boats.

The critical evidence that undermines the Kisumu Molasses Project allegations is that the two Italian companies introduced to the Kisumu Molasses Project by Domenico Airaghi, Asea Brown Boveri (ABB) Tecnomassio SpA and Tecnomasio Italiano/Brown Boveri, were part of the same multinational group, and the company that subsequently replaced Asea Brown Boveri, Techint, was also introduced by Airaghi.

There was no ‘rival tender’.

The Rome agenda

Marianne Briner-Mattern later accused Finance Minister George Saitoti, Energy Minister Nicholas Biwott and Dalmas Otieno (later the Minister of Industry) of removing the Molasses Project from the agenda of a bilateral meeting between Kenya and Italy that took place in Rome on 5 and 6 November, 1987, which she claimed, stopped any chance of funding from the Italian government.

There is, however, absolutely no evidence that the Molasses Project was ever placed on the agenda of the bilateral meeting, nor indeed could it have been.

The award of the Molasses Project contract to Techint introduced by Airaghi, was confirmed by the Kenyan Cabinet on 3 November but the agenda for the bilateral talks that began two days later in Rome would have been decided many months in advance and the Kisumu Molasses Project would not have been considered for inclusion at such short notice.

The minutes of the meeting and the attendant “List of Kenya Delegation” establish beyond doubt George Saitoti was in attendance at the bilateral meeting but that Nicholas Biwott was not. And the claim that Dalmas Otieno also attended the meeting is provably untrue and indeed absurd: Dalmas Otieno was not even a Member of Parliament at the time.

Letters, phone calls and threats

The basis for Briner-Mattern’s ‘evidence’ for the corruption report theory was that she wrote and spoke to Dr Ouko shortly before his death. The communications allegedly took the form of two letters supposedly sent by Briner-Mattern to Dr Robert Ouko on 29 January and 5 February, 1990 (of which she produced copies), and two telephone calls she claimed to have received from Dr Ouko. These were alleged to have taken place between 29th January and the 10thFebruary, 1990.

Troon accepted in his ‘Final Report’ that he had ‘found no independent evidence that Dr Ouko actually received the letter’ [of the 29th January] and that, ‘There is no independent evidence that Dr Ouko received this letter’ [5th February]. Troon stated that: ‘Papers in relation to the BAK allegations which may have been in the possession of Dr Ouko have not been found by the British investigators.’

Nor was there any evidence to support Briner-Mattern’s claim to have spoken to Dr Robert Ouko on the phone. Troon wrote: ‘Despite thorough enquiries I have not been able to obtain any evidence to corroborate these phone calls. Police enquiries to trace any telephone calls to Switzerland from Dr Ouko’s residences and office between June 1989 and the date of his disappearance have been negative even though copies of his accounts for this period have been obtained.’

Election 1988

The two letters supposedly sent by Briner-Mattern, particularly the first letter allegedly sent to Dr Ouko on 29 January and 5 February 1990, do not concentrate on bribes asked for by Kenyan Ministers and officials but rather threaten Dr Ouko about the employment of 50 workers at the Molasses Plant used for unlawful canvassing for Ouko in the election of 1988.

In the run up to the 1988 election, in which Dr Ouko faced stiff opposition from his local rival Joab Omino, Domenico Airaghi in effect donated $15,000 indirectly to Ouko’s campaign funds to employ 50 workers to begin cleaning up the Kisumu Molasses plant, as local voters would have observed.

In the letter of 29 January, Briner-Mattern informs Dr Ouko that she has hired a leading Kenyan law firm, was seeking a meeting with President Moi, and that an election fraud had been committed by using workers tidying up the Molasses Plant to campaign on behalf of Dr Ouko. She suggests that President Moi will be asking Dr Ouko for an explanation.

In the letter allegedly sent by Briner-Mattern on the 29 January, she stated: ‘… we believe that the reason for your non-involvement in our defence could be found when checking on the employment of the 50 workers, since we found out that they had been used also to “campaign” for you during the election and that part of the money was also used to pay the youth wingers.”

Briner-Mattern continued in the next paragraph: “Since it is possible that H.E. the President will approach you after it seems he finally received the letter sent to him by me originally in March 1988, I herewith enclose a copy for your knowledge and enabling you to prepare your defence…”

The express reference to letters to the President, the information on the fifty workers and the suggestion that Dr Ouko “get his defence in order” was without doubt a threat.

‘Truthful and honest’?

Troon accepted Airaghi and Briner-Mattern’s testimony because in his assessment they were, “truthful and honest witnesses”. It transpired that they were not.

Evidence established by 2003 proves beyond doubt that for the entire time that he was negotiating with Dr Robert Ouko and the Kenyan Government regarding the Kisumu Molasses Project, Domenico Airaghi was out on a bail having been convicted and sentence by a court in Milan after been found to have committed offences of corruption and presenting false evidence.

On the 14 March 1987, Domenico Airaghi and an accomplice were convicted (Civil and Criminal Court of Milan) on charges of corruption. The Court found that Airaghi had presented false evidence and false documents in an attempt to establish his defence. The judge described Airaghi as having displayed “the attributes of an International Fortune Hunter”.

Marianne Briner-Matter, or Marianne Briner as she termed herself at the time, who described herself as a “secretary” of “International Escort” an “employment agency”, gave evidence in Airaghi’s defence. The court found her evidence in support of Airaghi to be false. The judge said of Marianne Briner, “who lived with Airgahi”, that it would be better to draw a “compassionate veil” over her testimony and commented on her “unreliability” as a witness.

Airaghi appealed against his conviction, the final appeal ending in the conviction being upheld against him on the 4 April, 1991.

BAK a “reputable” company?

In respect of Airaghi and Briner-Mattern’s ‘company’, BAK, Troon stated in his ‘Final Report’ that Airaghi and Briner-Mattern, ‘have a reputation of both themselves and their company at stake in various African countries’ an assessment he repeated at the Judicial Inquiry when he stated, “it was conveyed to me that they were under a reputable company”.

BAK however were not a bona fide company as the Kenyan government had been led to believe, and there is no evidence that any of the BAK entities formally exited or had ever traded.

Various BAK entities were found to have used four different names and two addresses in just three years. The addresses given for each entity were low rent offices in Baden, Switzerland.

The story gets murkier still.

What a coincidence?

After over two-and-a-half years (from July 1987) in which Airaghi, Briner-Mattern and their back BAK company had been first dealing with Dr Robert Ouko, one BAK entity was finally and formally registered as a company in Switzerland. ‘BAK Group Marianne Briner + Partner’ was registered as a joint partnership on 13 February 1990 – the very day that Robert Ouko was murdered.

Liquidation proceedings against this BAK company began in Switzerland on 25 February 1992 and in June 1992 it was struck off the Register of Companies. At the same time Airaghi and Briner-Mattern established BAK Group International Consultants in Spain. It too was subsequently struck off the corporate register.

After Dr Ouko’s murder, Marianne Briner-Mattern claims for losses in relation to the ‘Molasses Project’ increased from $150,000 to $5.97 million.

The Kisumu Molasses theory was based on circumstantial, tenuous, unsupported and conflicting testimony. It came from a convicted extortionist and his willing accomplice – Domenico Airaghi and Marianne Briner-Mattern. Their “reputable” company did not exist. They had lied to the Kenyan government; they had lied to Dr Ouko; and they had lied to the Scotland Yard detective John Troon. There was no evidence of corruption and no corruption report was ever found.

Martin Minns produced the documentary series for Citizen TV (2017), ‘Who killed Dr Robert Ouko? And Why?

Kisumu Molasses Project Timeline & Facts

1977: The Madhvani Group proposed a joint venture with the Kenyan government to build a molasses processing plant in Kisumu.

1981: Work began on the Kisumu Molasses Project.

1983: The Kenyan Chemical and Food Corporation, the government’s special purpose vehicle set up to partner the Madhvani Group was insolvent as the project cost had reached $119 million against a projected cost of $61.4 million.

1986: President Moi announced that the Kisumu Molasses Project was to be rehabilitated and Dr Ouko, in whose constituency the plant was sited, was placed in charge of its revival.

1987: Dr Robert Ouko’s appointed Minister of Industry, the Ministry that would take the lead role in managing the project.

July 1987: Dr Ouko selected ‘BAK International’, based in Lugano, Switzerland, to help restart the molasses plant in Kisumu. The two ‘directors’ of BAK that Ouko dealt with were an Italian, Domenico Airaghi, and his partner, a Swiss-German woman Marianne Briner-Mattern. They agreed to search for the funding for the Molasses Project, find a reputable international contractor to undertake its completion, obtain a grant from the Italian Government to fund a study into the status of the plant, and assess what needed to be done to complete it.

6 August 1987: In a ‘Letter of Intent’ to Domenico Airaghi, Dr Ouko authorised the BAK group, to look for and obtain funding for the project and to nominate companies to undertake its completion.

23 September 1987: An Inter-ministerial meeting chaired by Dr Ouko agreed to issue a letter of intent to BAK and confirm that “the Italian Company has offered to complete the project and has undertaken to mobilize funds for this purpose.”

3 November 1987: The Kenyan Cabinet accepted the recommendation of a sub-committee chaired by Dr Ouko and agreed that the BAK nominated company Technit be awarded a contract for the study and rehabilitation of the Molasses Project. Specific duties were assigned to the Ministries of Industry (Ouko), Finance (Saitoti) and the Attorney General (Matthew Guy Muli) to oversee the project.

5 and 6 November 1987: Bilateral talks took place in Italy attended by Kenya’s Minister of Finance, George Saitoti. The Kisumu Molasses Project was not on the agenda.

March 1988: Following the general election, Dr Robert Ouko became the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Dalmas Otieno was appointed Minister of Industry taking over responsibility for the Kisumu Molasses Project.

September 1988: No feasibility study into the Kisumu Molasses Project had been undertaken and no funding arranged by the ‘BAK Group’ for the project’s completion.

27 September 1988: The Kenya Government selected a US company, F C Schaffer & Associates, to undertake a feasibility study of the Kisumu Molasses Project.

23 November 1988: The Minister for Industry, Dalmas Otieno, told Parliament that BAK was of “doubtful integrity”.

15 March 1989: Domenico Airaghi arrested at the Hilton Hotel in Nairobi by immigration officers and expelled from the country for alleged ‘interference with Government matters.’

17 October 1989: An interim report on the Kisumu Molasses Project delivered to Minister for Industry, Dalmas Otieno, FC Schaffer stated that they did not find the Kisumu Molasses project viable.

13 February 1990: The only BAK entity to be formally be established as a company, ‘BAK Group Marianne Briner + Partner,’ was registered as a joint partnership in Switzerland – the day that Dr Robert Ouko was murdered.

4 February 1991: Minister Dalmas Otieno informed F.C. Shaffer that the Kenyan Government had decided not to proceed with the Kisumu Molasses Project.

TAGS