Waste of public resources is not just a moral issue – it affects quality of life for all Kenyans. It deprives citizens of health and education services – and can even cost lives – making it a human rights issue. The report shows the “opportunity cost” of corruption, that is the goods and services that could have been purchased with the money that was squandered – resources that might have otherwise helped alleviate poverty.

The amount spent by Kenya’s High Court alone (equivalent US$ 1.1 million) could have built at least one classroom in each of the country's over two hundred constituencies. Wasteful expenditure also seriously undermines reforms efforts. Conspicuous consumption makes a mockery of poverty alleviation efforts and fuels resentment in society.

Kenya is obligated under conventions (such as the ICESR) to take appropriate legislative, administrative, budgetary, judicial and other measures towards the full realisation of citizens' rights in areas such as education, health, and housing to the greatest extent possible with given resources. The use of considerable public resources to provide comfort for an elite few at the expense of leagues of citizens facing a life of privation is cause for grave concern.

Luxury cars are an obvious symbol of government waste: they are visible, expensive, unnecessary and serve the needs of a few individuals rather than the greater good.

Information that we have received since publication indicate that the real situation is much worse than reported in our findings. Anecdotal evidence suggests more expensive models are in use particularly by cabinet ministers. There are also grave issues regarding how the cars are assigned among the senior officers. Unconfirmed reports for example indicate that a senior official in the judiciary has 8 (eight) assigned to him, some with civilian plates. Others indicate instances where senior officials have several luxury vehicles at their disposal, in addition to others being allocated to their spouses and children.

It is the personal nature of these expenditures and their extravagance that the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights draws attention to. We do not argue that all expenditure on vehicle purchases during the period was questionable. The Office of the President, for example, spent more than one billion shillings (US $14m) to purchase a fleet of 417 Toyota Land Cruiser pickups, 24 Corollas and 20 Condors for the Kenya Police. The Ministry of Health also purchased 54 Nissan double cabs at a cost of Ksh.120 million (US $1.67m). We believe that these were legitimate public outlays in the service of ensuring the right to health and security. We also received reports of permanent secretaries and assistant ministers driving modest cars, and we applaud them for it.

We hope the country can follow the example of neighbours such as Rwanda and Burundi, which have taken bold steps, including the confiscation and sale of fuel guzzlers. As of May 2005, the sale of such vehicles had raised US $3.5m in Rwanda and further savings in fuel and maintenance costs are projected.

We hope that this report drives home the simple message that there is an incredible degree of unnecessary extravagance on the part of the Government of Kenya. At a time when so many Kenyans are facing starvation, we hope this report will encourage reflection as the new cabinet settles into office.

• Ufisadi Jijini: Corruption in services and electoral processes in urban kenya
• More Reports on TI Kenya´s website: http://www.tikenya.org/