The truth, according to Mithika Linturi

Fertilizer scandal: the truth, according to Mithika Linturi

The former agricultural cabinet secretary Mithika Linturi showed that the inferior fertilizer distributed in Kenya comes from a procurement rule that enabled the import of various types of fertilizer materials.

In the repair of the nation of NTV, Mr. Linturi said that Kenya received 34,000 tons of raw fertilizer material from Russia, which was to be mixed on site, and 16,000 tons of finished urea from Algeria, which were intended for top dressing.

He made it clear that the Russian consignment was not ready and required proper local processing, which may not have been carried out correctly, which led to quality concerns.

Mr. Linturi, who was released from his role after the dissolution of the cabinet in June last year, claimed that the problem was from the way the raw materials were processed after import, not from the procurement decision itself.

“We have received this rule, and here I suspect that the inferior fertilizer comes. In both years we received 34,000 tons of fertilizers or material from Russia and 16,000 tons from Algeria from Algeria.

Nobody knows exactly who saved this material. And here is the story. The 16,000 tons were urea, a finished product used for top dressing – while the 34,000 tons of Russia were raw material to produce fertilizer, ”said Linturi.

According to the former CS, the urea from Algeria was a finished product for the top dressing, a method used in agriculture to provide plants with essential nutrients during their growth phase.

In contrast, the Russian program was raw material, which is to be installed in usable fertilizer products for sales to farmers on site.

“The problem did not come from the countries of origin or even from the intention behind the imports. It is the local handling, especially the mixed process, which spoke out,” said Linturi.

He said there was no fake fertilizer, but admitted that the farmer, if the entrance does not meet the necessary standards, did not achieve optimal income.

“There was no wrong fertilizer,” said Linturi.

The once rated the worst minister said that he assumed no responsibility for the procurement and distribution of the inferior fertilizer.

He emphasized that his role as a minister was purely politically oriented and was not operational and that responsibility for the announcement of the ministry lies with the main secretary.

“As a country, we have to consider how we deal with agricultural imports and have to ensure that systems are waterproof from procurement to delivery,” he said.

He admitted that part of the fertilizer delivered did not meet the necessary standards, but pointed out that the product had already been distributed to the farmers, which made it difficult to remember.

He claimed that the decision for the National Cereal and Produce Board (NCPB) to procure fertilizer by a certain company was made by the head of the Felix Koskei public service.

He confirmed that the fertilizer from Russia had to be mixed to farmers before the distribution, and this process was not followed as needed.

“Instructions were needed. The donations had to be mixed,” he emphasized.

The former CS also made it clear that he did not examine the matter personally and explained: “I am not DCI. I am not the state house. The police and the DCI were responsible for the investigation.”

He said that at that time he was not in the country and was surprised to find out that a letter had been written in his name, who pointed out that he was part of a decision to hire sales, even though he had not returned or participated in this meeting.

“When I came back, I immediately explained the situation to my boss and we agreed that the matter would be addressed as the top priority. I could not understand why they didn't answer my calls, and I found that the people with the DCI were at the police station's records,” he said.

Mr. Linturi claimed when he tried to manage the distribution of the fertilizer, decisions were made one -sidedly by others, which led to contradictions and confusion.

“There was a separation of how we dealt with the matter. The PS did things differently than what we had agreed,” he said.