Beneficiary? Ahmednassir cornered over selective action on corruption while North Eastern counties are crime scenes

Ahmednassir Abdullahi, a prominent figure in Kenya’s legal and political circles, has recently found himself on the headlines for what many are calling selective action in his fight against corruption.

Known for his sharp critiques and no-nonsense approach, Ahmednassir has often directed his energy toward attacking leaders from the Mt. Kenya region and Chief Justice Martha Koome.

However, critics argue that his focus seems to waver when it comes to addressing the rampant corruption in North Eastern counties, where governors and other leaders have been accused of far worse offenses than those he frequently highlights.

This has led to questions about his motives and whether his anti-corruption stance is as impartial as it claims to be.

In a post shared by Zakir Hassan on X, Ahmednassir, a senior counsel, has built a reputation for being outspoken and fearless in calling out wrongdoing, especially within Kenya’s political elite.

His social media platforms are often filled with scathing remarks aimed at leaders he believes are failing the public.

Yet, when it comes to the North Eastern region, his silence is deafening. The region, often referred to as the North Frontier District (NFD), has long been plagued by allegations of corruption, mismanagement, and embezzlement of public funds, further stated Zakir Hassan.

Governors and other officials in these counties have been accused of siphoning resources meant for development, leaving their constituents in dire conditions.

Despite these glaring issues, Ahmednassir has rarely, if ever, called out these leaders with the same vigor he reserves for others.

This selective approach has not gone unnoticed. Many Kenyans, especially those from the North Eastern region, feel that Ahmednassir’s silence on these matters is a betrayal of the principles he claims to uphold.

Corruption, after all, is corruption, regardless of where it occurs or who is involved. By focusing his criticism on specific individuals and regions while ignoring others, Ahmednassir is seen as biased or even complicit in the very corruption he claims to fight.

Some have gone as far as to suggest that his actions are politically motivated, aimed at protecting certain interests while targeting others.

The situation in North Eastern counties is particularly dire. These regions have historically been marginalized, with limited access to basic services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

The misappropriation of funds by local leaders only exacerbates these challenges, leaving residents to suffer the consequences.

For someone like Ahmednassir, who has positioned himself as a champion of justice and accountability, the failure to address these issues is a glaring omission.

It raises the question, why is he so vocal about some forms of corruption but silent on others?

Critics argue that Ahmednassir’s selective criticism undermines the broader fight against corruption in Kenya. Corruption is a national problem that requires a unified and impartial approach.

Focusing on certain individuals or regions while ignoring others, Ahmednassir risks alienating those who look to him for leadership in this fight. It also sends a dangerous message that some forms of corruption are more acceptable than others, which only serves to perpetuate the cycle of impunity.

While Ahmednassir’s efforts to hold leaders accountable are commendable, his selective approach to corruption raises serious concerns.