When the news media talk about how many people are living in poverty, how many people were killed in a war, or how many people have been affected by a famine, where do they get the numbers from? Quite often the numbers are based on a poorly informed guess, which may get magnified as it is passed on. According to the Daily Nation, the myth about how many people live in the Kibera slums has been exploded by the 2009 Kenyan Census figures.

According to popular estimates, the number of people living in Kibera in an area of less than 2.5 square kilometres was between 500,000 and 1 million, with some estimates as high as 2 million. Depending on which estimate you accepted, Kibera was the biggest or second-biggest slum in Africa, or even the biggest slum in the world. That reputation has now taken a beating, with the Census figures showing the number of residents as just 170,070.

It seems that half of all Kenyans do live in absolute poverty, but only a small proportion of them live in Nairobi’s slums, if the census figures are correct. The total number living in slums according to the census is 618,916, out of a total population in the country of 38,610,097. Based on these figures, community development efforts have been over-servicing Kibera at the expense of the rest of the country.

Accused genocidaire Omar al-Bashir, who is the subject of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court, was welcomed to Kenya last Friday, in contravention of Kenya’s obligation to arrest him. Dignitaries from a number of different countries were invited to witness the signing into effect of Kenya’s new constitution, and the welcome shown to al-Bashir seems to send a clear signal that people in power in Kenya intend to continue to regard themselves as being above the law.

The International Criminal Court is currently investigating a number of crimes that were committed in Kenya in 2008 in the wake of disputed elections. After Kenya’s parliament prevaricated for more than a year over how those responsible for perpetrating the crimes were to be tried, or whether they were to be held to account at all, responsibility for conducting the trials was handed over to the International Criminal Court.

It has been speculated that Kenya’s leadership as a whole does not want anyone to be held accountable for the post-election atrocities. There has been a long history of immunity with senior political figures not being held accountable for embezzlement, murder or any other types of crimes. The latest incident with al-Bashir suggests that the forthcoming International Criminal Court proceedings will not be met with co-operation.

A court in Thailand has recently ordered the extradition of suspected arms dealer Viktor Bout to the United States. Bout was an officer in the Soviet Union’s armed forces, and became a businessman after the collapse of the Soviet Union, using surplus Soviet craft to run an international air freight business. It is alleged that he was not too fussy about the cargo he accepted, so that his business became a major supplier of weapons to fuel civil wars in Africa.

It has been speculated that Bout could be an interesting witness at the trial of former Liberian president Charles Taylor at the International Criminal Court. Taylor is accused of dealing in blood diamonds from Sierra Leone to fund the rebel forces there which committed acts of unspeakable barbarity on the people of Sierra Leone. Bout is alleged to have supplied arms to Taylor in exchange for blood diamonds.

Liberia is only one of numerous conflict zones in which Bout is alleged to have supplied arms. He is alleged to have supplied illegal arms to the UNITA rebel group in Angola, provided transportation services for al Qaeda in Afghanistan, delivered weapons to various armed groups in the Second Congo War, and provided transportation services to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Now Bout, who is often called the Merchant of Death, seems likely to face trial in the US for providing support to terrorist organisations.

Gerald Mbanda, the First Secretary at the Rwanda High Commission in Nairobi, Kenya, has written a spirited response to the complaints of Westerners about the lack of political freedom and press freedom in Rwanda. One week ago, Paul Kagame was returned to the presidency with 93% of the votes, a majority unheard of in most democracies. However, observers reported that the voting was conducted in a peaceful, orderly manner, with no signs of intimidation.

Critics say that two opposition parties were prevented from taking part in the elections. Mbanda says that the bannings occurred because those parties were making statements aimed at fuelling ethnic divisions and denying the genocide. Campaigning based on ethnicity is banned in order to prevent a repeat of the 1994 genocide. In many European countries, people are jailed for denying the Holocaust, so why should Rwanda not be permitted to have laws making it an offence for people to deny the Genocide?

Ultimately, however, it is difficult to challenge the extent of Kagame’s popularity in the country. What people in developing countries want more than intense political debate or hotly contested elections is a government that pursues sound economic policies which improve everyone’s living conditions. This is what the Rwandan government has been providing, and Rwandans are hoping that the good times will continue.

Yesterday, Rwandans turned out to vote in their presidential elections, some 16 years after the genocide, with voting commencing at 6am and closing at 3pm. The present incumbent, Paul Kagame, is expected to be returned by a substantial majority. Unlike many other African elections, the polls were well organised and there was no apparent intimidation of voters, but not everyone is happy with the state of politics in Rwanda.

Mr Kagame’s critics say that his real opponents were not allowed to stand or campaign in the election. The government is accused of suppressing free speech, and the secret service is accused of killing dissidents. Given the level of antagonism that existed in the country at the time of the genocide, Mr Kagame will always have vocal critics, but he does have a more authoritarian style of governance than would be expected in a Western country.

Economic development seems to be racing ahead in Rwanda, and the country could become the wealthiest in the region within Mr Kagame’s next seven-year term. The vast majority of citizens seem to like the current government because it has brought peace and the hope of prosperity. Counting is now under way, and the results are expected to be known shortly.

Tomorrow Kenyans go to the polls to decide whether to adopt a new constitution. The draft constitution is the result of a broad consultation process, and it is generally seen as a useful step forward because it provides ways of keeping corruption in check and it limits the absolute power of the president. It contains a number of unusual provisions, but the parliament decided to put the draft to the people without making any amendments.

President Kibaki had promised to bring in a new constitution during his previous term in office, but had failed to do so. He is now supporting the new constitution, as is prime minister Raila Odinga. Opposition to the constitution is being led by William Ruto, a member of parliament currently under prosecution for alleged corruption and also rumoured to be a possible target of the International Criminal Court over 2008’s post-election violence. Ruto hopes to become president one day.

Many churches have also proclaimed their opposition to the constitution because it contains a clause outlawing abortion unless in the opinion of a trained health professional the life or health of the mother is in danger and because it contains special provisions for Muslims. US anti-abortion campaigners have been funding and supporting the “No” campaign, as has former president Daniel arap Moi.

US Attorney General Eric Holder has announced that the US intends to seize money stolen by corrupt African leaders and invested in the US. Speaking at the African Union meeting in Kampala over the weekend, Mr Holder said that a team of prosecutors has been assembled for the “Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative”, which is designed to detect large-scale corruption, recover public money, and redirect it to its proper use.

It remains to be seen whether any benefits will come out of this new initiative. In 2004 the Meeting of G8 Justice and Home Affairs Ministers made a “G8 Ministerial Declaration on Recovering Proceeds of Corruption”, in which the G8 nations pledged to establish accelerated response teams, asset recovery case co-ordination, and asset recovery workshops. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime runs an Asset Recovery Initiative. I suspect that it is easier to run an initiative than it is to recover stolen assets.

Many of the major perpetrators of corruption are known, and the approximate extent of their looting and locations of their stolen assets are also known. $100 billion is said to have been embezzled from Nigeria. Mobutu Sese Seko is said to have embezzled $5 billion from Zaire. $3 to $4 billion is said to have been looted from Kenya, and a widely published leaked investigation report reveals where much of that money is.

Al Shabaab (“the youth”) terrorists bombed crowds watching a television broadcast of the World Cup Final on 11th July in Kampala, killing 74 people and injuring 70 others. Ugandan soldiers make up a substantial part of the African Union peacekeeping force in Somalia, and hence Uganda was the target for the Islamist Somali militia group’s attack. The group has previously declared war on Western NGOs that distribute food aid in Somalia.

The Ugandan government is now left with the dilemma of how it should respond. Should it withdraw its troops from Somalia in the hope of avoiding further casualties? Should it ramp up its presence in Somalia as a sign that it will not give in to terrorism? Should it invade Somalia, bearing in mind that Somalia has been essentially at the mercy of warlords, and very unresponsive to foreign interference for two decades now, in a manner reminiscent of Afghanistan?

It looks as if the Ugandan government intends to strengthen the presence of its soldiers in Somalia. The Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) has resolved to send extra soldiers to Somalia to strengthen the African Union, but given that the 7 member countries of IGAD are Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, Uganda and Eritrea, and that Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti, as neighbouring countries to Somalia, are prevented by UN resolution from sending troops, Uganda is pretty much on its own.

The attempt by Kenya’s members of parliament to award themselves 41% pay rises, making them among the most highly paid parliamentarians in the world, is continuing. The Treasury is reported to be opposing the pay rises, and the finance minister has said that he is determined to block them. The members of parliament are threatening to obstruct government business and prevent the passing of the Finance Bill and the Appropriations Bill.

The finance minister claims that, as the first half of the year’s budget has already been approved, he has enough money to run the government until December, and he is prepared to dig in for a long fight. If further money supply is cut off by the actions of members of parliament, it is hard to say whether the leaders or the members will be worst affected. The prime minister has spoken publicly against the pay rises, although he personally stands to gain very significantly from the proposed new pay structure.

Many members of parliament are already ambivalent towards the new constitution, which goes to a referendum on 4th August. The new constitution has numerous strange and unusual provisions, but it would, at least in theory, remove from parliamentarians the ability to set their own salaries. The US and UK have expressed the view that the new constitution is an important part of reforms needed to guarantee political stability in Kenya.

Last week Kenya’s politicians voted themselves a 41% pay rise, taking the monthly pay of an ordinary member of parliament from Sh851,000 to Sh1.1 million, with further automatic 5% annual increases. Kenyans are due to vote on a new constitution which, if passed, will remove from politicians the ability to determine their own salaries, so the latest money grab is a case of getting in while the going is good.

To put things in perspective, Kenya is one of the 30 poorest countries in the world. Its economy is around 3% of the size of Australia’s, although it has 80% greater population. Under the new pay proposals, according to NTV Kenya, Kenyan MPs will be paid 50% more than German MPs, and 110% more than French MPs. The Kenyan prime minister will be paid 10% more than the US president and more than a third more than the British prime minister.

Unsurprisingly, there is no money in the Kenyan budget to pay the increased salaries, which would have to be financed by borrowings. The Treasurer has indicated that he intends to oppose the increases, but it is likely that MPs will block parliamentary business until they can get their way. It is often argued that increased pay reduces corruption, but in this case most observers see the pay increases as an example of open corruption.