National Assembly Finance Committee Chairman Kuria Kimani /FILE

MPs suspended consideration of the Unclaimed Financial Assets (Amendment) Bill 2023 after the agency implementing the proposed law failed to make clear to the Committee what the amendment in the parent law was intended to fix.

The National Assembly’s Departmental Committee on Finance and National Planning expressed concern that, if left unchecked, the proposed amendment is prone to abuse and could pave the way for easy transfer of proceeds of economic crime.

Unclaimed Financial Assets Authority acting chief executive Caroline Chirchir was taken to task when she appeared before the committee to explain the challenges that led to the proposed change.

Ainamoi MP Benjamin Langat, who chaired the meeting, sought to know from the acting CEO of UFAA why they proposed to give a claimant owner the power to designate payment of a claim to another person.

“The amendment that this bill seeks to pass has very serious ramifications. Can you explain to us the challenges you encountered in managing the Fund as an Implementing Agency that led to this change?” he asked.

If the amendment had been adopted, a person or entity with a rightful claim on the funds or assets would have been given the authority to order payment or discharge of their claim to another person or entity.

In response, Chirchir told the Committee that while they agree with the proposed amendment, the Authority has not exhaustively concluded discussions with the parent ministry – the Ministry of National Treasury and Economic Planning on the bill and has sought more time to conclude deliberations . , causing lawmakers to read evil into the matter.

“Mr. Speaker, I would just say that this is a government bill. We have not had enough time to consult on the proposed change and we would seek to be given more time,” she told the Commission.

Dissatisfied with the response, Kesses lawmaker, Julius Rutto questioned how the Authority was not stopped from the objective of the bill but expected to implement the proposed law if passed.

“The authority is part of the government. What do you mean when you say this is a government bill? We need to know who is the initiator of the bill. We will not allow ourselves to make a law to suit the interests of others,” Rutto said.

Kitui Rural MP David Mboni noted that the lack of sufficient safeguards in the proposed amendment was a recipe for evil and warned against rushing through the bill until it was clear what harm it was meant to address.

“Mr. Mr. President, we must be very careful with this amendment. What safeguards have been put in place to ensure that this provision is not abused? What happens when the designated beneficiary passes before the claim is filed?” he asked.

Expressing the same concerns, Chesumei MP Paul Biego also sought to know when a beneficiary is expected to be designated and what happens if the designated beneficiary disappears.

The substantive chairman, Kuria Kimani, who joined the meeting, later told members that he would seek clarification on the matter from the bill’s sponsor.

Langat ordered to harmonize his position with the National Treasury before appearing again before the Committee in two weeks.

At the same time, members raised the issue of accrued interest earned on unclaimed assets not being passed on to beneficiaries on demand.

They suggested that the Committee would revise the provisions of the Act to provide that the beneficiaries earn a share of the said interest on demand.