The Hustler Fund, initially pledged by President William Ruto to support Kenyans situated at the lower end of the economic spectrum, has indeed been set in motion. However, contrary to the initial promise of grants, it is disbursed as soft loans, which recipients are obligated to repay within a specified timeframe. There exists a cloud of uncertainty enveloping the fund, its operational procedures, and the identity of its rightful owner. Curiously, this perplexity persists despite the absence of legal anchoring in parliamentary legislation or budgetary allocations.
Additionally, there is a pressing need for clarity regarding the automatic deductions that are made as savings from the recipients’ funds. Kenyan citizens are yet to be informed about the mechanisms for accessing these saved amounts, further complicating their relationship with the fund.
One noteworthy drawback of the Hustler Fund is the relatively small sums of money dispensed. This inadequacy leaves many of the intended beneficiaries feeling that the fund’s impact is insubstantial and incapable of significantly improving their circumstances.
The question of who administers the Hustler Fund is equally pertinent. Economist David Ndii has divulged that the private sector exclusively manages the fund, with no involvement from the Government of Kenya or any public officials. He shared these insights during an interview on Citizen TV, confirming that government entities lack access to the fund. The entire operation relies on automated systems for the disbursement of funds, eliminating the direct participation of public officers.
Consequently, the absence of public oversight raises concerns about accountability. If any wrongdoing were to occur in the administration of the Hustler Fund, there would be no clear authority to hold accountable, as the intricate process remains shrouded in secrecy. Private companies have partnered with the Kenyan government to execute the fund’s operations, and the funds themselves are securely held by a custodian bank. Notably, telecommunications companies are the intermediaries that facilitate access to the fund.
These revelations understandably prompt Kenyan citizens to ponder whether the Hustler Fund is a government initiative or the brainchild of private business entities. The circumstances surrounding the fund’s management raise questions about potential state capture, a phenomenon where private interests wield disproportionate influence over government affairs. Time will be the ultimate judge in determining the true nature and impact of the Hustler Fund.
