Why deputy governors in Kenya need clear roles

Mohamed Guleid

NAIROBI: Most deputy governors are either a frustrated lot or are enjoying a passive and relaxed working environment.

The office of the deputy governor is a creation of the Constitution. Section 180 of the Supreme Law states that a governor must have a running mate to get elected.

Once a governor has been elected, his deputy becomes automatically elected. Chapter 11 of the Constitution describes the composition of the county government and the functions of all the offices including that of the deputy governor.

But the only functions ascribed to the deputy governor are set out in Section 179(3 & 4); he is the deputy Chief Executive Officer of the county and deputises the governor in his absence.

APPARENT HEIR

The only other place the Constitution refers to the deputy governor is in Section 181, involving the removal of the governor. Here, the deputy governor gets the honour of being the apparent heir. But the Constitution does not mention the deputy governor’s removal process. In essence, it is the safest seat to be in. The county assembly, which can impeach the governor has no powers over the deputy governor. 

The saddest part, however, is that this important office exists but is not to be heard. Many governors see the deputy as a potential opponent so the best they can make of it is to stop any attempts by his deputy to shine.

Through constitutionally granted powers, the governor can frustrate his deputy by denying him the benefits of the office. The other employees are directly answerable to the governor but not the deputy, therefore, in the event of a power show, they are likely to succumb to the governor.

Only in a few counties is there is a power-sharing arrangement similar to that of the President and his deputy. In areas where there has been political allianced of different political parties, the coalition is able to withstand only if a bargain between the two county bosses exists.

However, where both the governor and his deputy belong to the same political party, unless other balancing factors such ethnic loyalty plays a role, the deputy is likely to be disadvantaged in sharing out of county resources.

Since the deputy governor is a politician, the likelihood of resentment might be high, leading to competition. Internal wrangles are likely to stall the work of the county because of the inability of the governor to remove his deputy.

The victims here would be the citizens because the process of implementation of the Constitution and development of county structures might stall. The solution, therefore, lies in changing the law. The first option can be to create clearly defined roles for deputy governors independent of interference from the governor. This would make the office useful and increase the efficiency of the county government.

SIGN A PACT

The second option is to make the position independently elective. The person running for this office should run independently and can sign a pact with the governor. This makes sense because the governor would then not sideline his deputy upon winning.

The third option is to abolish the office totally and allow the governor to appoint an assistant from his committee of executives.

Failure to change the law will result in having deputy governors whose only responsibility would be to create parallel centres of power within the counties. Ultimately, service delivery might be undermined. The full implementation of the Constitution would also be seriously delayed.

The easiest option to resolve this issue is the amendment of the County Government’s Act to accommodate an active role for deputy governors.

Such a function could include playing an oversight role on matters of finance and procurement to ensure the correct checks and balances within the executive of the county government.

The law is also not clear about the possible resignation of a deputy governor. The Constitution does not give the governor powers to appoint another deputy. Is this a potential Constitutional crisis?