By Lucianne Limo
NAIROBI, KENYA: The appointment of Principal Secretaries can go on after the High Court dismissed a petition challenging the recruitment process.
Justice Isaac Lenaola yesterday threw out the application saying the Public Service Commission acted within their mandate in the exercise.
Consumer Federation of Kenya (Cofek) had moved to court to stop the appointment of Principal Secretaries claiming the recruitment process was flawed.
Cofek wanted the court to issue an order stopping the implementation of the Public Service Commission’s decision to recruit and recommend to President Uhuru Kenyatta for appointment of the 66 Principal Secretaries.
The consumer organization was aggrieved that members of the public were locked out of the recruitment process.
The court noted that there is no requirement in law that it should conduct all interviews in public or publicise the names of all persons who had applied for the position of PS.
“It has also not been denied that proceedings were video recorded and that any person, including Cofek was at liberty to procure the information they needed, “said the Judge.
He further supported PSC arguments that by publishing the names of all applicants in the website was a cheaper option.
“How can the petitioner in any event deny that there is need to secure public funds and that more and more institutions of governance are relying on the interest to send information about its activities, ”Lenaola added.
The judge further said the lobby group had latched on to the phrase ‘participation of the people’ in a selective and selfish manner.
“There is no express requirement that ‘participation of the people’ should read to mean that ‘the people’ must be present during interviews but taken in its widest context that their input is recognized, “he said.
He pointed out that the public will be represented by the Members of parliament when the names will be forwarded to parliament for vetting.
“In the present case, there is opportunity for a second time for the people to participate indirectly in raising issues, good or bad about persons recommended for appointment because parliament, before approving any applicant ,will scrutinize their suitability, “the court said.
On the issue of integrity, the court noted that a letter written by Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission to the PSC concerning some applicants has no details of the nature of investigations against them nor the status of those investigations.
Stay informed. Subscribe to our newsletter
“A court cannot and should not condemn a party on the basis of suspicious generalities which have not been carefully crafted to enable the party under attack respond comprehensively to the allegations of lack of integrity, “he added.
He also threw out the petition on grounds that the lobby group claimed sitting PS’s were not given opportunity to be interviewed yet they failed to supply the court with names or evidence in support of their claim.
In their petition, Cofek averred that the PSC did not publish final list of successful candidates for scrutiny by members of public and other legal institutions involved in vetting senior public appointments.
They also claimed PSC ‘s decision denied the graft body an opportunity to commence scrutinizing the candidates ahead of parliamentary vetting which ,they added, is likely to be rushed owing to time constraints.