Why MPs vetting of CS nominees needs overhaul to raise integrity bar

It has been argued that leaving the vetting of CS nominees to select MPs who openly show their vested interests and bias, creates room for approval of incompetent people.

The process therefore needs overhaul for it to be more professional, thorough and exhaustive.

“We should have a committee that is all inclusive. It should consist of judges, civil society, lawmakers from both Houses, public servants, religious leaders, youth representatives and Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission officers among other agencies,” says Nyaribari Masaba MP Daniel Manduku.

Makueni Senator Daniel Maanzo, says the outcome of vetting was expected because memoranda provided by the public is never seriously considered.

“It is always most unlikely that the list will change from what the president has presented. Many times there is heated debate when the names are presented in the House, but since 2013 the president still has his way,” says Maanzo.

Some MPs have also raised questions about the reasons given for the rejections of one nominee, with Suba North MP Millie Odhiambo Mabona demanding to know why women always fall victim.

Posting on her X account, the vocal legislator wondered how 19 nominees were approved and only Ms Langat was rejected: “To fool us that the committee was professional, Soi had to be a sacrificial lamb. Was she in the last Cabinet? No. Is she corrupt? Maybe. Is she a lady? Yes. Did she score a D? Never.”

Crucified to save others

Like Mabona, many Kenyans took to social media to express disappointment over President William Ruto’s decision to reappoint six CSs that were dismissed after protesters demanded their removal in June over alleged corruption and incompetence.

Senator Maanzo believes that the rejected CS nominee, may have been crucified to save others who have questionable integrity. He wonders why the government failed to appoint at least one Gen Z into the Cabinet, because “they are the new world order” and are armed with very many ideas on how the country can prosper.

“Unlike the older people who have their own way of perceiving how to run the country, these young people are not only well read, but they are also adept at using modern tech to access a lot of information. I believe they will be very useful if given a chance in cabinet,” says Maanzo.

The senator rightly predicted that some dissatisfied people will challenge the appointments in court, and indeed the Kenya National Human Rights Commission (KHRC) moved to court on Friday seeking to block the new CSs from taking office over questionable integrity and flawed vetting.

“People can still pursue these issues in court if they are dissatisfied or are unhappy with the report and how vetting was conducted. Remember it was rushed. It is largely political goodwill that guides the appointments,” says Maanzo.

He however, warns lawmakers that times have changed from when the president used to appoint anybody and dis-appoint ministers any time because the Constitution now lays out guidelines for appointment and parliamentary approval.

Last week most of the reappointed CSs revealed that their net worth had shot up considerably, some by up to Sh150 million, raising speculation on how they amassed wealth in such a short period when other Kenyans are feeling the heat of the poor economy.

“Which business are they doing to get such a windfall, when Kenyan businesses are closing and companies are also laying off a large number of staff in many sectors?” Poses Prof Gitile Naituli of Multi Media University.

Many Kenyans, especially the Gen Z have expressed displeasure with how Parliament conducts business, especially the vetting of nominees to Cabinet, saying they should be recalled by their constituents.

But Tana River Senator Danson Mungatana disagrees, blaming Kenyans for being dishonest and corrupt just like the leaders they elect to represent them.

“Parliament is composed of all cadres of leaders chosen by Kenyans and they include young people, religious leaders, professors, illiterate and semi leaders and even thieves, who are a representative of the society that elects them,” says Mungatana.

He argues that it is irrational for some Kenyans to say MPs should be recalled because it is very likely that either the same people or those with similar characteristics will be elected to Parliament.

“Even if you dissolved Parliament today, I guarantee you that those elections will again be a reflection of this same society. It will be a waste of resources,” he says.

Political pundit Martin Andati however, says that Parliament is still largely a rubber stamp of the Executive because since 2013 when they were empowered to carry out serious scrutiny of public servants by the 2010 Constitution, they have failed.

Andati argues that although the majority and minority sides in Parliament are supposed to oversight the Executive like what happens in the US House of Representatives, in Kenya the majority largely pushe the president’s agenda.

Maanzo regrets that even if the minority side pushes for accountability, they face opposition from pro executive MPs and that is where the country has largely gone wrong because lawmakers assume they are working for the president.

The fight between the majority and minority side in Parliament has created room for the Executive and other forces to interfere with independent institutions created in the 2010 Constitution to promote accountability and to also enhance checks and balances provided by Parliament.

The drama witnessed between the Office of the Director of Prosecutions (ODPP) and the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) during the just ended vetting is a good example of how Parliament fails to play its role.

The committee appeared to side with the ODPP which said it had no evidence to prosecute one of the CS nominees, even after the EACC had written to Parliament saying it had collected sufficient evidence to show that the individual and his family allegedly dipped their fingers in the cookie jar.

Such drama has continued since the first term of the Jubilee administration under President Uhuru Kenyatta in 2013 as Kenyans continue watching helplessly.

“You have seen the impunity with which the leaders of majority in Parliament operate with. They are the law unto themselves. It is like the Hamurabi laws. Whatever they say is cast in stone. It must carry the day,” says Maanzo.

Conduct thorough checks

Manduku argues that apart from coming up with a detailed template of vetting CSs, Parliament should also provide more time for institutions like EACC to conduct thorough checks on nominees so that Kenyans can get leaders of integrity.

Maanzo says some people who send memoranda should be accorded time to make presentations during vetting instead of the committee merely announcing that they took note of allegations raised.

Currently, all petitioners are supposed to file memorandum either manually or electronically, each stamped by a commissioner of oaths, but it appears many Kenyans are not aware of the process, leading to dismissal of many petitions filed against nominees.

“We only saw the nominees and MPs exchanging. We should have a more transparent vetting exercise. We did not see anyone testifying. You rather even push more time so that Kenyans can get some sense of justice,” says Manduku.

Kenyans have been treated to drama during vetting over the years. There was drama in Parliament when MPs approved President Kenyatta’s CS nominee for the East African Community Phylis Kandie, who had been rejected by the vetting committee for allegedly performing poorly.

The MPs dismissed the Vetting Committee report, saying, it had not given sufficient reasons to reject the nominee, whose name was approved by the committee of the whole House.