Questions Surrounding The Appointment Of CASs Should Be Directed To Judiciary And PSC

By: Joseph Mutua Ndonga

Worth Noting:

• The prayers sought in the previous petitions were not granted. The judges always ruled in favor of the respondents, the government, that the positions had been created in accordance with law.
• As we know, the position of CAS was created during the tenure of President Uhuru Kenyatta. In so doing, Uhuru invoked the powers conferred on him by the constitution.
• Responding to the critics’ assertions that he had dished out these positions to his cronies and all this was at the expense of the Kenyan taxpayers who were already overtaxed, Uhuru defended his decision, stating.
• The work load for cabinet secretaries (CSs) was too much. They were being overworked.

I have been following with keen interest the debate surrounding the nomination and appointment of 50 Chief Administrative Secretaries. Immediately after President William Ruto witnessed their swearing-in at State House, his critics led by Raila Odinga, the leader of Azimio La Umoja One Kenya Coalition, came out gun blazing.

They accused him of disregarding the law and claimed this once again demonstrated he was out to reverse the democratic gains that this country has achieved over the years.

We will not allow him to take us back to dark days of KANU/Moi dictatorship.

I disagree. Yes, it is true that this matter was in court but the Judge had declined to grant conservatory order sought by the petitioner.

The judge also refused to certify the case as urgent.

This means the decision by the President to witness the swearing-in of CASs and formally approve their appointments had not been declared as illegal.

This is not the first time a case challenging the legality and constitutionality of the CAS position had been filed.

The prayers sought in the previous petitions were not granted. The judges always ruled in favor of the respondents, the government, that the positions had been created in accordance with law.

As we know, the position of CAS was created during the tenure of President Uhuru Kenyatta. In so doing, Uhuru invoked the powers conferred on him by the constitution.

Responding to the critics’ assertions that he had dished out these positions to his cronies and all this was at the expense of the Kenyan taxpayers who were already overtaxed, Uhuru defended his decision, stating.

The work load for cabinet secretaries (CSs) was too much. They were being overworked.

The CASs will serve as their assistant and play a critical role of ensuring the vision and goals of their respective ministries are realized.

Their job description also covers marketing Kenya to the international community.  This will help to build investors confidence and create wealth and job opportunities.

So, the benefits to our country will be more than what they earn by far.

The first petition was filed by Law Society of Kenya (LSK) just a few days after President William Ruto was sworn-in.

The society argued the position of CAS is null and void. Uhuru failed to follow law and so the current president should be barred from repeating the same illegality.

The judges dismissed the petition on ground the LSK failed to convince the court that the former President had violated the law.

The law empowered the head of state to create a position or positions if this is done for the common good of the country.

It can only be issue if these appointments were made without subjecting the nominees to other legal requirements.

The Public Service Commission (PSC) must advertise these positions. Thereafter, the shortlisting is done and this clears the way for interviews. The names of those qualified are forwarded to the President for appointments.

I heard Azimio questioning why the CAS nominees were not vetted by parliament.

In my understanding, there is no law compelling the house to do the vetting of CAS nominees.

If the house opts not, this does not stop the President from discharging his mandate of approving the appointments.

Back to the petitions, the prayer of the number of CAS nominees that should be appointed had not been factored.

So, in their rulings, the judges did not specify the number.

To me, this was a glaring omission. The judges are allowed by the law to make certain discretions. Therefore, one would have expected the rulings to specify the minimum and maximum number of CASs.

Katiba Institute has moved to court seeking to stop the newly appointed CASs from assuming their respective office.  This is until the case they have filed is heard and determined, a prayer the court granted.

Katiba avers that the president violated the law by appointing 27 extra CASs.

According to their application, the law required PSC to recruit 23 nominees.

I’m longing to hear the sections of the law and rulings that Katiba will quote in support their case.

The President is not blame. Why did PSC fail to advise him? That is if the law specified the number of nominees.

Joseph Mutua Ndonga is a writer and commentator based in Nairobi

Similar Posts by Mt Kenya Times:

• IEBC outlines 2027 General Election preparations
• Nyoro: Parliament begins fuel price review
• Democratic Party of Kenya blames government for fuel crisis
• Court ends blanket teenage defilement charges
• Orengo’s Guard Gone