Why CAS case should be dismissed - PSC, Attorney General explain

AG asked the bench to dismiss the cases saying there cannot be two conflicting decisions.

In Summary
  • The PSC and the Attorney General said the three petitions challenging the appointments have been filed in the wrong court.
  • The matter is currently before the High Court, Constitutional and Human Rights Division.
Attorney General Justin Muturi when he appeared before the Shakaloha Inquiry Commission at the Senate on May 10, 2023.
Attorney General Justin Muturi when he appeared before the Shakaloha Inquiry Commission at the Senate on May 10, 2023.
Image: EZEKIEL AMING'A

The Public Service Commission has maintained that the dispute challenging the appointment of the Chief Administrative Secretaries (CASs) is a reserve for the Employment and Labor Court.

The PSC and the Attorney General said the three petitions challenging the appointments have been filed in the wrong court.

The matter is currently before the High Court, Constitutional and Human Rights Division.

While highlighting their submissions, the two told a three-judge bench constituted by Chief Justice Martha Koome not to hear the case arguing that the issues of constitutionality and public participation were already dealt with by the Labour Court in February this year.

The said court dismissed a case that had been filed by the Law Society of Kenya in which it sought to declare the CAS position as illegal.

Judge Monica Mbaru in dismissing the case said the commission followed the requisite legal procedure in its bid to establish the office to the extent of inviting public views.

Following this decision, President William nominated fifty persons for approval to be appointed to the office of CAS.

They were later appointed but before they could assume office, a case was filed in court challenging the same.

The case was filed by a Kenyan Citizen Eliud Matindi and another by LSK in conjunction with Katiba Institute.

They subsequently obtained orders stopping the 50 from assuming office and drawing salaries.

They faulted the  President for ‘unconstitutionally creating an additional twenty seven offices in the public service’.

It is what the AG, PSC and other parties are opposing. 

The AG asked the bench to dismiss the cases saying there cannot be two conflicting decisions.

"Which one will we choose? The Labour Court decision or the High Court decision. We cannot have two conflicting decisions," said the AG

The PSC in addition said the office of the CAS is not a state office but a public office and that is why the Salaries and Remuneration Commission did not have to determine the remuneration.

The salaries the court heard were determined in 2018 but when the PSC received an advisory from SRC, the remuneration was reviewed upwards.

The PSC also denied allegations of the duties of CAS usurping that of the Principal Secretaries adding that the issue was also dealt with by the Labour court.

WATCH: The latest videos from the Star