Eight orders issued by court on 50 CAS appointments

Court said Ruto enjoys immunity and was wrongly enjoined in petition.

In Summary

• The court said whereas there was reasonable public participation in the creation of 23 CASs, there was no such participation regarding the additional 27 CAS positions.

• "The notification of President William Ruto dated March 16, 2023, on the appointments is quashed," Justice Kimondo ruled. 

Lawyers follow proceedings of the hearing of petition challenging the creation of 50 CAS posts at Milimani Law Courts on Monday, July 3, 2023.
Lawyers follow proceedings of the hearing of petition challenging the creation of 50 CAS posts at Milimani Law Courts on Monday, July 3, 2023.
Image: DOUGLAS OKIDDY

The High Court on Monday gave its verdict on the consolidated petition that challenged the appointment of 50 Chief Administrative Secretaries by President William Ruto.

The court outlined its verdict and issued eight orders concerning the petition where President William Ruto was listed as the first respondent.

Among the final orders read by Justice Kanyi Kimondo, the court found that the President enjoys constitutional immunity from suit and was illegally joined into the proceedings.

It, however, found that he went against the constitution in creating the 27 additional CAS positions.

The court said whereas there was reasonable public participation in the creation of 23 CASs, there was no such participation regarding the additional 27 CAS positions.

"The notification of President William Ruto dated March 16, 2023, on the appointments is quashed," Justice Kimondo ruled. 

The court also dismissed a petition against the Controller of Budget that sought to find her at fault over the allocation of funds for the salaries of the persons appointed to the extra CAS posts.

Justice Kimondo also disallowed prayers sought to have Section 26 (ii) of the Salaries and Remuneration Act and the Salaries and Remuneration Commission, Remuneration of State and Public Officers Regulations 2013 be declared unconstitutional.

On costs, the court said each party shall bear its own costs. 

"Costs ordinarily follow the event and are at the discretion of the court. We find that the consolidated petition raised constitutional issues in the public interest. The order that commends itself to us is that each party shall bear its own costs," Justice Kimondo ruled. 

WATCH: The latest videos from the Star