Court awards man Sh7 million over delayed interview feedback

The Employment and Labour Relations Court has ordered the Nairobi County Assembly and its Speaker to pay a former nominee for Chief Officer Sh7 million for failing to complete his vetting process.

Justice Byram Ongaya ruled that the Assembly and Speaker violated Halkano Dida Waqo’s constitutional rights by failing to communicate the outcome of his vetting for the position of Chief Officer for Housing and Urban Renewal.

“The 3rd and 4th respondents to jointly or severally pay the petitioner Sh7 million by January 15, 2026, and failing interest to run thereon at Court rates from the date of this judgment until full payment,” the Judge ruled.

Waqo was nominated by the Nairobi Governor on April 15, 2024, and vetted by the County Assembly’s Lands, Planning and Housing Committee on May 6, 2024.

He had been nominated alongside six other candidates.

However, the committee never tabled its report before the full House within the statutory 21 sitting days.

Waqo said on May 21, 2025, the County Assembly held a special sitting where it considered reports for six nominees, excluding the report with respect to him.

He argued the committee’s failure to table the report inexplicably excluded him within the context of standing order No. 32(4) of the Standing Orders of the County Assembly of Nairobi City.

The court heard that after the vetting proceedings, Waqo has never been notified of the outcome of the vetting process and in violation to the Constitution and the Public Appointments (County Assemblies Approval) Act, 2017.

Section 9(1) of the Act states, “(1)Unless otherwise provided in any law, a committee shall consider a nomination and table its report in the County Assembly for debate and decision within twenty-one sitting days from the date on which the committee first sits to consider the nomination.”

He said on September 19, 2024, he wrote to the County Assembly and its speaker in a bid to follow up and establish the status of the outcome following his vetting as nominated for Chief Officer Housing and Urban Renewal.

No response came, he said, despite making numerous formal and informal inquiries on whether his nomination was approved or rejected for appointment.

Waqo stated that the respondents were automatically required to address his reasonable expectation and the failure to do so was unlawful, unreasonable, procedurally unfair and in breach of the legitimate expectation to due process in the vetting and appointment proceedings.

The responded however argued that the petition did not meet the evidentiary threshold of granting the orders sought as the facts and or grounds upon which it was anchored and premised did not raise any constitutional infringement or violation to warrant granting the orders.

They added that the allegations imposed on Governor and the City County were “far-fetched, misconstrued, unlawful and unreasonable”.

In the judgment, Justice Ongaya said the Assembly’s failure to act amounted to a violation of Articles 35 and 47 of the Constitution, which guarantee access to information and fair administrative action.

“The failure to table the vetting report and communicate the outcome was callous, whimsical and a gross violation of the petitioner’s rights,” the judge said.

The court found that while the Governor and the County Government had fulfilled their role by forwarding the nomination, the County Assembly and the Speaker were responsible for completing and communicating the vetting outcome.

Justice Ongaya declared that the two respondents had breached constitutional values of transparency, accountability and good governance under Article 10.

The court awarded Waqo Sh7 million in general damages to be paid jointly or severally by the Assembly and the Speaker by January 15, 2026, with interest accruing thereafter at court rates.

“In that consideration, the Court finds that the award as made will meet the ends of justice,” the court stated.

Other prayers, including an order to compel the Assembly to table the report and to quash the subsequent appointment of another officer, were declined since the process had already lapsed and the position was filled.

The ruling underscores public bodies’ obligation to conclude and communicate administrative processes promptly, with Justice Ongaya noting that state organs cannot let vetting processes “fade away in silence.

 “Public office is about service to the people and not a power to rule the people free from the chains imposed by the law and the Constitution, especially, the pronouncements in the Bill of Rights,” Justice Ongaya said.