- Employment and Labour Judge Nduma Nderi said JSC violated acting Finance director Susan Oyatsi’s rights by not confirming her as a substantive director.
- Justice Nderi further faulted the commission for not providing reasons to Oyatsi why she was not confirmed.
Image: FILE
The Judicial Service Commission has been ordered to pay a senior employee Sh14 million as compensation for violating her employment rights.
The employee had been working in acting capacity for six years.
Employment and Labour Judge Nduma Nderi said JSC violated acting finance director Susan Oyatsi’s rights by not confirming her as a substantive director.
Oyatsi had moved to court seeking to stop the commission from hiring someone else to fill her position.
JSC was directed to pay Sh3,572,320 per year from May 2, 2018, to date.
The court ruled that the amount is sufficient compensation for the violation of her rights.
Oyatsi also got a reprieve since the court ordered JSC to confirm her for the position in the next two months.
“Having found that the petitioner has served diligently, effectively and efficiently in the position of director finance, for a period of more than six years," the judgement reads.
"The court deems her to be the substantive holder of the position of with effect from May 2, 2018, being 18 months from the date of appointment in acting capacity."
Justice Nderi further faulted the commission for not providing reasons to Oyatsi why she was not confirmed.
Oyatsi had in 2015 and 2019 unsuccessfully applied and was interviewed for the position of finance director while in acting capacity.
The court also held that JSC degraded Oyatsi’s dignity by subjecting her to undignified working conditions as compared to her peers.
“A false narrative being sent out impliedly that she was incompetent and not deserving of the position yet she diligently and graciously served for more than six years,” the court ruled.
Nderi said due to that Oyatsi suffered and endured less pay unlike her counterparts which in itself is humiliating and aggravating.
The judgement further said that even though it was prudent to publish scores for the interviews that Oyatsi participated in, she was entitled to receive reasons for non-appointment privately because she was already a judicial officer.
“Denial of that information impaired the petitioner’s right to exercise and protect her rights violated by the respondent for a very long time,” the judge said.
She had further argued that JSC’s own evaluation and rating of her performance for over six years is in stark contrast to the image the it portrayed to the public.
She said while by refusing to appoint her to the position JSC still continued benefiting from her full service.
(Edited by Tabnacha O)