THAT despite there being many Kenyans willing to sit on the 2nd Respondent’s board, the 1st Respondent has no valid reason other than delaying the results of the said April and November 2016 interviews and deceptively order for third recruitment process with a new board appointment later. This eventuality will cost the country in more (avoidable) wastage of economic resources.

 THAT the Respondents must note that huge public resources were used in the stillborn recruitment processed of the CEO of the 2nd Respondent and further; various Kenyans participated in the process and are entitled to be expeditiously informed of the outcome and especially on the shortlisted winners of the process.

 THAT the action by the 1st and 2nd Respondents to indefinitely defer the appointment of the CEO of the 2nd Respondent amounts to wastage of public resources, cheating of applicants and discrimination as those expecting the appointing would be made to give up after the indefinite and unlawful wait.

*************************** 

Cofek prayers are;

THAT this Honourable Court hereby orders the 1st Respondent to immediately publicly release results and make appointment of the CEO of the 2nd Respondent as recommended by the Board of the 2nd

 THAT this Honourable Court hereby orders the Respondents to publicly declare the actual cost of failed appointment processes on the appointment of the CEO of the 2nd Respondent since 2016

 THAT this Honourable Court do make a declaration that the 1st Respondent cannot purport to review, annul and or indefinitely delay procedural appointment of the CEO of the 2nd Respondent as made and or recommended by the board of the 2nd Respondent

 THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to bar the 1st and 2nd Respondents from re-advertising the position of CEO of the 2nd

 THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to order the 1st Respondent to perform his duty of constituting the board of the 2nd Respondent

THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to bar the Respondents from allowing the CEO of the 2nd Respondent to act in the position for more than 6 months

THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to declare that the 3rd Respondent has failed in its duty to protect the rule of law and defend public interest.

THAT the costs of this application be in the cause.

 

 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh