The vetting of the various CS’es and PS’es appointed by H.E President Uhuru Kenyatta, refers.
While we had written to the President requesting him not to forward the name of one of the nominee CS’es (for having abandoned his State Office and occasioned a legal laguna and potential mass dropping of Court cases under investigation and or prosecution after his abrupt and suspect resignation), we would like to state as follows;
- THAT we neither received a response from the Presidency nor are willing to raise further objection on the said nominee on many accounts including but not limited to some raised here below and for which we request the Committee on Appointments addresses before proceeding with the exercise, which in our humble view, has been reduced to a mere formality. Open bias, refrain from asking questions or asking totally irrelevant or leading questions must be overruled by the Chairperson.
- THAT the refusal of the opposition MPs to participate in the vetting process, for reasons best known to themselves, will make the process a one-sided formality and a waste of public resources contrary to Article 232 of the Constitution. This conclusion is affirmed by the fact that the ruling party has an overwhelming control of both houses.
- THAT ideally the Speaker of the National Assembly should not be the chairperson of the Committee on Appointments. His presence amounts to intimidation and or negates his neutrality when the resultant report is tabled on the floor of Parliament.
- THAT in cases of integrity questions being raised against the nominees, it is only fair and just that such accusers and or claimants are allowed to observe and interrogate the nominees further.
- THAT the structure of vetting need to change so it doesn’t appear to be skewed towards negativity. Sufficient time, say at least 2 to 3 hours, need to be allocated per CS nominee. They must be allowed to inform the public, in their own words, about the impressive CV’s for instance that of Prof Margaret Kobia, whom we strongly feel she is not only competent but clearly fits her docket. The vetting need to be honest so as to take time to understand how non-technical nominees to like Ms Sicily Kariuki intend to manage the highly technical health sector especially on relationship between the Ministry and devolved health function.
We look forward to your consideration of our views so as to give meaning to public participation as contemplated under Article 10 of the Constitution . Thank you.