50 CASs Were Too Much - Mutahi Ngunyi

Political analyst Mutahi Ngunyi has weighed in on the High Court's Monday ruling that deemed the appointment of 50 Chief Administrative Secretaries unconstitutional. 

The three-judge bench consisting of Justices Kanyi Kimondo, Ali Visram, and Hedwig Ong'undi agreed with the petitioners' claim that there was no public involvement in the additional 27 positions President William Ruto appointed beyond the 23 vacancies announced by the Public Service Commission. Ngunyi concurred with the Judiciary's opinion that 50 CASs are too much. 

He wondered if the observance of the democratic rule of law would impede Ruto's capacity to govern. On March 16, Ruto nominated 50 CASs for the position from a list of 240 shortlisted aspirants. The High Court issued an injunction that prohibited the CASs from taking up their posts until the legal case challenging the appointment process is heard and decided. Should the government appeal Monday's ruling and then fails, it will be the first setback Ruto would have encountered in the constitution of his administration.

The court maintained that the Head of State erred in the appointment of the 50 CASs, however, Justice Aleem Visram found that Ruto was wrongly sued over the matter. He said the apex court made an error in its decision in the BBI case when it said the President can be sued if found to have violated the constitution.

“This leaves me with the conclusion that the learned judges unfortunately failed and erred in the interpretation and application of Article 143 (ii) of the Constitution by holding that civil proceedings can be instituted against the President or the person performing the functions of the Office of President during the tenure of office in the effect of anything done or not done contrary to the Constitution,” he said.