Bad idea to have governors appear before the Senate
The Senate building in Nairobi.
The latest report by the Auditor-General has predictably revealed persistent accountability issues stalking county governments’ management of public resources.
The report, covering the 2022-2023 period, raises concerns over procurement irregularities, inflated costs, missing records, and unauthorised expenditures, among others.
The persistence of these issues is a clear indication of the gaps and inadequacies of the accountability systems. It’s probably with this in mind that Kiambu Senator Karungo wa Thang’wa recently suggested an amendment to the Senate Standing Orders to compel governors to appear before the Senate plenary to respond to accountability queries.
The shape and design of oversight over the devolved units continues to be contentious. As far back as 2014, governors challenged the requirement to appear before the Senate to answer queries. Their argument was partly anchored on the fact that county assemblies exist for the same purpose.
The Senate, governors argued, should focus on the national institutions charged with enabling and facilitating devolution. The the Supreme Court in 2022 held that the Senate has powers to summon governors.
A governor heads the county executive similar to how the President heads the national executive. Oversight over the national government is exercised by Parliament (National Assembly and Senate). In a similar fashion and design, a county assembly exercises oversight, or should, the county executive.
Whereas the national executive has a single level of oversight through Parliament, one wonders why a county executive should be subject to two-layered oversight: Senate and county assembly. Further, Parliament’s oversight of the executive is through Cabinet secretaries. The President is hardly a subject of direct Parliamentary scrutiny, why shouldn’t the same apply for a governor?
Governors have argued that subjecting counties to direct oversight by the Senate only serves to weaken the oversight role of the assemblies. The argument, in my opinion, is not an empty one. The proposal by Mr Thang’wa would heavily shift the oversight system to the Senate at the expense of assemblies.
Rather than degrade their place, county assemblies should be empowered to assume more power in exercising their oversight responsibilities. Recently, Council of Governors Chairperson Anne Waiguru made a case for granting the assemblies greater autonomy over their budgets for this reason.
Part of the solution also lies in addressing a design flaw in our bicameral Parliament. Persistent disagreements between the two Houses over their mandates is symptomatic of the design flaw. Confining Senate’s role to being the custodian of devolution was wrong.
Its mandate should be broadened to cover more national roles akin to the US Senate. This will have the double benefit of freeing up space for assemblies to exercise their oversight powers, while ensuring effective checks and balances between the Senate and the National Assembly.
