KPC directors’ appointment challenged
What you need to know:
- Through lawyer Jacob Okoth, he claimed that the appointment of Mr Ngumi who is the board’s chairman was not advertised and did not include public participation as required by the law.
- Mr Ngumi’s appointment was gazetted on April 27, last year following a Presidential appointment alongside other appointees to lead various State corporations and regulatory agencies.
Nairobi resident has challenged the appointment of seven Kenya Pipeline Company (KPC) board of directors.
Mr Stephen Orendo Murumbwa sued KPC, energy Cabinet Secretary Charles Keter and the Attorney General while the board’s directors John Ngumi, Felicity Biriri, Marwa Maisori, Jerry Simu, Faith Jepkemboi, Itasayon Neepe and Wahome Gitonga are listed as interested parties.
Mr Murumbwa has however filed two separate suits, one against Mr Ngumi while the other against the six directors.
Through lawyer Jacob Okoth, he claimed that the appointment of Mr Ngumi who is the board’s chairman was not advertised and did not include public participation as required by the law.
He also disclosed that the appointment should have been made by the President soon after the appointing authority shortlists candidates who applied for that vacancy.
He faulted KPC of failing to advertise his position or declaring the existence of such a vacancy.
“The purported appointment of Mr Ngumi was made contrary to the law, was marred with illegality and should be cured by this court by an appropriate order,” Mr Okoth says.
Mr Ngumi’s appointment was gazetted on April 27, last year following a Presidential appointment alongside other appointees to lead various State corporations and regulatory agencies.
He was a former director at Konza technologies.
However Mr Murumbwa, in his case documents, argues that the manner in which Mr Ngumi was granted his current job was not done as per the required State Corporations Act.
He also accuses KPC of appointing the other six directors contrary to the principles of good governance as well as the Leadership and Integrity Act.
“The process leading to the appointment of the interested parties was made contrary to relevant values and principles that regulate appointments into public office as per the Constitution,” Mr Okoth said.
He alleged that the public was never informed about their appointments hence they got their jobs ‘through dictatorial decisions’.
“It is in the interest of the public that the rule of law on accountability for public exercise of power and fairness that this matter should be heard on a priority basis,” Mr Okoth added.
