Govt to wait longer to vet procurement bosses

A court order that suspended government directive to send heads of procurement and accounting on compulsory leave for 30 days for fresh vetting to be done will remain in force until Wednesday.

Employment and Labour Relations judge Onesmus Makau made the ruling on Monday after the government filed an application to set aside the order.

Last week, activist Okiya Omtatah challenged the government directive, arguing it was discriminatory to the affected public officers. He sued Head of Public Service Joseph Kinyua, the Public Service Commission and the attorney-general.

However, Solicitor-General Kennedy Ogeto and Interior Principal Secretary Karanja Kibicho also moved to court to protest against the temporary order.

“With each passing day in which government is prevented from undertaking an appraisal of the heads of procurement and accounting units in ministries, departments and agencies, corruption in the entire public sector remains [not attacked],” the PS said.

While pointing out that the exercise will also be rolled out to other public officers, he asked the court not to immobilise the fight against corruption.

“The public is losing faith in the procurement undertaken by public bodies in Kenya and the court should support the fight against corruption instead of frustrating the process,” Mr Kibicho said.

EACC REPORT

The PS said corruption has been an issue of concern and that 8044 reports on the vice have been analysed by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) in its 2017/2018 annual report.

He listed some of the complaints in 2016/2017 EACC report which involved more than Sh2.8 billion.

They include: an alleged irregular purchase of land from a vendor by the National Housing Corporation, an irregular award of tender for greenhouses in Kirinyaga County, irregular procurement of two new passenger ferries by the Kenya Ferry Services and procurement of faulty machines for printing imports standardization mark stickers by the Kenya Bureau of Standards among others.

Even though one of the claims in Mr Omtatah's suit against the directive was that the affected officers are anxious that they are on the verge of losing their jobs, the government insisted that the exercise is not meant to victimise or harass anyone.

The solicitor-general argued that the order issued is prejudicial and injurious to efforts in the fight against corruption.

“The appraisal process is being undertaken in the best interest of the public, as such, the ex-parte order serves to curtail the progress being made in the fight against corruption and offer a shield to perpetrators of graft as well as impunity,” said Mr Ogeto.

He added: “It is important that once a person becomes a public officer they are open to scrutiny and disclosing information.”

He said the appraisals is not a disciplinary issue but an inquiry into the record of heads of procurement as well as their financial integrity.

He argued that the state was not granted an opportunity to be heard hence the court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the matter at first instance.

But the activist told court that there is no clear legal framework to determine how the intended vetting is supposed to be handled hence it is discriminatory.

The Court is set to rule on Wednesday on whether its order issued earlier will be lifted or not.