MOCKING THE PEOPLE : THE RIDICULOUSNESS OF POLITICAL APPOINTMENTS IN KENYA

 

                                                                          Image on Google

The modern administrative state has been charged with a noble responsibility of service delivery to the people. And in light of the sheer scale and complexity of services required by the citizenry in this age, it was always inevitable that professionalism within bureaucratic ranks would grow even more than the preceding governments that were in place before the turn of the 20th century. Thomas Woodrow Wilson argues in his distinguishable paper: The Study of Administration  that formerly, the government functions were relatively elementary, almost rudimentary. With the speedy entanglement of government business with interdisciplinary and technical fields, there was a growing  need for establishment of  specialistic bureaus managed by specialised bureaucrats for better execution of government mandate. Administration is the face of government, it is simply government in action and the most visible side of government. Those are the words of Woodrow Wilson. It is these proponents of the administrative state theory that strongly championed the establishment of a governmental system of hierarchical professionals occupying administrative offices. Thus governments have been eternally striving to achieve efficiency under the bureaucratic system of administration.

In light of all this it is important to note that the bureaucratic system has always found itself cornered by the questions of whether it attempts to impeach the will of the people since holders of state offices under representative democracy are not democratically elected. Their (Bureaucrats and administrators) somewhat problematic existence is a culmination of decades long battles of attempting to strike a balance between their overarching influence in governance and the actions of democratically elected leaders. Taking into account all the foregoing, the subject of discussion in this article is the process in which the occupants of those positions come into existence, especially top level government officials. Some state officers get into office through political appointments, meritocratic employment through consideration of qualifications and the former is the most prevalent in the upper levels of administration. The subject of discussion in this paper lies with the former too. The Constitution of Kenya 2010 empowers the president under article 132 (2) to  nominate persons for appointments to major administrative positions in government. This function of the president has been far from uncontroversial in our country. This has been a tale as old as the state of Kenya itself. Ranging from the appointments in the 1990s by Daniel Moi and Mwai Kibaki  to Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto in recent years. It is empirically true that the different governing regimes have opted to substitute the ills of their predecessors for newer ones rather than reforming the system of appointment  and benefiting public service and the people. This is due to the peculiarity of problems of the exercise of appointments in the various regimes. In order to prove that this is not a conjecture, the 90s were marred with nepotism, favouritism and over-lunch-hour-news substitution announcements, Mwai Kibaki made emotionally propelled cabinet reshuffles (which were followed by an embarrassing incident of appointees rejecting the offers), Uhuru Kenyatta became the master inventor of novel administrative positions while President William Ruto has triggered an avalanche of appointments with apocryphal qualifications. Recently, the extensive coverage has exposed a diseased system of presidential appointments. Embarrassing images were recently aired on various media platforms showing the sorry state of persons the president selects for appointment to even sensitive positions. Some examples of these include incoherent engagements with cabinet secretaries in in-camera interviews, ridiculous show of moral indifference when using social media platforms, distasteful dismissal of claims of stakeholders in the ministry of Health and that of Roads,Transport and Public Works, and more recently absurd responses from a candidate during a vetting session for a potential position of Consulate General in Goma Congo. It is important to highlight that the persons proposed or those already appointed do not lack merits. However, the issue centrally lies with their inability to look the part. A conclusion we rush to make is that academic qualifications are sufficient to pass for a leadership position. This disregard for other aspects, puts several provisions of the constitution and other legislation to shame. Article 73 (1) of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, under the chapter referred therein as Leadership and integrity states that authority is a Public Trust to be exercised in a manner that (i) demonstrates respect to the people; (ii) brings honour to the nation and dignity to the office. Subarticle 2 of that provision further states that selection should be based on personal integrity, competence and suitability. It is unlikely that the overt show of mediocrity that has been unapologetically waved in the face of Kenyans is in line with the foregoing constitutional standards. A frequent display of a handful of  the top leaders’ inability to carry themselves with the most basic standards of etiquette and decorum has become the order of the day. The constitution further states that the appointments should sow confidence in the government. By gathering feedback from the Kenyans on major platforms, it’s clear that there is absolutely minimal belief that the executive positions are in safe hands. The people of Kenya have silently cast what Jill Cottrell and Yash Pal Ghai term as a silent vote of no confidence. Moreover, while most executive appointees are academically qualified, it is unclear why there is minimal compatibility between the positions they hold and what they are specialised in. This narrows down to technical expertise vis a vis the appointee’s suitability to the office. In the spirit of practicality, it is key to match technical merit and the office they are to occupy. This is vital in establishing an office that understands the sentiments of other professional stakeholders. Take for instance, a Cabinet secretary who has never worked as a medic would never fathom the troubles of the medical field. Thus, it would not be a shocker that there would be an astronomical gap, inhibiting the meeting of minds on matters entrusted with the Cabinet secretary such as remuneration. Since the inception of the 2010 constitution, Kenya has moved from the Parliamentary model and this ceded a lot of leeway to the president on who he can appoint; anyone he/she fancies without being confined to members of parliament. Backing the statement by Yash Pal Ghai et al in their statement on a paper published at katiba Institute, the chief executive officer of the cabinet should understand that it is more than just political strategy but also basic practicality.

Consequently, it would be absurd to demand or expect diligence from the Counties in their appointments if the chief executive authority of the state can’t get themselves to act in the spirit of the constitution or any other attending legislation. There is immense congruence between the Public Appointments(Parliamentary Approval) Act No. 3 of 2011 and the Public Appointments (County Assemblies approval) Act No. 5 of 2017 in that they both prescribe similar qualifications and procedures for the appointment exercise under both levels. The contention on how appointments were made in the County governments has been on the forefront of impeachment proceedings against most of the governors. The diligent compliance of the elder brother would be very persuasive for the younger sibling to eat their vegetables. Similarly, the persistence of notoriety would undoubtedly trickle down to the devolved levels of governance.

It is clear that the constitution and other incidental legislation set standards for appointments both at the national level and county level. The spirit of the framers of the Constitution and statutes are the ultimate proof of the image the people wish to see in their government. The head of state and the chief executive authority of  the counties and the parliamentary committees tasked with approval should nip this show of shame and mockery towards the sovereign people of the republic of Kenya in the bud. Over the decades, achieving a ‘clean sheet’ in government appointments has proven to be an impossible task. The question arises then, is it really impossible to make appropriate appointments? I think not.

By Victor Mwangi, an editor at the University of Nairobi Law Journal