Judiciary now says it did not preside over swearing-in of Ruto’s 50 CASs

The Judiciary now claims it did not preside over the Thursday swearing-in ceremony of the 50 Chief Administrative Secretaries (CASs) at State House in Nairobi.

The Judiciary, in a statement to newsrooms on Saturday, was responding to a claim by National Coordinator of the Institute for Social Accountability Diana Gichengo, which it termed as misleading.

It further stated that it did not send any official to State House to conduct the ceremony, adding that it has no role whatsoever in the process.

“The Judiciary's attention has been drawn to a statement issued by the National Coordinator of the Institute for Social Accountability Diana Gichengo, claiming that the Judiciary presided over the swearing-in of Chief Administrative Secretaries while the matter was pending in court,” read the statement.

“The statement is grossly misleading and deliberately meant to discredit the Judiciary. The Judiciary has no role in the swearing-in of Chief Administrative Secretaries. Similarly, the Judiciary does not play any role in the swearing-in of Cabinet Secretaries and Principal Secretaries.”

The statement added: “As such, no official of the Judiciary was sent to State House to swear-in the 50 Chief Administrative Secretaries. The Judiciary reaffirms its commitment to upholding the rule of law and the Constitution.”

The 50 CAS were sworn in following their appointment by President William Ruto after the National Assembly declined to vet them saying it had no constitutional authority to do so.

The High Court later issued orders barring the CASs from assuming office pending the hearing and determination of a petition challenging their appointment process.

In a ruling delivered on Friday by Lady Justice Hedwig Ong'udi, the court also barred the newly-appointed CASs from earning a salary, remuneration, and any benefit pending the conclusion of the case filed by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) and Katiba Institute.

In the petition, LSK and Katiba Institute sued the President and the Public Service Commission (PSC), while all the 50 CASs have been listed as interested parties in the case.

The petitioners argue that by appointing 50 CASs, the President violated Article 10 of the Constitution since he was “in the full knowledge that only 23 positions were created and recruited for.”

“By creating the additional 27 positions, the Respondents violated the binding constitutional principles, such the national values and principles of governance, contrary to Articles 4[2] and 10, particularly patriotism, national unity, the rule of law, democracy, participation of the people, good governance, integrity, transparency accountability and sustainable development.

"The latter is especially implicated due to the additional, unsanctioned call on public finances to fund the irregular positions,” read court documents.

The petitioners further argue that by creating additional 27 offices in the public service, to be financed using public funds, the President violated and threatened to violate Articles 201 and 228[5] which call for prudent use of public resources.

LSK and Katiba Institute further submit that the Public Service Commission has abdicated its roles under article 234 which are to inter alia to establish public offices in compliance and subject to articles 10, 232 and all provisions of the constitution.

“Such abdication has enabled the 1st Respondent (President) to establish 27 additional offices in violation of constitutional dictates,” the court documents further read.

The case will be mentioned on March 28, 2023 for further directions.