KPA board suffers blow in human resource policy change case
The Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) Board of Directors has suffered a blow after its objection to a petition challenging a new controversial human resource policy was overruled.
Employment and Labour Relations Court Judge Byram Ongaya dismissed the objection and directed the parties to take steps to expedite the hearing and determination of the main case.
The civil dispute pits the KPA board against Genesis for Human Rights Commission (GHRC) over the changes.
Dismissing the board’s preliminary objections, the judge noted that the petitioner had established that the case was brought in the public interest.
“In conclusion, the notice of preliminary objection filed by the directors is dismissed,” said the judge.
Through lawyer Githu Muigai, the board objected to the case, questioning GHRC’s legal capacity to file the suit to quash internal management instruments governing employment and human resource management.
The board also argued that the case was time-barred as the changes being challenged were considered, approved and adopted last year.
“It follows that the applicant’s application as framed seeks to challenge the merits, substance and the content of the human resource instruments and not the decision-making through which the said instruments came to be,” the board said.
GHRC has sued the board over what it called alterations in its human resource policies, claiming it had affected staff deployment.
It has accused the management of failing to conduct an inclusive process before formulating and presenting the policy for approval thus denying the procedure the legitimacy, trust and cohesiveness it deserves.
In its court documents, the organisation says that if the irregularity goes ahead unchecked, a precedent will be set where the rule of law and laid-down procedures for policy formulation in public institutions will be thrown out of the window.
The rights group also faults National Treasury Cabinet Secretary Ukur Yatani over his involvement in the matter when he approved the revised policy, noting that he does not have the authority to do so.
Last month, the organisation’s case received a major boost after the Public Service Commission (PSC), which is listed in the case as an interested party, distanced itself from the process that led to the adoption of the structural changes.
The PSC stated that any structural changes made at the KPA without its approval is illegal and unconstitutional.
It also argued through an affidavit filed by PSC Chief Officer Kevin Rotich that the development or review of the organisational structure of a public service entity such as the KPA should be approved by the PSC before it is implemented.
“Implementation of any establishment or organisation structure without the approval of the commission is unconstitutional and unlawful,” he said.
The PSC also states that it had not received a request to establish any new positions or review the organisational structure of the KPA as required by law as the parastatal falls under its mandate.
GHRC wants the court to quash the implementation of the proposed revised policy and the subsequent deployment of 38 staff members. BY DAILY NATION
.jpg)
Post a Comment