Employment and Labour Relations Court has ordered the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) to compensate 41 police officers who had been seconded to it after terminating their services in January without giving reasons.
Employment and Labour Relations court judge Byram Ongaya ruled that the decision to terminate the secondment of the police officers to the investigations and enforcement department was unprocedural because it led to the reduction of their salaries and other benefits.
The 41 police officers were part of a team of 60 dispatched to the KRA for three years and subject to extension for another two years. The contract could only be terminated on disciplinary or other grounds.
Justice Ongaya said the termination was grossly unfair as it was done without notice, and due reason, yet the police officers had served diligently.
“As submitted for the petitioners, they had no expectation of such sudden termination of their respective secondment contracts. The court considers that they are entitled to lament that their salaries were significantly reduced and they were no longer entitled to the enhanced remuneration and other benefits under the secondment contracts,” the judge said.
The court directed the KRA to pay the officers 10 months’ gross monthly salaries each after deducting the pay- as- you- earn.
According to the judge, the parties were bound by the contracts they signed, and the affected officers were entitled to serve for the entirety of the initial three years or the extended two years of secondment tenure unless earlier terminated on disciplinary or other grounds.
“The court returns that the respondent flagrantly violated that contractual provision and as submitted for the petitioners,” the judge added.
The police officers led by Victor Otieno, Ronah Omache, Guyo Alakhe, and Margaret Njoka informed the court that KRA in liaison with the National Police Service invited qualified individuals to apply for the in its investigations and enforcement department.
The affected officers successfully applied for the positions and were taken through a competitive recruitment before their secondment.
But before the contract lapsed, they were issued with letters of termination on February 3, this year.
KRA defended the termination arguing that it was in line with the provisions of the Public Service Commission Act as their services were no longer required.
The court, however, said there is no material evidence tabled showing that it was no longer necessary for the petitioners and other affected officers to continue on the secondment contracts.
According to the judge, the contracts and the letters of termination did not invoke or refer to the guidelines on secondment in the Public Service.
The judge said the secondment contracts were silent as they did not incorporate the guidelines and as well, and the letters terminating the secondment did not state that the termination was by the Guidelines, generally or in any material provision.
“The Court finds that in any event, the respondent has not shown any provision of the Guidelines that may have been invoked in terminating the secondment contracts,” the judge said adding that invoking the guidelines was an afterthought.
