The Nairobi County Assembly has been ordered to pay Sh7 million as compensation to a candidate who was vetted for the position of county chief officer in April last year, but his name was never approved for the job.
The Employment and Labour Relations court ruled that the Assembly and its Speaker were unfair to Halkano Dida Waqo, as he was kept waiting without being informed of the outcome of his vetting.
The court said Mr Waqo suffered a serious adverse outcome of an aborted process of his vetting, as he was not informed whether his name was approved or rejected, to the office of Chief Officer Housing and Urban Renewal.
“To vindicate the violations the petitioner is awarded Kshs.7,000,000 payable jointly or severally by the 3rd and 4th respondents (county government and Speaker),” said the judge.
Evidence tabled in court showed that Mr Waqo was among seven chief officers nominated for various positions in April last year.
The public was then invited to submit memoranda on the proposed nominations before the names were gazetted for vetting, approval and formal appointment.
Mr Waqo said he expected his approval to proceed smoothly, and he did not pursue any other professional or economic opportunities.
In May last year, a special sitting of the county assembly considered reports for six nominees but did not consider the report with respect to Mr Waqo’s nomination.
This was because the relevant County Assembly Sectoral Committee report by the Lands, Planning and Housing Committee of the assembly, which had vetted him, did not table its report.
It was his case that the committee’s failure to table the report inexplicably excluded him within the context of Standing Order No. 32(4) of the Standing Orders of the Nairobi County Assembly.
Mr Waqo said after the vetting proceedings, he has never been notified of the outcome of the process and in violation of his rights and the constitution.
In September last year, he wrote to the county assembly as a follow-up and a bid to establish the status of the outcome of his vetting, but he never got a response.
He submitted that he had since made numerous formal and informal inquiries on whether his nomination was approved or rejected, but no useful response has been provided to him.
The court ruled that Mr Waqo suffered significant harm, including emotional distress and mental anguish due to the administrative opacity and disregard, and suffered reputational harm from public perception of being nominated and silently dropped without an explanation.
“As a professional he has experienced loss of income and missed economic opportunities caused by reliance on the anticipated appointment as well as diminished professional standing and confidence in the integrity of public recruitment process,” said the court.
The court added that the suffering was aggravated by the refusal to provide relevant information in violation of the constitutional values of transparency, accountability, and good governance.
“His right to the opportunity to get fairly employed or not employed as a Chief Officer through rejection or approval of his nomination appears to have been grossly violated when the vetting proceedings before the Committee appear not to have been reported and deliberated by the 3rd respondent as was required by statute,” said the court.
The court further said it was most callous and whimsical for the county assembly to simply argue that the matter had been overtaken by events.
