Wilfrida Arnodah Itolondo v Attorney General & 5 others; Francis Aduol & 2 others (Interested Parties); Mary Walingo(Intended Interested Party) [2019] KEELRC 2233 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Employment Court ruled that university Vice-Chancellors can be reappointed for a second term without a competitive recruitment process, and dismissed the challenge to four reappointments.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether reappointment of a Vice-Chancellor to a second term required a competitive process
No competitive process was required; the respondents properly reappointed the interested parties after appraisal of performance
The court construed the word 'eligible' in Section 39(3) of the Universities Act using dictionary meanings, concluding that an incumbent Vice-Chancellor is fit and legally qualified for a second term without a fresh selection process. It relied on the Court of Appeal decision in Wilfrida Itolondo v President which bound it, and on Korir J's decision in Republic v Cabinet Secretary for Education holding the competitive process only kicks in on first recruitment. No violation of Articles 3, 10, 27, 35, 73 and 232 was proved.
Whether the Employment and Labour Relations Court had jurisdiction over the constitutional petition
Yes; the court's jurisdiction extends to all disputes relating to employment and labour relations, including enforcement of ancillary constitutional rights
The court relied on Article 162(2) and Section 12 of the ELRC Act, and on the line of authority including USIU v Attorney General, Mugendi, Okungu and Choge holding that jurisdiction is not confined to employer-employee relationships but covers all employment and labour relations disputes, including incidental constitutional interpretation.
Whether the petitioner had locus standi
Yes, under Article 258(2)(c) a person acting in the public interest has standing
The court cited Article 258, which permits proceedings by a person acting in the public interest. The petitioner described herself as a public spirited individual and defender of the Constitution, and the court found she had locus standi to file the petition.
Legal principles established
#- Where the procedure for reappointment for a second term is not specifically set out in legislation or the instrument of appointment, no competitive process is required provided the appointing body has reviewed and is satisfied with the appointee's performance during the first term
- A Vice-Chancellor eligible under Section 39(3) of the Universities Act for a further term is legally qualified for a second term and need not undergo a fresh selection process
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is dismissed
- 2.Each party shall bear its costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 162(2) of the Constitution and Section 12 of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wilfrida Arnodah Itolondo v Attorney General & 5 others; Francis Aduol & 2 others (Interested Parties); Mary Walingo(Intended Interested Party) [2019] KEELRC 2233 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Petition (Notice of Motion dated 18th January 2018) - number not stated in judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/2233/eng@2019-02-15
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.