Dwasi v Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Natural Resources & another (Petition 35 of 2017) [2019] KEELRC 2562 (KLR)
The bottom line
#What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Scope of the respondent's role in appointing the NET chairperson
The JSC's role was to nominate the chairperson of NET and the respondent's role was merely facilitative, limited to gazetting and appointing the nominee; the respondent had no statutory power to reject a JSC nominee
Section 125(1)(a) of EMCA vested the nomination of the NET chairperson in the JSC, with the respondent's role limited to gazettement and appointment. The JSC maintained, and the respondent's conduct in purporting to reject the nominee on September 25, 2017 and October 13, 2017 usurped the nominating body's mandate. The judgment records the precedent that where one body nominates and another gazettes, the latter's role is merely facilitative. However, the court did not make a final determination because subsequent events rendered the application spent.
Fair administrative action in the refusal to gazette the applicant
The applicant argued, but the court did not finally determine, that the respondent's refusal breached article 47(1) of the Constitution, section 4(1) of the FAA Act and natural justice because she was not notified of the complaints or given a chance to respond
The applicant submitted that the respondent failed to notify her of the decision to refuse gazettement, contrary to article 47(1) of the Constitution and section 4(1) of the Fair Administrative Action Act, and alleged bias and tribal/nepotistic influence by the Principal Secretary. The respondent's role was instead said to have usurped the JSC's mandate. The court made no express finding on these complaints, as the application was overtaken by events, including the lapse of the interim appointment and amendment of section 125 of EMCA.
Whether the mandamus application was overtaken by events
Yes - the one-year interim appointment had lapsed, the law had changed, and the applicant had already been installed in a transitory capacity by an earlier ruling, rendering the orders sought superfuous
The court noted that the one-year interim appointment had lapsed on September 14, 2018; that the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Amendment) Act, 2018 had amended section 125(5) of EMCA so that the JSC no longer nominates the chairperson; and that its ruling of March 2, 2018 had appointed the applicant in a transitory capacity pending recruitment of her successor. In these circumstances the mandamus orders sought were superfuous and incapable of being granted, and the application was declared spent.
Legal principles established
#- An order of mandamus issues only to compel the performance of a statutory or public duty that is lawful
- A suit may be declared spent where events subsequent to its institution render the orders sought incapable of being granted
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated December 22, 2017 is declared spent
- 2.Each party shall bear their own costs
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Judicial review jurisdiction under article 159 of the Constitution (order of mandamus); not expressly cited by article number in the judgment
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Dwasi v Cabinet Secretary for Environment and Natural Resources & another (Petition 35 of 2017) [2019] KEELRC 2562 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Judicial Review Application (Notice of Motion dated December 22, 2017). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/2562/eng@2019-11-22
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.