Namu v National Police Service Commission & 2 others (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E005 of 2023) [2023] KEELRC 1231 (KLR)

The court applied the Anarita Karimi Njeru standard as affirmed in Mumo Matemu, requiring a petitioner to set out with reasonable precision the complaint, the constitutional provisions infringed and the manner of infringement. On perusal, the petition clearly pleaded the complaint of frequent deployments (transfers in disguise), cited articles 27, 41 and 47, and set out detailed particulars in paragraphs 8 to 13 of the petition.

The respondents argued the petitioner bypassed internal mechanisms under the Transfer and Deployment Regulations. The court read regulation 6 and found the objection procedure therein is availed only to an officer facing a transfer by the Commission. Since what was impugned were deployments by the Inspector-General, the exhaustion doctrine was not offended and the suit was properly before the court.

The court examined police signals showing the petitioner was moved from Nakuru-Naivasha to Kerugoya on January 23, 2023 with records amended and a transfer allowance paid, then to Kambi ya Moto on February 1, 2023, and to Central Regional Headquarters on February 13, 2023. Amending records and paying a transfer allowance showed a transfer in substance, which is the Commission's mandate, not the Inspector-General's.

Following the decision in Republic v Deputy Inspector General of Police Service ex parte Stephen Mathenge, the court held that failing to consider family obligations is a failure to consider a relevant factor rendering a decision irrational. The court took judicial notice that the Service maintains a database of officers' spouses and children, so the respondents could not claim ignorance of the petitioner's family. The lapse of only two weeks at Kerugoya was itself a material factor.

Article 24(5) permits statutes to limit articles 31, 36, 37, 41, 43 and 49 for National Police Service members, but the respondents cited no such statutory provision. Article 27 is not listed at all and therefore applies fully. Although some labour statutes are disapplied to police officers, this does not strip officers of the right to fair labour practices; the Service must still consider family and children's education, especially for female officers.