Wanjohi v Karatina University; Kakiya & another (Interested Parties) (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E004 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 2601 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Employment and Labour Relations Court dismissed a challenge to Karatina University's Finance Officer appointment, confirming that allegations of unfair hiring and integrity issues must be backed by admissible, probative evidence.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the petition met the Anarita Karimi Njeru competence threshold
Despite lacking some material particulars, the petition disclosed a reasonable constitutional cause of action with reasonable precision
The court applied the Anarita Karimi Njeru standard requiring precision in stating the complaint, the provisions infringed and the manner of infringement. It found the petition lacked some material particulars but nevertheless set out the violations, the constitutional provisions and the manner of violation with some degree of precision, so it met the threshold.
Whether the recruitment procedure violated Articles 73(2)(a) and 232(1)(g) and (i)
No violation proved; the two advertisements, shortlisting, interviews and scoring demonstrated fair competition, merit and inclusivity
The court found two advertisements were issued, one in a nationwide newspaper and the university website, attracting internal and external candidates. The decision to re-advertise was made by the full council before the two members resigned, no evidence showed the council lacked quorum, and the advert's equal-opportunity statement aligned with Article 232 and the Public Service Regulations on affirmative action.
Whether the 1st Interested Party was qualified and fit for appointment
She held the required academic and professional qualifications; allegations of financial impropriety and integrity issues were not proved on a balance of probabilities
Relying on Mumo Matemu, the court held that unfitness on integrity grounds is a factual issue requiring probative evidence. The EACC investigations targeted the Vice Chancellor, not the 1st Interested Party, no disciplinary proceedings existed against her, clearance certificates were produced, and the petitioner's documents were inadmissible as illegally obtained or uncertified electronic records.
Admissibility of the petitioner's documentary evidence
Auditor General's report and KRA tax documents were inadmissible - the former for illegal acquisition, the latter for lack of a section 106B certificate
The court found the petitioner produced no evidence of lawful acquisition of privileged documents such as the Auditor General's report and management letter, contrary to Article 50(4) and Article 35(1) objections. Separately, computer-generated tax documents lacked the certificate required under section 106B of the Evidence Act, rendering them inadmissible.
Legal principles established
#- Public entities must recruit through open, competitive and inclusive processes guided by merit and integrity, including fair inquiry into allegations of impropriety
- The burden of proving constitutional violations lies on the person alleging them, on a balance of probabilities, and the Evidence Act applies to constitutional petitions
- A review of an appointment on integrity grounds cannot be half-hearted; it must be conclusive, fair and just, dependent on probative evidence
- Documents obtained illegally or not certified as required by section 106B of the Evidence Act are inadmissible in constitutional petitions
Court orders
#- 1.The petition is dismissed
- 2.The petitioner is not condemned to pay costs since the suit was public interest litigation
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Article 165 of the Constitution / Article 23 jurisdiction over alleged violations of Articles 10, 27, 73 and 232
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Wanjohi v Karatina University; Kakiya & another (Interested Parties) (Employment and Labour Relations Petition E004 of 2022) [2023] KEELRC 2601 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2023). Petition dated 26th May 2022 (ELRC, Nyeri). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2023/2601/eng@2023-10-25
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.