Clerk,Nairobi City County Assembly v Speaker, Nairobi City County Assembly & another; Orange Democratic Party & 4 others (Interested Parties) [2020] eKLR Case Summary

Explore the 2020 eKLR case summary of Clerk, Nairobi City County Assembly v Speaker and others. Discover key legal insights and implications for local governance and party participation.

Case Brief: Clerk,Nairobi City County Assembly v Speaker, Nairobi City County Assembly & another; Orange Democratic Party & 4 others (Interested Parties) [2020] eKLR

1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: Jacob Muvengei Ngwele v. Kedeveresia Beatrice Elachi & Others
- Case Number: Petition No. 194 of 2019
- Court: Employment and Labour Relations Court, Nairobi
- Date Delivered: October 16, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. Lady Justice Maureen Onyango
- Country: Kenya

2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issues the court must resolve include:
- Whether the appointment of Jacob Muvengei Ngwele as the Clerk of the Nairobi City County Assembly was lawful and regular.
- Whether the actions of the 1st Respondent, Kedeveresia Beatrice Elachi, constituted a violation of the Petitioner’s constitutional rights.
- Whether the Petitioner is entitled to the remedies sought in the petition.

3. Facts of the Case:
The Petitioner, Jacob Muvengei Ngwele, served as the Clerk of the Nairobi City County Assembly and Secretary to the Nairobi City County Assembly Service Board from April 2013. The 1st Respondent, Kedeveresia Beatrice Elachi, was the Speaker of the County Assembly and Chairperson of the 2nd Respondent until her resignation in August 2020. The Petitioner filed this petition on October 23, 2019, alleging that the 1st Respondent engaged in a malicious scheme to unlawfully interfere with his employment. The Petitioner claimed that the 1st Respondent sought to remove him from office due to personal grievances stemming from his alleged role in her impeachment and other political conflicts.

4. Procedural History:
The petition was filed in 2019 and went through various stages, including a ruling on November 15, 2019, which struck out parts of the petition related to political disputes. The court later upheld this ruling, stating that certain interested parties were no longer necessary for the determination of the petition. The Respondents opposed the petition, claiming that the Petitioner was never lawfully appointed as the Clerk.

5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered several legal provisions, including Articles 10, 27, 28, 29, 41, 47, and 236 of the Constitution of Kenya, as well as sections of the Employment Act, County Governments Act, and County Assembly Service Act.
- Case Law: The court referenced previous cases, including *Anarita Karimi Njeru v Attorney General* and *Trusted Society of Human Rights Alliance v AG*, which set the standard for precision in constitutional petitions and the necessity of providing adequate notice of alleged violations.
- Application: The court found that the Petitioner had not been appointed lawfully as the Clerk, as required by the County Governments Act, and that his confirmation was invalid due to procedural irregularities. The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his constitutional rights were violated, as the 1st Respondent's actions were not proven to be malicious or unlawful.

6. Conclusion:
The court dismissed the petition, concluding that the Petitioner was not the Clerk of the Nairobi City County Assembly and had not established any constitutional violations by the 1st Respondent. The dismissal underscored the importance of lawful appointment processes and adherence to statutory requirements in public service employment.

7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the judgment.

8. Summary:
The Employment and Labour Relations Court ruled against Jacob Muvengei Ngwele, affirming that his appointment as Clerk was unlawful and that the 1st Respondent's actions did not constitute a violation of his constitutional rights. The decision highlights the necessity for compliance with legal and procedural standards in public sector appointments and serves as a precedent for similar cases involving employment disputes within government structures.