Drama as police c*mmission chair calls for Koome’s sacking
The differences between Inspector General (IG) Police Japhet Koome and the National Police Service Commission (NPSC) chairperson Eliud Kinuthia took a turn for the worse yesterday after the two traded harsh words during a meeting with a parliamentary committee.
During the bitter exchange, Kinuthia openly called for Koome’s sacking on grounds that he had grossly violated the Constitution.
The duo who had appeared before the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee (CIOC) chaired by Githunguri MP Gathoni Wamuchomba washed their dirty linen before the shocked MPs, raising accusations and counter accusations against each other in the discharge of their mandate.
While Koome remained firm that he must be in control to enable him exercise his mandate, Kinuthia maintained that the IG, as an individual and not the office, had demonstrated disregard for the constitution and lacks goodwill to comply with the existing laws and regulations.
Trouble started after Kinuthia who was the first to address the committee members, told them that Koome had severally invoked Articles 245(2)(b) vs 246(3) to usurp the mandate of the Commission on human resource management.
The Article in question states that ‘no person’ may give direction to the IG with respect to the employment, assignment, promotion, suspension or dismissal of any member of NPS.
Kinuthia claimed that Koome had blatantly and consistently failed to comply with the constitution in various areas including transfers, promotions and recruitment of civilian members of the Service.
He said: “It is the Commission’s humble submission that “no person” does not include an independent Constitutional Commission in the discharge of its express constitutional.”
He added: “The purpose of this letter is therefore to recommend to the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee to further explore the extent to which the violations and lack of compliance sighted herein meet the threshold of the grounds for removal provided in Article 245 (7) (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the Constitution.”
But in his response Koome cited Article 245 2(b) and (4)(c) and the National Police Service Act No 11A of 2011 that gives the IG powers to exercise independent command of the National Police Service (NPS) as well as to perform any other function prescribed by any other legislation.
He made it clear that the Constitution is clear that no person may direct the IG with respect to investigations of any particular offences, enforcement of the law against any particular persons or employment, assignment, promotion, suspension or dismissal of any member of NPS.
He said: “The Inspector General exercises command over the National Police Service and lawfully administers, controls and manages the National Police Service as a Disciplined Service.”
He added: “Cognisant of the uniqueness of the police as a national security organ dealing with complex and ever evolving security landscape, the independence of the IG in command and control of the Service is paramount. The exercise of independent command, or independence of command, is indispensable to successful policing, police administration and management practice. Independent command is based on the two basic principles of unity of command and span of control.”
On hiring, transfers and promotions, Kinuthia told the members that for the last five years, the commission has not determined a single transfer of a member of the Service because the IG has not presented any recommendations for determination.
He claimed that the IG has been conducting transfers of police officers in the NPS under the guise of deployments contrary to Article 246(3) (a) of the Constitution.
Deployment of officers
He added that the IG had deliberately refused to recommend to the Commission for determination the distribution and deployment of officers above the rank of Superintendent.
Kinuthia in particular cited the promotions of 514 police officers of various ranks including both below and above the ranks of Superintendent of Police contrary to Article 246(3) (a) that Koome had initiated, conducted, determined and implemented and only belatedly sought the Commission’s indulgence to regularise the Constitutional violations on promotions.
He also alleged that on February 28, Koome also unilaterally initiated and concluded “course promotions” for over one hundred senior officers from the ranks of Chief Inspectors to Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) knowing very well that the promotions to the ranks of ASP is not delegatable.
Appeal decisions
He further said that Koome had refused to implement twenty-five (25) reinstatements being appeal decisions on members of the Service as determined by the Commission and transmitted to his office for implementation on November 16, 2023.
He said: “The IG has blatantly and consistently undermined the mandate of the Commission to recruit, promote, transfer and exercise disciplinary control over civilian members of the Service contrary to Article 246(3) (a) and (b) of the Constitution. This is evident in the fact that the IG issued orders blocking the reporting to duty four (4) civilian staff recruited by the Commission in February, 2024 by denying them entry to the physical premises of the NPS.”
But in his defence, Koome told the MPs that observance of the concept of unity of command is essential to avoid confusion and manipulation in the National Police Service.
To exercise his powers, Koome said that he cannot do so efficiently and effectively have independence without well-structured span of control instruments
The span of control instruments includes personnel matters for instance recruitment, training, deployment, transfer, promotions, performance, discipline and accountability.
Others are arrangement of instruments of command (ranks) in a hierarchical manner, transfer of services intra and extra services and other Government institutions, determination of strength, formations and specialised units, financial resources, police equipment and other assets.
