The fate of more than 300 newly recruited employees of the Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) now hangs in the balance after human rights organisations moved to court seeking to nullify the entire recruitment exercise.
In their filings submitted on Friday, May 15, the petitioners are citing alleged violations of constitutional principles of transparency, fairness and accountability. They say the exercise was conducted in secrecy, lacked disclosure of key information and may have been influenced by extraneous considerations.
One of the major complaints is that KPA allegedly failed to publish the list of shortlisted candidates, a move the petitioners say undermined transparency from the outset.
‘This omission made it impossible for applicants and the public to verify whether the process was inclusive and
competitive,’ said Mr Hussein Khalid, director of Vocal Africa.
The petition has been filed jointly with Muslims for Human Rights (Muhuri) and She Rises Organisation.
They have sued KPA, the Public Service Commission (PSC) and the Attorney-General. Eight individuals affected by the recruitment have also been listed as interested parties.
The petitioners argue that a public institution of KPA’s stature is expected to operate within strict accountability frameworks, especially when dealing with mass recruitment exercises attracting thousands of applicants.
They raised concerns over the use of virtual interviews without adequate disclosure of evaluation criteria or publication of outcomes for unsuccessful candidates, saying this created uncertainty and eroded confidence in the integrity of the exercise.
The petition further alleges that individuals who neither participated in the interviews nor appeared on the shortlist were nonetheless issued with employment offers, pointing to possible irregularities.
The petitioners also accuse KPA of failing to comply with Article 35 of the Constitution on access to information, saying formal requests for disclosure of recruitment data, including shortlisted candidates, interview results and final appointment lists, were ignored.
Concerns have also been raised about possible violations of constitutional requirements on regional balance and inclusivity. Petitioners claim successful candidates may have been disproportionately drawn from certain regions, raising questions about compliance with national diversity principles.
They further argue that failure to issue regret letters to unsuccessful candidates amounted to procedural unfairness, leaving applicants in limbo without communication of outcomes.
They are now seeking sweeping court intervention to halt and overturn the recruitment exercise. Among the orders sought are a declaration that the process is unconstitutional and void, an order compelling KPA to conduct a fresh recruitment in
compliance with constitutional and statutory standards, and a directive requiring full disclosure of all recruitment records.
They also want declarations that failure to publish successful candidates, issue regret letters and communicate outcomes amounted to violations of the constitution.
However, the Centre for Litigation Trust is dismissing the petition as malicious and time-barred.
Executive director Julius Ogogoh instead wants efforts channelled towards development, governance and
national cohesion rather than disputes.
‘The recruitment exercise concluded in February, so why bring a case now? Those who were recruited are Kenyans and deserve to serve in the positions they applied for,’ Mr Ogogoh said.