Lobby group wants Vision 2030 CEO kicked out

By Judy Ogutu

A consumers lobby wants the appointment of Director General of Vision 2030 Mugo Kibati quashed, citing anomalies in his recruitment.

Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) argues that unless the case is urgently determined, they will "suffer great loss and damage because living standards will remain low and Kenyans will fail to achieve the objectives of Vision 2030."

Through its advocate Mr Henry Kurauka, Cofek wants the High Court to allow it to apply for orders quashing Kibati’s appointment. Also sought for is permission to apply for orders prohibiting Kibati from continuing to act as the Director General of the Vision Delivery Secretariat.

Cofek further wants the court to allow it to seek orders compelling the Vision Delivery Board and a panel of Permanent Secretaries to competitively and through public participation and in an open manner interview and choose the best candidate for appointment as director general within the provisions of the law.

In addition, they want the court to issue temporary orders suspending the decision to appoint Kibati.

Cofek, which is suing through its officials Stephen Mutoro, Ephraim Githinji Kanake and Henry Meshack Ochieng’, claims the Minister of State for Planning, National Development and Vision 2030 ignored presidential and legal guidelines in appointing Kibati.

Guidelines ignored

They argue that President Kibaki had outlined guidelines in a gazette notice that the respondents blatantly ignored. Such a decision, they contend was illegal, unjustified, unlawful, unreasonable, irrational, in bad faith and tantamount to discrimination.

The minister’s decision, they argue, was tantamount to impunity because according to them, Kibati had not applied for the position and was also not interviewed by a panel of PSs, who finalised interviews on May 19, 2009.

"The 3rd respondent (Vision Delivery Board) is under legal duty to recruit its director general in a competitive, transparent, fair and open manner," argues Cofek.

It is their argument that Kibati’s appointment contravenes Article 10(2)(c) of the Constitution.

"The Constitution demands that public participation in public recruitment is paramount," they said.

In a sworn statement in support of the case, Mutoro says that under Section 7(1) of the said gazette notice, the director general would be appointed by the president following a competitive recruitment process.

Mutoro further claims there were six candidates who were interviewed by the Vision’s Delivery Board and a panel of PSs.

The case is expected to be heard on Tuesday.