Several avenues give Uhuru Kenyatta a way out in Monica Juma’s case

The rejection of Ambassador Monica Juma for the position of Secretary to the Cabinet has thrown the ball back in President Uhuru Kenyatta’s court.

Juma’s fate now lies with the President, who, in his protest note to Parliament on Thursday, attested to his trust in her professional credentials and strong values.

The seven-paragraph statement signed by State House spokesperson Manoah Esipisu regretted that the MPs’ actions denied the President, and the nation, an officer who would have been central to the Jubilee administration’s transformation agenda.

This appeared to imply that Juma’s days in government are gone. But the final paragraph in the statement gave her a glimmer of hope: “The President remains determined to ensure Kenyans are served and the nation is made safer and more prosperous for all.”

Uhuru could invoke executive fiat in defiance of Article 154 of the Constitution and appoint Juma as Secretary to his Cabinet.

The action would instigate a constitutional crisis and present grounds for impeachment.

It is highly unlikely that the President would adopt this approach.

Another option is retention of Juma as the Permanent Secretary for Interior and Coordination of National Government. She does not need fresh parliamentary vetting for the job.

National Assembly Speaker Justine Muturi says a precedent has already been set in that regard.

“Remember General (rtd) Joseph Nkaissery did not resign as an MP until after he was approved as Cabinet Secretary for Interior and Coordination of National Government? It is only after the approval that he resigned. If the House had rejected him for some reason, he would have remained in his position as an MP,” Muturi says.

The President could then elect to recall the nomination of Immigration director Gordon Kihalangwa for the Interior Permanent Secretary docket or allow it to proceed to its logical conclusion.

Already, there is talk in parliamentary corridors that the ex-military man awaits a similar rejection when he comes up for vetting.

A stickler for rules, Kihalagwa was last year appointed Immigrations boss to dismantle corruption cartels in issuance of work permits, citizenship and other documents.

If he goes through parliamentary vetting, the President can choose to ignore the approval and fail to appoint him in favour of the incumbent, Juma.

Neither Article 154 of the Constitution nor the Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) Act provides clear guidance on exactly what happens once a candidate is approved by Parliament.

Clause 11 only binds the Clerk of the National Assembly to notify the appointing authority of the decision of the House within seven days of the decision.

Another option, endorsed by Commission on Implementation of Constitution chair Charles Nyachae, is for the President to submit the same name and risk embarrassing himself.

“Nothing stops the President from re-submitting Juma’s name,” Nyachae told a news conference on Friday while announcing that his commission would challenge the process in court.

Another candidate

Clause 10 of the Parliamentary Approval Act says where the nomination of a candidate has been rejected by Parliament, the appointing authority may submit the name of another candidate.

Leader of Majority in the National Assembly Aden Duale says since the report of Asman Kamama’s Security Committee was a motion, it can be brought back after six months in the same form, by which time he would have convinced MPs.

“Essentially, it was a motion. We could elect to bring it back and use the preceding period to consult with our colleagues and change their minds. We are exploring these options among others,” Duale said.

But the rejection could also mark the ultimate end of Juma’s engagement in top civil service.

Minority Leader Francis Nyenze says unless Juma gets an appointment that does not require parliamentary approval, her goose is as good as cooked.

Juma, an accomplished academic, could as well choose to bounce back to academy and pursue research.