Court declines to revisit MPs’ hefty perks tiff

Attempts by Parliament to reopen the contentious issue of allowances payable to each member for committee sittings has been dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

A three-judge bench dismissed the appeal by the Parliamentary Service Commission, saying the fate of the MPs was sealed when the House engaged the Salaries and Remuneration Commission and compromised remuneration and salaries.

Justice Gatembu Kairu, Francis Tuiyott and Jessie Lesiit said in the compromise reached with the SRC in 2023, Parliament submitted to the mandate of the SRC and abided with its directions and supervisory role over it.

The judges said the Gazette notice that resulted from the compromise was clear that the SRC did not cap the number of times committees can sit, but the maximum allowances members can earn each month as House committee sitting allowance.

“Which means while the number of committee meetings members can attend are not capped, they cannot earn more in sitting allowances than prescribed by the SRC,” they said.

In the August 2023 notice, SRC set the allowance of the chairperson at Sh15,000 per sitting up to a maximum of Sh240,000 per month.

The vice chairperson receives Sh12,000 per sitting up to a maximum of Sh192,000 per month, while a member gets Sh7,500 per sitting up to a maximum of Sh120,000 per month.

PSC had appealed against a decision of the High Court made in 2020, which quashed the housing allowance the MPs had paid themselves.

Although the MPS abandoned the fight to get back the housing allowance, they argued that SRC had encroached on PSC’s mandate by capping the number of sittings of House committees.

Through senior counsel Tom Ojienda, PSC submitted that SRC can only prescribe the allowance payable to MPs on sittings and that its role ends there.

The Kisumu senator argued that SRC cannot prescribe a number of sittings that MPs should undertake, as doing so would undermine the independence of Parliament.

Ojienda submitted that an interpretation by the High Court, which allows SRC to go right to the table of PSC not only to set allowances but to prescribe how those allowances are paid, is a bad interpretation.

He said PSC must be given space as contemplated by Article 127 ( 6 ) to determine the details and to pay allowances.

The legislator said the role of SRC must stop at simply prescribing how those allowances should be paid. On the issue of parliamentary sitting, Ojienda submitted that SRC can only prescribe the allowance payable to MPs on sittings and that its role ends there.

The SRC, through lawyer Peter Wanyama, opposed the appeal saying Kenya does not have bottomless public coffers, hence the establishment of SRC.

The lawyer added that SRC acted within its constitutional and statutory mandate.