Bill seeks to scrap 28-day vetting limit for presidential nominees

Parliament may soon have unlimited time to vet and conduct due diligence on presidential nominees if a new proposal before the Senate is passed into law.

Wanyonyi to reignite rivalry with Arop, Sedjati in Oslo Athletics

KSSSA Nyanza region to roll out digital player verification to curb cheating Sports

Nyamira Senator Okong’o Omogeni has fronted the Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which seeks to remove the 28-day limit currently imposed on Parliament to approve or reject presidential nominees.

Omogeni, a senior counsel, argues that the current timeframe does not allow legislators enough time to carry out meaningful background checks and assess the integrity, competence and suitability of appointees.

“The current 28-day period is too short for Parliament to properly investigate and assess nominees for high public office,” Omogeni said, noting that thorough scrutiny requires more time and resources.

According to the Bill, the proposed amendment would also repeal Section 9 of the existing Act, which provides for automatic approval of a nominee if Parliament does not act within the 28-day window.

Omogeni says the clause undermines accountability and could lead to the appointment of unfit individuals simply because the House ran out of time.

The law empowers Parliament to vet presidential nominees, including Cabinet Secretaries, Principal Secretaries, ambassadors and other senior public officers.

Omogeni's proposal seeks to give the legislature greater flexibility to exercise its oversight role without the pressure of rigid deadlines.

“The objective of the Bill is to amend the Public Appointments (Parliamentary Approval) Act (Cap 7F) to remove the timelines within which public appointees should be vetted by Parliament,” the Bill states.

Parliament has in the past faced persistent criticism for what is widely seen as a “rubber-stamp” approach to executive appointments.

Critics argue that the vetting process is often perfunctory, with committees approving nominees even when questions arise over their conduct or qualifications.

“The vetting process has become predictable. Parliament rarely rejects nominees, even when glaring integrity issues are raised,” political analyst Martin Andati said.

The National Assembly’s Committee on Appointments has, in recent years, approved almost all of President William Ruto’s nominees, often despite public concerns about their suitability.

In 2019, then minority leader Junet Mohamed captured public frustration when he quipped: “If (former Sports CS Rashid) Echesa went through here with just a birth certificate, we should spend very little time discussing Prof Magoha.”

Although Parliament has consistently defended its vetting process, insisting that all nominees are subjected to fair scrutiny, public perception remains skeptical.

Lawmakers previously extended the statutory vetting period from 14 days to 28 days, arguing that it would allow for more comprehensive evaluations.

However, Omogeni now believes that even the 28-day limit is inadequate for such a critical oversight function.

If passed, the Bill would give Parliament indefinite time to review nominees—a move supporters say will enhance accountability, but critics warn could lead to political delays or abuse of the process.

INSTANT ANALYSIS

The Bill is expected to trigger debate in both Houses over the balance between efficiency in public appointments and Parliament’s constitutional duty to ensure only qualified individuals ascend to key positions in government. Whether the removal of the timeline will lead to enhanced scrutiny of nominees is a matter that only time will tell.