Inspector General of Police Douglas Kanja/FILEThe Court of Appeal of Kenya has temporarily halted part of a ruling by the Employment and Labour Relations Court (ELRC) that gave the Inspector-General of Police exclusive authority over promotion and dismissal of officers in the National Police Service (NPS).
The three-judge bench, comprising President Daniel Musinga, Mumbi Ngugi, and George Odunga, delivered the ruling following an appeal by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) challenging the ELRC decision of October 30, 2025.
The case is against former MP John Harun Mwau; the Inspector-General of Police; the National Police Service; the National Police Service Commission (NPSC); the Attorney General; the National Security Council; and the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA).
In the ELRC ruling, Justice Hellen Wasilwa declared that the National Police Service Commission (NPSC) has no constitutional authority to recruit, appoint, promote or discipline members of the National Police Service.
She also emphasised that the Constitution clearly demarcates the roles of the Inspector General and the National Police Service Commission, and that any overlap would interfere with the IG’s independent command over the Service.
"The Inspector General shall exercise independent command over the National Police Service, and no person may give direction with respect to matters of employment, assignment, promotion, suspension, or dismissal of any member of the Service,” the judge stated.
LSK moved to the Court of Appeal seeking to temporarily stop the judgment from being enforced.
The lawyers’ body argued that the decision disrupted the balance set out in the Constitution between the Inspector-General and the NPSC.
LSK said that if the ruling continued to take effect, it could paralyse the Commission’s work and undermine fair recruitment, training, and promotions in the police service.
"That unless the judgment of the Employment and Labour Relations Court is stayed, the processes of recruitment, appointment, promotion, removal, and dismissal within the National Police Service are likely to be undertaken by an organ that lacks constitutional authority to perform those functions," the judgment states.
LSK’s view was supported by the NPSC and IPOA.
IPOA’s CEO, Elema Halake, said the matter affected the public at large and raised serious questions about how the Constitution is interpreted regarding police management.
LSK’s Florence Muturi also highlighted that the ELRC judgment could reverse gains made in police reforms aimed at promoting professionalism, discipline, and merit-based recruitment.
The Inspector-General of Police, Douglas Kanja, and the National Police Service opposed the suspension.
They argued that the Constitution already gives the Inspector-General independent authority over employment matters, and that recruitment of police constables had already been completed with training underway.
"That the intended appeal is not arguable since, pursuant to Article 245(4)(c) of the Constitution, the 2nd respondent (NPS) has the mandate to employ, assign, promote, suspend and dismiss any member of the police service without being directed by any person or body, including the 4th respondent (NPSC)," Kanja argued.
They said stopping the process could compromise public safety, especially with the 2027 general elections approaching.
The Court of Appeal noted that while recruitment had been completed, the appeal raised important constitutional questions, including which body—the NPSC or the Inspector-General—has authority over promotions and dismissals.
The judges said allowing promotions or dismissals to proceed before the hearing of the appeal could create confusion and irreversible consequences.
As a result, the court temporarily froze the powers to promote and dismiss police officers until its heard and decides.
"For avoidance of doubt, we are not, by this ruling, reverting those powers to the National Police Service Commission. The exercise of those powers shall await determination of the appeal," the bench said.
They directed that the appeal be filed and prioritised for determination within three months.
Comments 0
Sign in to join the conversation
Sign In Create AccountNo comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!