Matemu gets all clear to assume anti graft job

Mumo Matemu’s appointment as head of the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission was confirmed July 26, 2013 after the Court of Appeal set aside a High Court ruling that nullified his appointment. FILE  NATION MEDIA GROUP

By PAUL OGEMBA pogemba@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted  Friday, July 26  2013 at  15:02

Mumo Matemu’s appointment as head of the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission was confirmed Friday after the Court of Appeal set aside a High Court ruling that nullified his appointment.

A five-judge bench of the Appellate Court ruled that the High Court’s decision did not meet the standards of revoking an executive appointment since it failed to apply the doctrine of separation of powers.

Justices Kihara Kariuki, William Ouko, Patrick Kiage, Agnes Murgor and Gatembu Kairu ruled that the evidence placed before the High Court as the basis for integrity claims against Mr Matemu were insufficient, inconclusive and lacked verification.

"Although the High Court has powers to review appointment of state and public officers, it cannot sit as an appeal for reviewing the opinion or decision of the appointing authority. Its conclusion of procedural impropriety on the part of the appointing organ and unsuitability of Mr Matemu cannot be upheld,” ruled the judges on Friday.

They said that High Court Judges Mumbi Ngugi, Joel Ngugi and George Odunga misapplied the rationality test in adopting a standard of review which goes against the doctrine of separation of powers and if their decision is allowed to stand, it will curtail the functions of other arms of government.

Proper inquiry

According to the Appellate Judges, Mr Matemu’s appointment had gone through the entire procedure of appointing a state officer and faulted the High Court for revoking the appointment without proper inquiry into the allegations levelled against him.

“Parliament intensely debated his nomination on two occasions and in any event, the petitions who challenged his appointment did not show any evidence to prove that they presented their claims before parliament when Mr Matemu was being vetted,” ruled the judges.

They faulted the High Court for interfering with the work of parliament, ruling that the process of shortlisting, interviewing and selection of Mr Matemu met the entire constitutional requirement for appointing a state officer.

“The court cannot be at liberty to arrive at a finding which is not supported by any law. We have reviewed the High Court judgment and come to the conclusion that it has so many shortfalls that cannot allow it to stand,” said the judges.

On Mr Matemu’s suitability to head the EACC amid claims that he misappropriated over Sh37 million belonging to the Agricultural Finance Corporation, the judges ruled that there was no evidence to prove he was directly involved in the loss of the funds.