[kictanet] Day 5-6: Terms of Office, Removal from Office, Remuneration and Conflict of Interest

[Grace Githaiga]

Dear Nyaki
 
I have comments on the following and sorry to take you back but I missed out the discussion on section 5 and 6.
 
SECTION 5: APPOINTMENT
 
 I would like to start by supporting Kay Kerubo who does not like the idea of appointees being endorsed by Parliament. And to support this, article 233 (2) of the constitution says the Public Service Commission is appointed by the President with the approval of the National Assembly. Say for example we have one dominant political party (this is informed by recent comments by some section of parliamentarians claiming they have political muscle in the house due to their numbers) and the President’s choice is approved by the majority of the dominant party only, wont the appointments procedure for the Communications Commission be indirectly controlled by that dominant political party?
 
Secondly, lthough persons or organisations will be invited to nominate candidates – which means that civil society has a chance to make an input – the procedure is not open and transparent, given that the Public Service Commission is not required to publish the list of nominations and to interview candidates in public for example as we have seen with the JSC vetting. 
 
Again, the President has the power of finally selecting the commissioners without any requirement for transparency.
 
SECTION 6: DISQUALIFICATION
 
The Bill in its list of disqualifications for appointment attempts to ensure that the Commission is protected against interference, particularly of a political or economic nature. The exclusion of the entire public service, however, seems overzealous and questionable in light of the provision in the constitution that the commission should be “representative of a broad cross section of the population of the Republic”. Under the envisaged provisions would academics in public Universities who posses qualifications in say broadcasting and ICT, for example,  have a chance to serve on the commission considering they are remunerated under the state?
 
SECTION 7: TERMS OF OFFICE
On 7 (6), I am also not clear on whether the Commissioners will be like those of KNHRC, who are in full employment.
However, I think it is important to guarantee the security of tenure of members to limit the influence of political authorities on their decisions. 
 
SECTION 8: REMOVAL FROM OFFICE
8 (b) and (e) are subjective removal e.g. ...inability to perform the duties...efficiently; and incompetence. My I suggest that this be done through a vote say by 2/3 of the commissioners? The process of removal needs to be clear. 
 
SECTION 10: REMUNERATION
I suggest that this be pegged to other existing commissions. 
 
And finally I also agree with McTim and Victor of Article 19 who talk of the need to have best practice. The Constitution in its article 34 (3) provides for broadcasting regulation which is “independent of control by government, political interests or commercial interests”. The law is important to enable it to live up to this title "independence', and may I say, this is our opportunity to contribute and push for this independence. 
 
  		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20110219/4bbb65f4/attachment.htm>