Patrisio Njeru Njiru v Embu County Government & another [2016] KEELRC 120 (KLR)

The court reasoned that the statutory scheme provides two distinct avenues: one initiated and concluded by the governor under section 31(1)(a), and another involving the county assembly under section 40. Following Richard Bwogo Birir v Narok County Government, it held the two are separable. The show-cause notice was a lawful first step of disciplinary action envisaged by Article 236 of the Constitution and section 41 of the Employment Act, which prescribes notice and hearing.

The petitioner replied to the show-cause notice on 30.05.2015 and filed the petition three days later, without giving the respondents an opportunity to conclude the disciplinary process. The court held that courts should intervene in a disciplinary procedure only where the procedure invoked is shown to contravene the Constitution or other law, and that a challenge to the genuineness of the reasons lies under section 43 of the Employment Act only after removal is imposed. No such contravention was established.

The petitioner alleged the 2nd respondent harboured hostility toward senior officials from the Mbeere community after his double impeachment by the Senate, invoking section 5 of the Employment Act, 2007. The respondents denied discriminatory conduct and asserted the disciplinary process had not been commenced to victimize the petitioner on account of ethnicity. The court made no finding of discrimination and found the petitioner not entitled to the relief sought.