Attorney General and Police Service Support Harun Mwau in Recruitment Petition
The Attorney General (AG), National Police Service (NPS), and Inspector General (IG) Douglas Kanja have jointly backed a petition filed by politician Harun Mwau, seeking a declaration that the recruitment of police constables is the exclusive mandate of the Inspector General and the Police Service, not the National Police Service Commission (NPSC).
The case has sparked a constitutional debate over control and independence within Kenya’s policing structure, potentially reshaping the country’s recruitment and command systems.
Court Halts Recruitment of 10,000 Police Officers
The Employment and Labour Relations Court temporarily halted the planned recruitment of 10,000 police officers nationwide following Mwau’s petition.
In his filing, Mwau challenged the legality of NPSC’s recruitment notice, arguing that the Commission had overstepped its constitutional mandate by assuming powers reserved for the Inspector General and the NPS.
Attorney General and NPS: “NPSC Has No Mandate to Recruit Constables”
Through Attorney General Dorcas Oduor, the government aligned with Mwau’s position, asserting that the NPSC cannot constitutionally recruit members of the disciplined service.
Similarly, the NPS, represented by lawyer Martin Gitonga, urged the court to affirm the independence and command of the Service as envisioned under the Constitution of Kenya 2010.
“It is in the public interest and in furtherance of good governance and national security that the court affirms the independence and command of the NPS,” Gitonga submitted.
He emphasized that the principle of independence of command is crucial for maintaining discipline, unity of direction, and operational efficiency within the service, as contemplated under Article 244(a).
Legal Basis of the Petition
According to court documents, NPS argued that NPSC is not a National Security Organ within the meaning of Article 239(1) and therefore cannot exercise powers that affect the command or discipline of the Service.
Gitonga cited Article 247, which provides that even special police services created by statute must remain under the command of the IG, thereby affirming that recruitment and discipline fall under the Inspector General’s authority.
“The petition promotes constitutional fidelity and institutional harmony by preserving the independence of the NPS and preventing unconstitutional encroachment by the Commission,” Gitonga told the court.
Distinction Between Police Officers and Administrative Staff
The NPS also clarified that the Constitution distinguishes two categories of personnel within the Service:
-
Members of the Service (uniformed officers under command of the IG)
-
Persons who hold or act in offices within the Service (administrative staff appointed by NPSC)
Therefore, while Article 246(3) gives the NPSC power to recruit and appoint persons to offices within the Service, this does not extend to recruiting police constables, who fall under the IG’s operational command.
Challenge to the NPSC Regulations 2025
The NPS challenged the recently published National Police Service Commission (Recruitment and Appointment) Regulations, 2025, terming them unconstitutional.
The Service argued that the regulations unlawfully expanded the Commission’s authority to include recruitment of police officers — powers that the Constitution expressly reserves for the IG and NPS.
“The impugned regulations unconstitutionally extend the powers of the Commission into areas reserved for the IG, contrary to Articles 2(4) and 245(4)(c),” NPS stated.
Court Jurisdiction and Next Steps
The Attorney General and NPS further argued that Mwau had properly invoked the court’s jurisdiction under Article 162(2)(a) of the Constitution and Section 12(1) of the Employment and Labour Relations Court Act (2011).
They maintained that the petition raises critical questions about the employment and disciplinary structure within the police service — specifically, who between the IG and the NPSC is the lawful employer of police officers.
“The question of who exercises powers of recruiting, employing, and dismissing members of the Service lies at the core of the employment relationship within NPS,” the submission read.
The court is expected to issue further directions in the coming weeks as the legal battle over police recruitment powers intensifies.
Constitutional Implications
This case could set a major precedent for Kenya’s security governance framework, determining the extent of autonomy the Inspector General holds over the National Police Service.
It also underscores the delicate balance between oversight and command, especially in managing recruitment, promotions, and disciplinary actions within disciplined forces.