Advertisement

Court Stops Police Commission from Recruiting Officers

Court Stops Police Commission from Recruiting Officers

An Employment Court has ruled that the National Police Service Commission cannot recruit train or manage police officers. The court said this power belongs to the Inspector General of Police.

What the Court Decided

Judge Hellen Wasilwa declared that the National Police Service Commission is not a national security organ. The court stated that recruitment into security organs must be done by the security organs themselves under the Constitution.

The judgment nullified a recent police recruitment advertisement and new regulations published by the commission. The court issued a permanent order blocking the commission from recruiting training employing assigning promoting suspending or dismissing police officers.

Two Different Staff Categories

The court explained that the Constitution creates two distinct categories within the police service. Members of the service who are police officers fall under the command of the Inspector General. Persons holding offices in the service who are civilian staff fall under the commission’s authority.

The Inspector General now has exclusive control over all police officers from constables to senior commanders. This includes their recruitment training deployment promotion suspension and dismissal.

The Significance of This

The decision reinforces the independent command of the Inspector General. The court emphasized that national security requires a clear chain of command free from external interference.

This ruling resolves a long-standing conflict between the police leadership and the civilian commission over who controls police employment matters.

In conclusion, the National Police Service Commission can no longer conduct police recruitment. All future hiring and management of police officers will be handled by the police service under the Inspector General.

The court also directed Parliament to review two police service laws to align them with this constitutional interpretation.

More HERE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *