The High Court recently declared the appointments made by President William Ruto to the Climate Change Council unconstitutional. Justice Lawrence Mugambi ruled that the process failed to involve the public, which is required by law for such appointments.
He nullified the appointments of Emily Mwende, John Kioli, Umar Omar, and George Odera, and ordered that new nominations be made within 90 days.The court’s decision follows the suspension of the four individuals pending the outcome of a petition that challenged how they were appointed. The petition questioned whether the public had been given a chance to participate in the selection process, something that is vital for ensuring transparency and fairness in government decisions.
Justice Mugambi’s ruling is a reminder that public appointments must follow the right legal procedures, especially when they concern issues that affect many people, like climate change. The judge pointed out that such appointments should not only be transparent but also involve the public to ensure that those chosen are fit for the roles they are given. Without proper participation, there is a risk of undermining the public’s trust in the process and the people in charge.
The ruling also places pressure on the government to address its mistakes and ensure that future appointments are carried out properly. While the government may have hoped to fill the council quickly, it now has to restart the process and make sure the next nominations are made in line with the law.
The court’s decision emphasizes the need for the government to respect the rules and take accountability for its actions.This judgment also raises questions about the broader approach of the administration in filling important positions. There are concerns that bypassing public involvement could lead to poor choices or individuals who do not have the necessary qualifications or public support.
It’s clear that when filling key roles, especially those dealing with critical matters such as climate change, public confidence must be prioritized. The government will need to revisit the appointment process and find a way to make the next set of nominations in a way that satisfies both legal requirements and public expectations.
With this ruling, it is clear that the High Court expects leaders to follow constitutional procedures carefully, and it will be interesting to see how quickly the government acts to address the issue and regain public trust in the process.
