listers,
m prompted to  weigh in with a few more points arising from the daylong posts on this story:
1. first, if the minister has renewed the DG's term (I am not aware he has as there is no gazette notice to that effect beyond his verbal threat to do so), it will be premature because the DG's current term expires in July. He should wait for him to serve out the time.
2. the issue of whether the board is right or wrong is neither here nor there. the board responded to the DG's application in December to renew his term. it did not act on its own volition, nor was it coerced by anyone. if indeed the DG thought the board had no such power or role in renewing his term, he should not have applied to it. the information i have is that the board responded by constituting an ad hoc committee to draw up a framework and criteria for appraising the DG objectively.  the parameters were drawn from his own terms of appointment, the cck's strategy and mission, and related concerns.  the board proceeded to evaluate him for the period of his tenure (so Hook's contention whether he was being evaluated annually is not valid because he was not seeking renewal of his contract annually, even though internal continuous evaluations are a good practice).
3. the bottomline is that at the end of this process, which was at every stage agreed generally by the board, the DG did not score the pass mark that had been set at 70%. He got 60. the board then proceeded to advice the minister against renewing his term on the basis that he was not suitable to continue for another term. he was asked to proceed on leave to allow for the recruitment of a successor. he declined.
4. the minister overruled the board by fiat.
5. important to note: the board of the cck has adequate representation — the ps for internal security ps Kimemia, information ps ndemo, ps finance (koimet), apart from the chairman (okundi) appointed by the president. if indeed the DG senses the board did not like him for some reason, he should have expressed his fears before being subjected to the process which he sought to renounce.
it appears as if he opted to go through the motions of appraisal with foreknowledge of the outcome, while all along working his connections. at least judging from the rabid and scathing manner in which the minister (escorted by the ps who was part of the appraisal) trashed the suspension of the DG on grounds he had declined to proceed on leave.
6. yet it bears noting that regardless of whether the board had approved/rejected the DG's application for a new term or the minister's purported arbitrary renewal of the term, in my view all that was needlessly unconstitutional. the DG came into office under the previous constitution. the state corporations act and the roles of boards, procedures for appointing, renewing or replacing chief executives, as well as the minister's powers to appoint, must all now be subjected to the new Constitution and its provisions for filling public offices -  they must be participatory, equitable and transparent. to the extent that the appraisal and renewal or otherwise of the DG's term was not competitive, the whole exercise is null and void.the position should have been declared vacant, applications invited and other interested parties considered alongside the incumbent seeking renewal.

that is not to say the board is all above board in its actions. there are indications / currents and versions to the proceedings, beside the formal process alluded to above, that point to some machinations to  capture the cck as an institution for very unfortunate reasons.

the cck saga is both unfortunate and opportune. it has come at a time when we are in the process of reviewing the Communications Act to align it to the Constitution. Clearly, we will need to be more clinincal in the drafting to avoid the potential abrogation of power by institutions and individuals.

hopefully, when all chips are settled on this matter, the correct position will prevail. otherwise, i will not hesitate to invoke section 258 of the constitution to ensure the fundamental values enshrined in chapter 10 are enforced. we cant go on like that as is nothing changed on august 27, 2010.

david
 
_______________

"If my doctor told me I had only six minutes to live,
I wouldn't brood. I'd type a little faster."
— Isaac Asimo, Columbian Author and Scientist
_______________


PO Box 3234
00200 Nairobi, Kenya
cell: +254 722 517 540


From: "Francis.Hook@gmail.com" <Francis.Hook@gmail.com>
To: dmakali@yahoo.com
Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>
Sent: Wed, April 20, 2011 2:45:16 PM
Subject: Re: [kictanet] Poghisio Flouting The Law in The CCK Tussle-by DMakali

Thank you. Thank you for seeing the forest for the trees,

On , Jotham Kilimo Mwale <jokilimo@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Francis, you are spot on. Whereas we are all busy trying to see if the Minister has breached the law (which is on order), we are not interrogating the actions of the Board, thus giving the impression the minister is wrong and the Board is right. Was the Board's decision influenced externally? Was it a one-time appraisal or has there been continuous (annual?) appraisals and what were the scores?
>
> Regards,
> Jotham
>
> --- On Tue, 4/19/11, Francis Hook francis.hook@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Francis Hook francis.hook@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Poghisio Flouting The Law in The CCK Tussle-by DMakali
> To: jokilimo@yahoo.com
> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>
> Date:
> Tuesday, April 19, 2011, 10:40 PM
>
> Thanks MM.  In many senses your email and the link in reference to an objective view of the issue, open up space for fresh discussions  about which media can really lay claim to being part of the fourth estate.     I feel BD has legitimate claim to that for their objectivity and  independence. 
>
>
> And I really hope such deliberations can feed into discussions that try to define what "independent" really means - such that "independent" excludes the ability to pander to certain interests and not any licence that amounts to impartial treatment of issues.
>
>
>
> On 20 April 2011 08:23, muriuki mureithi mureithi@summitstrategies.co.ke> wrote:
>
>
> Walu
> It’s actually resurrected and is now  turning up for  constitutional interpretation at the supreme court
>
> Read on ---
> http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Corporate+News/CCK+director+appointment+row+goes+to+court/-/539550/1146974/-/9r63o8z/-/index.html
>
>  
> this will be  precedent setting  not just for CCK but for all boards . it will remove doubt on the construct of the Independent CCK  that is coming up ---
>
> cheers
>  
> Muriuki Mureithi
>
> Consultant Member
> Society of Telecommunications Consultants
>
>  
> what chance gathers , she easily scatters !! Johann  Wolfgang von Goethe
>
>  
> From: kictanet-bounces+mureithi=summitstrategies.co.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke [mailto:kictanet-bounces+mureithi=summitstrategies.co.ke@lists.kictanet.or.ke] On Behalf Of Walubengo J
>
> Sent: 20 April 2011 08:01
> To: mureithi@summitstrategies.co.ke
> Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions
> Subject: Re: [kictanet] Poghisio Flouting The Law in The CCK Tussle-by DMakali
>
>
>  
> It seems this saga refuses to die...
>
> ~~~
> The Star
> Tuesday, 19 April 2011 00:04 BY DAVID MAKALI
>
>  
> A little over a week ago, Information and Communications minister Samuel Poghisio called a press conference to announce that he had revoked the suspension of the director general of the Communications Commission of Kenya.“For the avoidance of doubt, I wish to state that Charles Njoroge remains in office and that as the appointing authority I will proceed to renew his contract in line with the law,” he stated.
>
>  
> The minister’s intervention may have seemed timely and proper. Given the infighting that had become the order of the day at the CCK between the board of directors (or some) and the director-general, some form of external intervention was necessary to establish order.
>
> However, questions still linger over what exactly the minister did, if it was legal, and if it is in the interest of the general telecommunications sector and the public in general. At the time of this writing, his re-appointment or otherwise had not been gazetted.
>
>
> more @
> http://tinyurl.com/3cddk4h
>
> walu.
>  
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> kictanet mailing list
>
> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
>
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
>
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/francis.hook%40gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.
>
>
>
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Francis Hook
> +254 733 504561
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
> Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jokilimo%40yahoo.com
>
> The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and
> development.
>
> KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth, share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.
>