Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court
@Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background and the orders of the court are available at http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
Walu, you might have a point, but being a don yourself (or on the way to donship), I think your argument is biased. Any professional at any educational level can give good advice to national boards. Most successful Ministers at the Kibaki regime were not necessarily PhD holders. I am not discounting the value of education at all, and in 5 years, I will be a don too. And I agree, the law is biased by preventing public university employees from sitting on public boards but allowing private university employees and other private citizens to sit on the same boards. Although I have a contradictory view that education and research will suffer if the said professors are overloaded with side jobs (something they will still do with private consultancies). It's a catch22 On 08/08/2014, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
@Kamotho,
am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal.
it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level?
Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose?
walu.
------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background and the orders of the court are available at http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldafr...
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.
-- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh The best athletes never started as the best athletes. You have to think anyway, so why not think big? - Donald Trump. "You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky. Tackle the biggest frog first. I will persist until I succeed - Og Mandino.
Mwendwa, am three quarters(3/4) of a don, one quarter (1/4) to go before am a full don :-) Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that the Kenya Communications Act (revised 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these very boards. I am just not able to understand the rationale behind this - perhaps I will when I complete the remaining 1/4 of my studies. But meanwhile the drafters of this clause are on this list (National Communication Secretariate lurkers :-). Maybe they could break it down for us in simple english. But bottom line, I want to believe nobody should be barred whether they come from private or public university. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Fri, 8/8/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Friday, August 8, 2014, 10:29 PM Walu, you might have a point, but being a don yourself (or on the way to donship), I think your argument is biased. Any professional at any educational level can give good advice to national boards. Most successful Ministers at the Kibaki regime were not necessarily PhD holders. I am not discounting the value of education at all, and in 5 years, I will be a don too. And I agree, the law is biased by preventing public university employees from sitting on public boards but allowing private university employees and other private citizens to sit on the same boards. Although I have a contradictory view that education and research will suffer if the said professors are overloaded with side jobs (something they will still do with private consultancies). It's a catch22 On 08/08/2014, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
@Kamotho,
am yet to read the full ruling. But if i
was
Boards to be be found illegal.
it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering
recall well the key contention/plea that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT the amount of
intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to
national development at a Board level?
Is it time to review
this clause or it does serve the purpose?
walu.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background and the orders of the court are available at http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by any person whatsoever to overlook the
------------------------------ prescriptions of the court's decree
has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldafr...
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.
-- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh The best athletes never started as the best athletes. You have to think anyway, so why not think big? - Donald Trump. "You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky. Tackle the biggest frog first. I will persist until I succeed - Og Mandino.
Walu, It could be that Public Servants sitting in boards of Public bodies is an 'incestious' relationship that does not allow for the *independence* that external members of a board are supposed to bring to the table. Take your case, you are at MMU, which is under Min ICT, then you get to be a board member at CAK, also under Min ICT. One phone call from you know who and you basically sing their story :-) Waithaka Ngigi Alliance Technologies Nairobi, Kenya www.A1.io On 9 Aug 2014 12:00, "Walubengo J via kictanet" < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
am three quarters(3/4) of a don, one quarter (1/4) to go before am a full don :-)
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that the Kenya Communications Act (revised 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these very boards.
I am just not able to understand the rationale behind this - perhaps I will when I complete the remaining 1/4 of my studies. But meanwhile the drafters of this clause are on this list (National Communication Secretariate lurkers :-). Maybe they could break it down for us in simple english. But bottom line, I want to believe nobody should be barred whether they come from private or public university.
walu.
-------------------------------------------- On Fri, 8/8/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Friday, August 8, 2014, 10:29 PM
Walu, you might have a point, but being a don yourself (or on the way to donship), I think your argument is biased. Any professional at any educational level can give good advice to national boards. Most successful Ministers at the Kibaki regime were not necessarily PhD holders.
I am not discounting the value of education at all, and in 5 years, I will be a don too.
And I agree, the law is biased by preventing public university employees from sitting on public boards but allowing private university employees and other private citizens to sit on the same boards. Although I have a contradictory view that education and research will suffer if the said professors are overloaded with side jobs (something they will still do with private consultancies). It's a catch22
On 08/08/2014, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
@Kamotho,
am yet to read the full ruling. But if i
was
Boards to be be found illegal.
it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering
recall well the key contention/plea that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT the amount of
intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to
national development at a Board level?
Is it time to review
this clause or it does serve the purpose?
walu.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background and the orders of the court are available at
http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the
avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders
are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by any person whatsoever to overlook the
------------------------------ prescriptions of the court's decree
has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldafr...
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.
-- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh
The best athletes never started as the best athletes. You have to think anyway, so why not think big? - Donald Trump. "You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky. Tackle the biggest frog first. I will persist until I succeed - Og Mandino.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ngigi%40at.co.ke
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.
Ngigi, That's a fair argument. Except that Universities (Public or Private) are not your typical organisation. There is usually that thing called Academic Freedom. We tend to be entitled to, and defend our own thinking - and reserve the right to disagree with someones else thinking. Irrespective of whether it is the Vice Chancellor, the Minister or the President who is having contrary opinion. I think someone with this background or culture is infact more "independent" than someone who sits on a board representing specific and narrow interests, be they commercial, political or otherwise. In another words, as an academic, I can disagree with my boss on an issue and live to earn my salary the following day, because my terms of employment guarantee my my academic freedom/right to disagree. Not quite sure this applies in the private sector :-) Nevertheless, your argument does hold some water, but perhaps applies only to folks in what we used to call "Central" and now "National" Government a.k.a the CORE civil servants. I still dont think Public University dons fall in this category of core civil service. But as @Mwendwa said, I could be biased.. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi@at.co.ke> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "John Walubengo" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 12:11 PM Walu, It could be that Public Servants sitting in boards of Public bodies is an 'incestious' relationship that does not allow for the *independence* that external members of a board are supposed to bring to the table. Take your case, you are at MMU, which is under Min ICT, then you get to be a board member at CAK, also under Min ICT. One phone call from you know who and you basically sing their story :-) Waithaka Ngigi Alliance Technologies Nairobi, Kenya www.A1.io On 9 Aug 2014 12:00, "Walubengo J via kictanet" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Mwendwa, am three quarters(3/4) of a don, one quarter (1/4) to go before am a full don :-) Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that the Kenya Communications Act (revised 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these very boards. I am just not able to understand the rationale behind this - perhaps I will when I complete the remaining 1/4 of my studies. But meanwhile the drafters of this clause are on this list (National Communication Secretariate lurkers :-). Maybe they could break it down for us in simple english. But bottom line, I want to believe nobody should be barred whether they come from private or public university. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Fri, 8/8/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Friday, August 8, 2014, 10:29 PM Walu, you might have a point, but being a don yourself (or on the way to donship), I think your argument is biased. Any professional at any educational level can give good advice to national boards. Most successful Ministers at the Kibaki regime were not necessarily PhD holders. I am not discounting the value of education at all, and in 5 years, I will be a don too. And I agree, the law is biased by preventing public university employees from sitting on public boards but allowing private university employees and other private citizens to sit on the same boards. Although I have a contradictory view that education and research will suffer if the said professors are overloaded with side jobs (something they will still do with private consultancies). It's a catch22 On 08/08/2014, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: > > > @Kamotho, > > am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea > was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT > Boards to be be found illegal. > > it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of > intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is > discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to > national development at a Board level? > > Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? > > walu. > > > ------------------------------ > On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet > wrote: > >>The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred >>Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background >>and the orders of the court are available at >>http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c... >> >>For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders >>are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the >>board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to >>appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear >>is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board >>cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so. >> >>This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of >>a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by >>any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree >>has obvious sanctions. >> >>Kamotho > > > _______________________________________________ > kictanet mailing list > kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet > > Unsubscribe or change your options at > https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldafr... > > 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. > -- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh The best athletes never started as the best athletes. You have to think anyway, so why not think big? - Donald Trump. "You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky. Tackle the biggest frog first. I will persist until I succeed - Og Mandino. _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ngigi%40at.co.ke 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.
Walu, My narrow definition of a civil servant would be anybody paid from the Exchequer. In this narrow defination, if a parastatal is generating it's own income, (like some public universities and government owned companies), then their employees are not civil servants. That is why recruitment in these "non civil service" entities is not done by PSC or any governmental statutory entity. In my proposed model, even if the government comes up with austerity measures (like staff rationalization, reducing expenditure) or populist mechanisms (like hiking salaries, giving subsidies, minorities empowerment), the governmental "non civil service entities" should not be affected. Currently as it stands, when the government is implementing austerity measures, the policy affects even the profit making fully owned government subsidiaries and universities. This should not be the case. On 09/08/2014, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Ngigi,
That's a fair argument. Except that Universities (Public or Private) are not your typical organisation. There is usually that thing called Academic Freedom. We tend to be entitled to, and defend our own thinking - and reserve the right to disagree with someones else thinking. Irrespective of whether it is the Vice Chancellor, the Minister or the President who is having contrary opinion.
I think someone with this background or culture is infact more "independent" than someone who sits on a board representing specific and narrow interests, be they commercial, political or otherwise. In another words, as an academic, I can disagree with my boss on an issue and live to earn my salary the following day, because my terms of employment guarantee my my academic freedom/right to disagree. Not quite sure this applies in the private sector :-)
Nevertheless, your argument does hold some water, but perhaps applies only to folks in what we used to call "Central" and now "National" Government a.k.a the CORE civil servants. I still dont think Public University dons fall in this category of core civil service. But as @Mwendwa said, I could be biased..
walu.
-------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Ngigi Waithaka <ngigi@at.co.ke> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "John Walubengo" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 12:11 PM
Walu, It could be that Public Servants sitting in boards of Public bodies is an 'incestious' relationship that does not allow for the *independence* that external members of a board are supposed to bring to the table.
Take your case, you are at MMU, which is under Min ICT, then you get to be a board member at CAK, also under Min ICT. One phone call from you know who and you basically sing their story :-) Waithaka Ngigi Alliance Technologies
Nairobi, Kenya www.A1.io On 9 Aug 2014 12:00, "Walubengo J via kictanet" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
am three quarters(3/4) of a don, one quarter (1/4) to go before am a full don :-)
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that the Kenya Communications Act (revised 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these very boards.
I am just not able to understand the rationale behind this - perhaps I will when I complete the remaining 1/4 of my studies. But meanwhile the drafters of this clause are on this list (National Communication Secretariate lurkers :-). Maybe they could break it down for us in simple english. But bottom line, I want to believe nobody should be barred whether they come from private or public university.
walu.
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 8/8/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court
To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>
Date: Friday, August 8, 2014, 10:29 PM
Walu, you might have a
point, but being a don yourself (or on the way
to donship), I think your argument is biased.
Any professional at any
educational level
can give good advice to national boards. Most
successful Ministers at the Kibaki regime were
not necessarily PhD
holders.
I am not discounting the value
of education at all, and in 5 years, I
will
be a don too.
And I agree,
the law is biased by preventing public university
employees from sitting on public boards but
allowing private
university employees and
other private citizens to sit on the same
boards. Although I have a contradictory view
that education and
research will suffer if
the said professors are overloaded with side
jobs (something they will still do with private
consultancies). It's a
catch22
On 08/08/2014, Walubengo J via
kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>
wrote:
>
>
> @Kamotho,
>
> am yet to read the full ruling. But if i
recall well the key contention/plea
> was
that the appointment of Public University staff into the
various ICT
> Boards to be be found
illegal.
>
> it
appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering
the amount of
> intelkectual talent
within public universities - dont you think it is
> discriminatory that that group of staff
are barred from contributing to
>
national development at a Board level?
>
> Is it time to review
this clause or it does serve the purpose?
>
> walu.
>
>
>
------------------------------
> On Fri,
Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via
kictanet
> wrote:
>
>>The illegal appointments made by the
ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred
>>Matiang'i have been quashed by the
High Court. Details on the background
>>and the orders of the court are
available at
>>http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
>>
>>For the
avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari
orders
>>are that the impugned board
was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the
>>board never existed. Reports
attributable to the CS are that he plans to
>>appeal the decision. He has an inherent
right to do so. What must be clear
>>is that the quash orders are in full
force w.e.f yesterday and the board
>>cannot purport to transact or to be
seen to do so.
>>
>>This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary
has precipitated himself because of
>>a trademark unilateralism approach and
failure to engage. Any attempt by
>>any person whatsoever to overlook the
prescriptions of the court's decree
>>has obvious sanctions.
>>
>>Kamotho
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
>
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
>
> Unsubscribe or change
your options at
> https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldafr...
>
> 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.
>
--
______________________
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
twitter.com/lordmwesh
The best athletes never started as the best
athletes.
You have to think anyway, so why
not think big? - Donald Trump.
"You
miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne
Gretzky.
Tackle the biggest frog first.
I will persist until I succeed - Og
Mandino.
_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/ngigi%40at.co.ke
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.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/kivuva%40transworldafr...
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.
-- ______________________ Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya twitter.com/lordmwesh The best athletes never started as the best athletes. You have to think anyway, so why not think big? - Donald Trump. "You miss 100 percent of the shots you never take." - Wayne Gretzky. Tackle the biggest frog first. I will persist until I succeed - Og Mandino.
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that the Kenya Communications Act (revised 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
Mwendwa, Attending Board meetings is radically different from supervising PhD/Masters students. But to answer ur question, my supervisor from a public university is quite accessible - infact I am the one running away from him :-) walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 2:07 PM
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that
(revised
the Kenya Communications Act 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including
dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these
very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
Walu, No one disputes we need Academics in the KICTA. How does the KICTA (following their slogan) make Kenya a "Top 10 Global ICT Hub"? Noted an EU paper about their top ICT Hubs http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-435_en.htm The UK tops in academics while Germany tops in research/practicals (patents). Regards Murigi / Stanley Muraya *"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32* On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Walubengo J via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
Attending Board meetings is radically different from supervising PhD/Masters students. But to answer ur question, my supervisor from a public university is quite accessible - infact I am the one running away from him :-)
walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 2:07 PM
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that
(revised
the Kenya Communications Act 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including
dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these
very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail....
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.
Seems to me like the antagonists/protagonists in this debate are more interested in a power play than in actual solutions. Boards of corporations have to be kept small, multi-skilled and efficient to allow for better decision making. The solution to bring in "non-qualified", or external expertise is to set up board committees - which most by-laws allow and which usually do not have a limit on membership. So, guys, forget about the power politics, focus on the business and objectives of the organization and get these comittees to work....oops, I forgot, the board has been disbanded.... le sigh, Mblayo On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, S.M. Muraya via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Walu,
No one disputes we need Academics in the KICTA.
How does the KICTA (following their slogan) make Kenya a "Top 10 Global ICT Hub"?
Noted an EU paper about their top ICT Hubs
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-435_en.htm
The UK tops in academics while Germany tops in research/practicals (patents).
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Walubengo J via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
Attending Board meetings is radically different from supervising PhD/Masters students. But to answer ur question, my supervisor from a public university is quite accessible - infact I am the one running away from him :-)
walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 2:07 PM
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that
(revised
the Kenya Communications Act 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including
dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these
very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail....
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.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%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.
Brian, On a more practical note, did the team which setup the KIXP require the approval of a Government Tender/Board/Committee? If there were a tender/PHD committee involved, do you think a team involving locals would have been selected/favored? I remember (in the late 90's) you often had some Internet Protocol documentation in hand or in some bag. Regards Murigi / Stanley Muraya *"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32* On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com> wrote:
Seems to me like the antagonists/protagonists in this debate are more interested in a power play than in actual solutions.
Boards of corporations have to be kept small, multi-skilled and efficient to allow for better decision making. The solution to bring in "non-qualified", or external expertise is to set up board committees - which most by-laws allow and which usually do not have a limit on membership.
So, guys, forget about the power politics, focus on the business and objectives of the organization and get these comittees to work....oops, I forgot, the board has been disbanded....
le sigh,
Mblayo
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, S.M. Muraya via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Walu,
No one disputes we need Academics in the KICTA.
How does the KICTA (following their slogan) make Kenya a "Top 10 Global ICT Hub"?
Noted an EU paper about their top ICT Hubs
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-435_en.htm
The UK tops in academics while Germany tops in research/practicals (patents).
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Walubengo J via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
Attending Board meetings is radically different from supervising PhD/Masters students. But to answer ur question, my supervisor from a public university is quite accessible - infact I am the one running away from him :-)
walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 2:07 PM
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that
(revised
the Kenya Communications Act 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including
dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these
very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail....
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.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%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.
Murigi, The setup of KIXP was purely private sector driven (despite countless efforts to get KPTC (current Telkom) onboard. Nevertheless we were shut down by CCK for about 1 year because of an alleged "national security risk" mooted by KPTC (who felt that their then monopoly was being threatened). Anyhow, after 1 year of very loud local/international lobbying, internal education, behind the doors bargaining, and intense scrutiny, investigation and eventual clearance by the national intelligence apparatus, the project got a green light - and the face saving solution was to apply for an IXP license, the first ever in the world....a precedent that unfortunately was followed by a few other African countries... There was no power play like with this ICTA fiasco... Mblayo On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:15 AM, S.M. Muraya <murigi.muraya@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian,
On a more practical note, did the team which setup the KIXP require the approval of a Government Tender/Board/Committee?
If there were a tender/PHD committee involved, do you think a team involving locals would have been selected/favored?
I remember (in the late 90's) you often had some Internet Protocol documentation in hand or in some bag.
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com> wrote:
Seems to me like the antagonists/protagonists in this debate are more interested in a power play than in actual solutions.
Boards of corporations have to be kept small, multi-skilled and efficient to allow for better decision making. The solution to bring in "non-qualified", or external expertise is to set up board committees - which most by-laws allow and which usually do not have a limit on membership.
So, guys, forget about the power politics, focus on the business and objectives of the organization and get these comittees to work....oops, I forgot, the board has been disbanded....
le sigh,
Mblayo
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, S.M. Muraya via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Walu,
No one disputes we need Academics in the KICTA.
How does the KICTA (following their slogan) make Kenya a "Top 10 Global ICT Hub"?
Noted an EU paper about their top ICT Hubs
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-435_en.htm
The UK tops in academics while Germany tops in research/practicals (patents).
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Walubengo J via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
Attending Board meetings is radically different from supervising PhD/Masters students. But to answer ur question, my supervisor from a public university is quite accessible - infact I am the one running away from him :-)
walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 2:07 PM
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that
(revised
the Kenya Communications Act 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including
dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these
very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail....
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.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%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.
Prof Kulubi, Thank you for the translating the Judgement to Common Mans language. One thing i pick from your answers is the importance of stakeholder engagement which could have helped address some of the oversights you have pointed out. Such details can only be picked out when stakeholders are properly engaged. I hope the Cabinet Secretary and the Principal Secretary can be organizing some form of baraza's so that Stakeholders can engage them on critical issues such as the one we are discussing otherwise we might need a referendum to address Walu's concerns. Best Regards On 8/12/14, Brian Munyao Longwe via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Murigi,
The setup of KIXP was purely private sector driven (despite countless efforts to get KPTC (current Telkom) onboard. Nevertheless we were shut down by CCK for about 1 year because of an alleged "national security risk" mooted by KPTC (who felt that their then monopoly was being threatened).
Anyhow, after 1 year of very loud local/international lobbying, internal education, behind the doors bargaining, and intense scrutiny, investigation and eventual clearance by the national intelligence apparatus, the project got a green light - and the face saving solution was to apply for an IXP license, the first ever in the world....a precedent that unfortunately was followed by a few other African countries...
There was no power play like with this ICTA fiasco...
Mblayo
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:15 AM, S.M. Muraya <murigi.muraya@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian,
On a more practical note, did the team which setup the KIXP require the approval of a Government Tender/Board/Committee?
If there were a tender/PHD committee involved, do you think a team involving locals would have been selected/favored?
I remember (in the late 90's) you often had some Internet Protocol documentation in hand or in some bag.
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com> wrote:
Seems to me like the antagonists/protagonists in this debate are more interested in a power play than in actual solutions.
Boards of corporations have to be kept small, multi-skilled and efficient to allow for better decision making. The solution to bring in "non-qualified", or external expertise is to set up board committees - which most by-laws allow and which usually do not have a limit on membership.
So, guys, forget about the power politics, focus on the business and objectives of the organization and get these comittees to work....oops, I forgot, the board has been disbanded....
le sigh,
Mblayo
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, S.M. Muraya via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Walu,
No one disputes we need Academics in the KICTA.
How does the KICTA (following their slogan) make Kenya a "Top 10 Global ICT Hub"?
Noted an EU paper about their top ICT Hubs
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-435_en.htm
The UK tops in academics while Germany tops in research/practicals (patents).
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Walubengo J via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
Attending Board meetings is radically different from supervising PhD/Masters students. But to answer ur question, my supervisor from a public university is quite accessible - infact I am the one running away from him :-)
walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 2:07 PM
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that
(revised
the Kenya Communications Act 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including
dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these
very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail....
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.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%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.
-- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254-20-2498789 Skype: barrack.otieno http://www.otienobarrack.me.ke/
In those days, we (external IT Consultants) tried with some IT reformers in KPTC to get their IT staff trained on a certain messaging system. Unfortunately, the initiative never succeeded as KPTC was being looted and transparency was not a priority for their leadership. Eventually, Orange came in and using a local IT firm, easily deployed an upgraded version of the same system. Which brings me back to an issue which the KICTA (and this thread) should be most concerned with... challenging Government Executives who do not support Transparency (which includes IT, not just Leadership and Organizational Processes). Regards Murigi / Stanley Muraya *"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32* On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com> wrote:
Murigi,
The setup of KIXP was purely private sector driven (despite countless efforts to get KPTC (current Telkom) onboard. Nevertheless we were shut down by CCK for about 1 year because of an alleged "national security risk" mooted by KPTC (who felt that their then monopoly was being threatened).
Anyhow, after 1 year of very loud local/international lobbying, internal education, behind the doors bargaining, and intense scrutiny, investigation and eventual clearance by the national intelligence apparatus, the project got a green light - and the face saving solution was to apply for an IXP license, the first ever in the world....a precedent that unfortunately was followed by a few other African countries...
There was no power play like with this ICTA fiasco...
Mblayo
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:15 AM, S.M. Muraya <murigi.muraya@gmail.com> wrote:
Brian,
On a more practical note, did the team which setup the KIXP require the approval of a Government Tender/Board/Committee?
If there were a tender/PHD committee involved, do you think a team involving locals would have been selected/favored?
I remember (in the late 90's) you often had some Internet Protocol documentation in hand or in some bag.
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Brian Munyao Longwe <blongwe@gmail.com> wrote:
Seems to me like the antagonists/protagonists in this debate are more interested in a power play than in actual solutions.
Boards of corporations have to be kept small, multi-skilled and efficient to allow for better decision making. The solution to bring in "non-qualified", or external expertise is to set up board committees - which most by-laws allow and which usually do not have a limit on membership.
So, guys, forget about the power politics, focus on the business and objectives of the organization and get these comittees to work....oops, I forgot, the board has been disbanded....
le sigh,
Mblayo
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, S.M. Muraya via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Walu,
No one disputes we need Academics in the KICTA.
How does the KICTA (following their slogan) make Kenya a "Top 10 Global ICT Hub"?
Noted an EU paper about their top ICT Hubs
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-435_en.htm
The UK tops in academics while Germany tops in research/practicals (patents).
Regards
Murigi / Stanley Muraya
*"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32*
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Walubengo J via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
Mwendwa,
Attending Board meetings is radically different from supervising PhD/Masters students. But to answer ur question, my supervisor from a public university is quite accessible - infact I am the one running away from him :-)
walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, Mwendwa Kivuva <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "Mwendwa Kivuva" <Kivuva@transworldafrica.com> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 2:07 PM
Anyway, my beef in all this saga is that
(revised
the Kenya Communications Act 2013) has a clause that stipulate that public servants (including
dons in PUBLIC universities) should not sit on some boards including the Communication Authority, Universal Service, ICT Authority amongst others. It however does not bar dons from PRIVATE universities to sit on these
very boards.
Walu, have you been supervised for a masters or PhD by a public university don? How accessible were they?
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail....
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.
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%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.
@Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote:
@Kamotho,
am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal.
it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level?
Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose?
walu.
------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background and the orders of the court are available at
http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
Dear Kamotho, Walu, et al, Trust the KICTA has learned a lesson will identify and consult relevant/interested local parties. For sure, that is one of the reasons KICTA exists is to clean and build up the local IT industry. What are the CID and NSIS doing to weed out firms and public officials killing our IT industry? Why do we invest in technologies we do not deploy? Often to win tenders, firms quote less than they should without considering the value of talent. Also, multinationals favor firms which do best in selling (but not deploying) their technologies. We expect IT teams to develop skills and perform when paying them well below global averages. And more malpractices... On NTV, heard President Kenyatta (in the US) stating there are IT opportunities in Kenya for US firms. Doubt if US firms can bribe like many local and foreign firms do without getting themselves in trouble/prison. As such we cannot expect them to significantly invest in Kenya, before we reduce corruption our society. Note what the CIA thinks about IT malpractice... http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/black-hat-2014-keynote-what/ Regards Murigi / Stanley Muraya *"Better a patient person than a warrior, one with self-control than one who takes a city." Prov 16:32* On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Kamotho Njenga via kictanet < kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote:
@Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine.
ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer".
But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers
The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding.
Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid".
All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector.
My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds.
Kamotho Njenga
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote:
@Kamotho,
am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal.
it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level?
Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose?
walu.
------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background and the orders of the court are available at
http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be
clear
is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/murigi.muraya%40gmail....
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.
@Kamotho, Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards. As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-) But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry). regds. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM @Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred
Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background
and the orders of the court are available at
http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders
are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the
board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to
appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear
is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board
cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of
a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by
any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree
has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
Walu, I think that you have over generalized your views on university by using a traditional medieval university model of freedom of expression to justify ‘independence of university dons.’ The modern society needs universities to train their government, political, religious, and security and other specialized servants. This is the main objective of governments, religious organizations and other parties that sponsor universities. The views of sponsors generally affect the ‘independence’ of the staff and students. Indeed it is rare to find a public university that does not specify promotion of national values in its statutes without specifying these values and drawing a line between these values and those of the government of the day. Similarly, it is not possible to get a religious university (Catholic, Muslim, Presbyterian, etc) which does not seek to promote unique values of the religious sect. In Kenya, we have gone further to guarantee freedom of expression to all citizens in Section 33 of the Constitution (http://www.kenyalaw.org:8181/exist/kenyalex/actview.xql?actid=Const2010). However, it is wrong to assume that such guarantees ensure that individuals appointed to Boards like that of CTA, who inevitably must deal with organizational and national politics, make independent decisions. Prof. James Kulubi -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 9/8/14, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, 9 August, 2014, 16:17 @Kamotho, Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards. As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-) But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry). regds. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM @Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred
Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background
and the orders of the court are available at
http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the
are
certiorari orders that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the
board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to
appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear
is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f
yesterday and the board
cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has
precipitated himself because of
a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to
any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of
engage. Any attempt by the court's decree
has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
_______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jkulubi%40yahoo.co.uk 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.
@Prof Kulubi, I agree - at the end of the day, nobody is entirely independent and has to weigh their decisions against multiple variables. However, my point is that academics by training tend to interrogate the issues more critically and objectively and are likely to vote against the grain once convinced on a given matter of principle. An extreme case in point is Dr. Ndemo who as PS actually voted against himself (the Government thinking) at the ITU/WCIT 2012 conference in Dubai :-) Check out the story @ http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/When-Kenya-failed-to-sign-telecom-treat... walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sun, 8/10/14, James Kulubi <jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Sunday, August 10, 2014, 10:58 AM Walu, I think that you have over generalized your views on university by using a traditional medieval university model of freedom of expression to justify ‘independence of university dons.’ The modern society needs universities to train their government, political, religious, and security and other specialized servants. This is the main objective of governments, religious organizations and other parties that sponsor universities. The views of sponsors generally affect the ‘independence’ of the staff and students. Indeed it is rare to find a public university that does not specify promotion of national values in its statutes without specifying these values and drawing a line between these values and those of the government of the day. Similarly, it is not possible to get a religious university (Catholic, Muslim, Presbyterian, etc) which does not seek to promote unique values of the religious sect. In Kenya, we have gone further to guarantee freedom of expression to all citizens in Section 33 of the Constitution (http://www.kenyalaw.org:8181/exist/kenyalex/actview.xql?actid=Const2010). However, it is wrong to assume that such guarantees ensure that individuals appointed to Boards like that of CTA, who inevitably must deal with organizational and national politics, make independent decisions. Prof. James Kulubi -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 9/8/14, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, 9 August, 2014, 16:17 @Kamotho, Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards. As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-) But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry). regds. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM @Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the
ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred >Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background >and the orders of the court are available at >http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
>For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders >are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the >board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to >appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear >is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board
cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so. >
>This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of >a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by
any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree
>has obvious sanctions. > >Kamotho _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jkulubi%40yahoo.co.uk 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.
@Walu Attached is a copy of the judgement. The public university dons question is addressed at paragraphs 41-50 of the ruling. As per tradition, courts may not necessarily pronounce all issues in "plain language". Should such challenges be encountered, it is advisable to befriend a competent legal practitioner. Kamotho On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote:
@Kamotho,
Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards.
As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-)
But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry).
regds.
walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM
@Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine.
ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer".
But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following:
-A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers
The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding.
Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid".
All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector.
My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds.
Kamotho Njenga
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote:
@Kamotho,
am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal.
it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level?
Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose?
walu.
------------------------------
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote:
The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred
Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background
and the orders of the court are available at
http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c...
For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders
are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the
board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to
appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear
is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board
cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so.
This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of
a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by
any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree
has obvious sanctions.
Kamotho
Thnx Kamotho. Suprised it took the judge many paragraphs to conclude what I have always known :-) And I quote the judge in part on article 50 of the judgement. --------<<<< 50......Based on the material before me I am NOT (emphasis by me) convinced that the mere fact that the 1st and 4th interested parties may be permanent and pensionable employees of the University of Nairobi necessarily qualify them to be public officers as defined under Article 260 of the Constitution. --------<<<<< Cool! walu. -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 8/11/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, August 11, 2014, 12:41 PM @Walu Attached is a copy of the judgement. The public university dons question is addressed at paragraphs 41-50 of the ruling. As per tradition, courts may not necessarily pronounce all issues in "plain language". Should such challenges be encountered, it is advisable to befriend a competent legal practitioner. Kamotho On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards. As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-) But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry). regds. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM @Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote: >The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred >Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background >and the orders of the court are available at >http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c... > >For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders >are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the >board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to >appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear >is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board >cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so. > >This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of >a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by >any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree >has obvious sanctions. > >Kamotho
After reading the ruling, it is clear that the problem with the appointment of dons from the University of Nairobi (Interested Party One and four) has all to do with the drafting of Legal Notice No. 183 which established the ICT Authority. Drawing from my experience as the Communication Secretary (CEO of the National Communications Secretariat) for 7 years during which period I participated in the drafting Legal Notice establishing the ICT Board amongst others, I would first shed light on the processes which such legal notices follow. 1. The parent ministry would go through the policy formulation process including stakeholder consultation and approve the policy that a new state corporation was necessary and also list its functions. In this particular case, this step was not necessary since the policy was gazetted in the Executive Order No. 1 on the reorganization of Government. 2. Second, the Ministry would get a body or individuals with necessary sector and legal expertise to draft the Legal Notice which would be reviewed at ministerial level before being forwarded to the Permanent (now Principal) Secretary. For the ICT sector, the National Communication Secretariat would normally perform this function as provided for in Section 102 of the Kenya Communications Act. Not only did it have technical experts, it had a legal expert and could use consultants where necessary. The Permanent (now Principal) Secretary would, after seeking approval from the Minister (CS), forward the Legal notice the Attorney General for review. 3. The Attorney General would read the Legal Notice and highlight any areas which fail to comply with the Law (Constitution, Acts of Parliament and Subsidiary Legislation) and recommend correction or redrafting. If satisfied, the Attorney General would forward two copies of the Legal Notice to the Permanent Secretary with a cover letter indicating that the President may sign if he agrees. 4. The President would sign the Legal Notice (if he agrees) and a copy would be forwarded to the Principal Secretary who would forward it again to the Attorney General who would now give it the Legal Notice number (in this case Legal Notice No. 183) and forward it to the Government Printer for publication. Away from the government bureaucracy, what happened in this case is that the drafters, as highlighted in the court proceeding, were content with having the CS of Treasury and the CS of the Parent Ministry as the only two central and county members of the Board of the Authority. By doing so, they also complied with the provisions of the State Corporation Act which provides for a maximum of three. Indeed, I fully agree with them on this matter. But they used the words ‘public servants’ when drafting. Unfortunately and most likely unknown to the drafters, the Constitution of Kenya 2010 had defined a public servant in such a manner that it goes beyond central and county government employees. So we have the unfortunate situation where dons from public universities can sit on the Boards of most State Corporation and even Councils of the Public Universities (which as also state corporations) but they cannot sit on the Board of the ICT Authority. My personal opinion is that the situation can be corrected by either appointing another Board while excluding the two dons and also staggering the appointments or alternatively withdrawing the legal notice and gazetting another one which fulfils the intention of the drafters and provides for staggered terms of office. Let me have your views. Prof. James A. Kulubi -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 11/8/14, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, 11 August, 2014, 15:05 Thnx Kamotho. Suprised it took the judge many paragraphs to conclude what I have always known :-) And I quote the judge in part on article 50 of the judgement. --------<<<< 50......Based on the material before me I am NOT (emphasis by me) convinced that the mere fact that the 1st and 4th interested parties may be permanent and pensionable employees of the University of Nairobi necessarily qualify them to be public officers as defined under Article 260 of the Constitution. --------<<<<< Cool! walu. -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 8/11/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, August 11, 2014, 12:41 PM @Walu Attached is a copy of the judgement. The public university dons question is addressed at paragraphs 41-50 of the ruling. As per tradition, courts may not necessarily pronounce all issues in "plain language". Should such challenges be encountered, it is advisable to befriend a competent legal practitioner. Kamotho On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards. As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-) But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry). regds. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM @Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote: >The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred >Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background >and the orders of the court are available at >http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c... > >For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders >are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the >board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to >appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear >is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board >cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so. > >This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of >a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by >any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree >has obvious sanctions. > >Kamotho _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jkulubi%40yahoo.co.uk 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.
Prof. I was with you all along until your final paragraph which in part says: "...My personal opinion is that the situation can be corrected by either appointing another Board while excluding the two dons..." I thought the judge had just ruled that dons can be on this board? This can be the original two dons, or new ones like you :-) What I dont understand is why the original ones must be excluded as per your opinion. Why should this be? walu. -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 8/11/14, James Kulubi <jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, August 11, 2014, 11:04 PM After reading the ruling, it is clear that the problem with the appointment of dons from the University of Nairobi (Interested Party One and four) has all to do with the drafting of Legal Notice No. 183 which established the ICT Authority. Drawing from my experience as the Communication Secretary (CEO of the National Communications Secretariat) for 7 years during which period I participated in the drafting Legal Notice establishing the ICT Board amongst others, I would first shed light on the processes which such legal notices follow. 1. The parent ministry would go through the policy formulation process including stakeholder consultation and approve the policy that a new state corporation was necessary and also list its functions. In this particular case, this step was not necessary since the policy was gazetted in the Executive Order No. 1 on the reorganization of Government. 2. Second, the Ministry would get a body or individuals with necessary sector and legal expertise to draft the Legal Notice which would be reviewed at ministerial level before being forwarded to the Permanent (now Principal) Secretary. For the ICT sector, the National Communication Secretariat would normally perform this function as provided for in Section 102 of the Kenya Communications Act. Not only did it have technical experts, it had a legal expert and could use consultants where necessary. The Permanent (now Principal) Secretary would, after seeking approval from the Minister (CS), forward the Legal notice the Attorney General for review. 3. The Attorney General would read the Legal Notice and highlight any areas which fail to comply with the Law (Constitution, Acts of Parliament and Subsidiary Legislation) and recommend correction or redrafting. If satisfied, the Attorney General would forward two copies of the Legal Notice to the Permanent Secretary with a cover letter indicating that the President may sign if he agrees. 4. The President would sign the Legal Notice (if he agrees) and a copy would be forwarded to the Principal Secretary who would forward it again to the Attorney General who would now give it the Legal Notice number (in this case Legal Notice No. 183) and forward it to the Government Printer for publication. Away from the government bureaucracy, what happened in this case is that the drafters, as highlighted in the court proceeding, were content with having the CS of Treasury and the CS of the Parent Ministry as the only two central and county members of the Board of the Authority. By doing so, they also complied with the provisions of the State Corporation Act which provides for a maximum of three. Indeed, I fully agree with them on this matter. But they used the words ‘public servants’ when drafting. Unfortunately and most likely unknown to the drafters, the Constitution of Kenya 2010 had defined a public servant in such a manner that it goes beyond central and county government employees. So we have the unfortunate situation where dons from public universities can sit on the Boards of most State Corporation and even Councils of the Public Universities (which as also state corporations) but they cannot sit on the Board of the ICT Authority. My personal opinion is that the situation can be corrected by either appointing another Board while excluding the two dons and also staggering the appointments or alternatively withdrawing the legal notice and gazetting another one which fulfils the intention of the drafters and provides for staggered terms of office. Let me have your views. Prof. James A. Kulubi -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 11/8/14, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, 11 August, 2014, 15:05 Thnx Kamotho. Suprised it took the judge many paragraphs to conclude what I have always known :-) And I quote the judge in part on article 50 of the judgement. --------<<<< 50......Based on the material before me I am NOT (emphasis by me) convinced that the mere fact that the 1st and 4th interested parties may be permanent and pensionable employees of the University of Nairobi necessarily qualify them to be public officers as defined under Article 260 of the Constitution. --------<<<<< Cool! walu. -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 8/11/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, August 11, 2014, 12:41 PM @Walu Attached is a copy of the judgement. The public university dons question is addressed at paragraphs 41-50 of the ruling. As per tradition, courts may not necessarily pronounce all issues in "plain language". Should such challenges be encountered, it is advisable to befriend a competent legal practitioner. Kamotho On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards. As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-) But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry). regds. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM @Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote: >The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred >Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background >and the orders of the court are available at >http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c... > >For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders >are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the >board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to >appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear >is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board >cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so. > >This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of >a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by >any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree >has obvious sanctions. > >Kamotho _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jkulubi%40yahoo.co.uk 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.
Walu, I will quote extensively from the ruling to answer your question on why the dons cannot be appointed to the Board of the Authority. 1. Section 7 of the ruling gives the statement of the deponent as follows: "According to the deponent, the actions of the 1st Respondent (CS) reek of irrationality; abuse of power or impunity; illegality; are tainted with bias and are in flagrant disregard for the rule of law for the reasons that the appointments are ultra vires the provisions of Section 6(2)(e) of the Order in that the 1st and the 4th interested parties are public officers being in employment as lecturers at the University of Nairobi which is a Public Institution, by dint of Article 260 of the Constitution hence ought not to have been appointed as members of the board." 2. Section 6(2)(e) of the Order which provides that the Board of the Authority shall consist of “not more than six persons, not being public officers, appointed by the Cabinet Secretary, by virtue of their specialist knowledge and distinguished service and experience of at last seven years in matters of information and communications technologies, e-Government, e-Commerce, law, finance, or human resources management.” 3. Section 260 of the constitution gives the interpretation of public office as: “public office” means an office in the national government, a county government or the public service, if the remuneration and benefits of the office are payable directly from the Consolidated Fund or directly out of money provided by Parliament; 4. The judge in his ruling states (Section 42 of the judgement) states: " In my view where a statute donates powers to an authority, the authority ought to ensure that the powers that it exercises are within the four corners of the statute and ought not to extend its powers outside the statute under which it purports to exercise its authority." The judge is simply saying that the Legal Notice gave the CS powers to appoint “not more than six persons, not being public officers” and further the State Corporation Act under which the Order was made requires that such appointments are staggered (to ensure continuity in the business of the Authority). 5. Given this ruling, one could say that the only loophole to appoint the two dons is to use the argument of the 2nd respondent that Nairobi university makes money from other sources and therefore there is doubt that the dons were drawing salary from the Consolidated Fund or directly out of money provided by Parliament. In this regard, the judge states: "Based on the material before me I am not convinced that the mere fact that the 1st and 4th interested parties may be permanent and pensionable employees of the University of Nairobi necessarily qualify them to be public officers as defined under Article 260 of the Constitution." I know that this is where you appear to be convinced that the dons could be re-appointed. The problem here is that the burden of proof will lie with dons or applicants for the position of Board members. In my view each don seeking to serve on the Board of the ICT Authority must under the prevailing Order prove that he or she in on an unpaid leave (also called leave of absence) from the public university for a period longer than 3 years; or that all his remuneration will come from a research project/parallel students’ fees/consultancy for the whole of the three years that he or she is serving on the Board. This is not a common practice since most universities have ceilings on the length of unpaid leaves and the accounts of fees from parallel and regular students are often mixed. I therefore believe that the easier solution is to either keep the dons away from the Board of the ICT Authority for the time being while awaiting a substantive Bill to establish the Authority to be drafted and tabled in Parliament, or alternatively to review the Order establishing the Authority and gazette it afresh. On a lighter note, I am not interested in serving on the Board of this Authority. Best Regards Prof. James Kulubi -------------------------------------------- On Tue, 12/8/14, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke>, "James Kulubi" <jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Tuesday, 12 August, 2014, 9:42 Prof. I was with you all along until your final paragraph which in part says: "...My personal opinion is that the situation can be corrected by either appointing another Board while excluding the two dons..." I thought the judge had just ruled that dons can be on this board? This can be the original two dons, or new ones like you :-) What I dont understand is why the original ones must be excluded as per your opinion. Why should this be? walu. -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 8/11/14, James Kulubi <jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com>, "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, August 11, 2014, 11:04 PM After reading the ruling, it is clear that the problem with the appointment of dons from the University of Nairobi (Interested Party One and four) has all to do with the drafting of Legal Notice No. 183 which established the ICT Authority. Drawing from my experience as the Communication Secretary (CEO of the National Communications Secretariat) for 7 years during which period I participated in the drafting Legal Notice establishing the ICT Board amongst others, I would first shed light on the processes which such legal notices follow. 1. The parent ministry would go through the policy formulation process including stakeholder consultation and approve the policy that a new state corporation was necessary and also list its functions. In this particular case, this step was not necessary since the policy was gazetted in the Executive Order No. 1 on the reorganization of Government. 2. Second, the Ministry would get a body or individuals with necessary sector and legal expertise to draft the Legal Notice which would be reviewed at ministerial level before being forwarded to the Permanent (now Principal) Secretary. For the ICT sector, the National Communication Secretariat would normally perform this function as provided for in Section 102 of the Kenya Communications Act. Not only did it have technical experts, it had a legal expert and could use consultants where necessary. The Permanent (now Principal) Secretary would, after seeking approval from the Minister (CS), forward the Legal notice the Attorney General for review. 3. The Attorney General would read the Legal Notice and highlight any areas which fail to comply with the Law (Constitution, Acts of Parliament and Subsidiary Legislation) and recommend correction or redrafting. If satisfied, the Attorney General would forward two copies of the Legal Notice to the Permanent Secretary with a cover letter indicating that the President may sign if he agrees. 4. The President would sign the Legal Notice (if he agrees) and a copy would be forwarded to the Principal Secretary who would forward it again to the Attorney General who would now give it the Legal Notice number (in this case Legal Notice No. 183) and forward it to the Government Printer for publication. Away from the government bureaucracy, what happened in this case is that the drafters, as highlighted in the court proceeding, were content with having the CS of Treasury and the CS of the Parent Ministry as the only two central and county members of the Board of the Authority. By doing so, they also complied with the provisions of the State Corporation Act which provides for a maximum of three. Indeed, I fully agree with them on this matter. But they used the words ‘public servants’ when drafting. Unfortunately and most likely unknown to the drafters, the Constitution of Kenya 2010 had defined a public servant in such a manner that it goes beyond central and county government employees. So we have the unfortunate situation where dons from public universities can sit on the Boards of most State Corporation and even Councils of the Public Universities (which as also state corporations) but they cannot sit on the Board of the ICT Authority. My personal opinion is that the situation can be corrected by either appointing another Board while excluding the two dons and also staggering the appointments or alternatively withdrawing the legal notice and gazetting another one which fulfils the intention of the drafters and provides for staggered terms of office. Let me have your views. Prof. James A. Kulubi -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 11/8/14, Walubengo J via kictanet <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: jkulubi@yahoo.co.uk Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, 11 August, 2014, 15:05 Thnx Kamotho. Suprised it took the judge many paragraphs to conclude what I have always known :-) And I quote the judge in part on article 50 of the judgement. --------<<<< 50......Based on the material before me I am NOT (emphasis by me) convinced that the mere fact that the 1st and 4th interested parties may be permanent and pensionable employees of the University of Nairobi necessarily qualify them to be public officers as defined under Article 260 of the Constitution. --------<<<<< Cool! walu. -------------------------------------------- On Mon, 8/11/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Monday, August 11, 2014, 12:41 PM @Walu Attached is a copy of the judgement. The public university dons question is addressed at paragraphs 41-50 of the ruling. As per tradition, courts may not necessarily pronounce all issues in "plain language". Should such challenges be encountered, it is advisable to befriend a competent legal practitioner. Kamotho On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, Thanx for the detailed response. I wish you could point us to the full judgement, I am still keen to see how the judge managed to argue out my gut feeling about public university dons i.e. being able to find that they are indeed not part of the envisioned "public" servants as specified in the clause barring public servants sitting on such boards. As for the change of modus operandi at the ministry, I do agree it has happened and have blogged and complained about it - without losing my pay (@ Ngigi :-) But I am not sure all is lost. Perhaps there are just multiple routes to the same objective and we may just need some consensus and understanding on both sides (ministry/industry). regds. walu. -------------------------------------------- On Sat, 8/9/14, Kamotho Njenga <kamothonjenga@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [kictanet] ICT Authority Board Appointments Quashed by the High Court To: "Walubengo J" <jwalu@yahoo.com> Cc: "KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions" <kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke> Date: Saturday, August 9, 2014, 1:30 PM @Walu, I am entirely in agreement that the intellectual capital residing within academia is astronomical and any policy that expressly forbids academics from disbursing their knowledge treasures to Public Boards is frail in logic. As a matter of full disclosure and as you are aware, I also spend some time in lecture halls on account of what I believe to be a high calling. So, it was obviously not very convenient for me to advance the "ant-lecturer" line of argument. But once you choose to walk through the corridors of justice, there is no option but to stick to the straight and narrow legal path. All contested matters of law however trivial they appear must be laid bare before the court. Moreover when it became apparent that the decision making authority was deliberately contemptuous, we had to pursue the strict compliance doctrine. ICTAK's petition was anchored on multiple grounds. The ground on the appointment of Public University Dons was like a ribbon on the package. It stemmed from the fact that the Legal Notice No. 183 of 2013 out-rightly forbid the inclusion of public officers in the board. Our contention was that since public universities are largely funded through public funds, lecturers can be deemed to fall under the public officers category. Upon rigorous interrogation, the court was not convinced by this argument and therefore this ground was strikingly shattered by the court. Thus as far as the ruling goes, no one should deny Walu an opportunity to sit on the next ICTA Board under the pretext that he is a "public officer". But why should the cabinet secretary be precluded from appointing public officers to his list? Isn't this discriminatory? These questions can be best answered by analyzing the composition and context within which boards operate. For instance, when completely structured, ICTA Board should consist of the following: -A chairman (appointed by the President) -PSs 1. ICT 2. Treasury 3. Lands and Housing -CEO (The first CEO to be hired competitively by the CS, the successors to be hired by the Board) -Not more than six other persons not being public officers The global trend in governance is that of public-private stewardship. Thus, if the CS was allowed to nominate the six other persons from the public service, the weight of the board would heavily tilt towards the executive side and questions of independence would naturally arise. Public-private combination also helps resolve the potential challenge of ideological inbreeding. Over the years, we advanced the logic to have the various public agencies within the ICT sector converged. When the executive order on the same was finally signed by the President, we anticipated a drastically bright future for the Kenyan ICT sector. At the same time, we recognized that there are a range of issues that require harmonization in the course of time. On this basis we have variously pleaded with the ministry to convene a multi-stakeholder forum so that the ICT community can ventilate their concerns and make contribution to policy. This to no avail. In good faith, we have also invited the ministry to useful events where business relevant to them is transacted but they have failed to show up. In the true African spirit, we have optimistically hoped that they will reciprocate our multiple invitations, at least with a single invite even to their lowest profile event, only to harshly realize that "our hopes are not valid". All along, we have held a strong desire to support the Kenyan ICT excellence dream. However, without fear of contradiction, I regrettably submit that the modus operandi at the ICT ministry has tragically deflated the ICT momentum and enthusiasm that prior leadership strove to gather. Never has it been so difficult to offer a helping hand at the ministry! I nostalgically miss the times when Hon Rege, Hon Mutahi Kagwe, Hon Poghisio, Dr. Ndemo were at the helm. Those are the days when the PS or Minister would stay late into the evening consulting stakeholders and ooze visions of wisdom for the sector the following dawn. Court battles were alien to the sector. My personal holding is that courts should only be applicable as a last resort. Litigation procedures and outcomes in their nature are very adversarial. There are majorly two possible outcomes in a court process; a fabulous winner and bitter loser. Engagement and Consultation on its part produces an endless chain of winners. But if the Kenyan ICT sector can only be successfully steered through chamber summons, sworn affidavits and court decrees; then my heart bleeds. Kamotho Njenga On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Walubengo J <jwalu@yahoo.com> wrote: @Kamotho, am yet to read the full ruling. But if i recall well the key contention/plea was that the appointment of Public University staff into the various ICT Boards to be be found illegal. it appears the judges are in agreement. However, considering the amount of intelkectual talent within public universities - dont you think it is discriminatory that that group of staff are barred from contributing to national development at a Board level? Is it time to review this clause or it does serve the purpose? walu. ------------------------------ On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 1:19 PM AST (Arabian) Kamotho Njenga via kictanet wrote: >The illegal appointments made by the ICT Cabinet Secretary, Dr Fred >Matiang'i have been quashed by the High Court. Details on the background >and the orders of the court are available at >http://www.ictak.or.ke/resources/news-and-events/235-statement-on-the-high-c... > >For the avoidance of doubt, partial implications of the certiorari orders >are that the impugned board was illegal *ab initio*. So it is like the >board never existed. Reports attributable to the CS are that he plans to >appeal the decision. He has an inherent right to do so. What must be clear >is that the quash orders are in full force w.e.f yesterday and the board >cannot purport to transact or to be seen to do so. > >This is a crisis the Cabinet secretary has precipitated himself because of >a trademark unilateralism approach and failure to engage. Any attempt by >any person whatsoever to overlook the prescriptions of the court's decree >has obvious sanctions. > >Kamotho _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list kictanet@lists.kictanet.or.ke https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jkulubi%40yahoo.co.uk 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.
Interesting interview of Dr Matiang¹I on the Board issues https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YafSJI0UXQ I agree with him that we are wasting a lot of time shadow-boxing instead of getting the sector moving. Andrew Director | African eDevelopment Resource Centre PO Box 49475 00100 | Nairobi, Kenya Tel +254 20 4041646 | Cel +254 722 702187
participants (9)
-
Andrew Karanja -
Barrack Otieno -
Brian Munyao Longwe -
James Kulubi -
Kamotho Njenga -
Mwendwa Kivuva -
Ngigi Waithaka -
S.M. Muraya -
Walubengo J