Koskei in a spot over top official appointment despite court ruling

Barely days after the High Court declared his involvement in the recruitment of chief executives of State corporations unlawful, Chief of Staff and Head of Public Service Felix Koskei has once again found himself at the centre of a fresh storm over the appointment of the Director General of the Technical and Vocational Education and Training Authority (TVETA).

Documents seen by The Sunday Standard suggest that the Office of the Head of Public Service  advised for the appointment of the second-ranked candidate for the lucrative position, despite the TVETA board having formally recommended the top-scoring applicant following a competitive recruitment process.

The development is likely to reignite debate over executive interference in appointments to State corporations, particularly after the High Court emphatically ruled that boards—not the Office of the Head of Public Service—have the statutory mandate to recruit and recommend chief executive officers.

At the heart of the latest controversy is a recruitment exercise that ranked Moriasi Arabu Josiah first with 84.9 per cent, followed by Dr Wanyeki Paul Machocho with 80.4 per cent, while Dr Kaburu Leah Wangari came third with 78.9 per cent.

In a letter addressed to the Office of the Head of Public Service, the Ministry of Education forwarded the outcome of the interviews, noting that the recruitment had been conducted competitively and in accordance with the law.

"This has reference to the captioned subject matter and to our previous correspondence thereon... By the said letter, you granted approval for the recruitment of the Director General of the Technical and Vocational Education and Training Authority," the communication reads in part.

Citing Section 20 of the TVET Act, 2013, the board reminded the government that the law requires the Cabinet Secretary to appoint the Director General upon the recommendation of the authority.

"In line with the foregoing, we write to recommend the appointment of the top-ranked candidate, Moriasi Arabu Josiah, to the subject position," the letter states.

However, in a letter dated July 23 addressed to Education Cabinet Secretary Julius Ogamba, Koskei preferred the second-ranked candidate.

"We acknowledge receipt of your letter... We have considered the report of the recruitment process and noted that the process was compliant with the applicable laws and procedures," Koskei wrote.

"In view of the above, and in furtherance of Circular No. OP/CAB.9/1 dated April 8, 2025, this office does not object to the appointment of Dr Wanyeki Paul Machocho as the next Director General of TVETA. Please proceed with the appropriate action to formalize the appointment."

The letter was copied to Principal Secretary for TVET Dr Esther Muoria, Principal Administrative Secretary Arthur Osiya and State Corporations Advisory Committee CEO Simon Indimuli.

The correspondence has now raised questions over why the Office of the Head of Public Service appeared to favour the second-ranked candidate despite acknowledging that the recruitment process complied with the law and despite the board's express recommendation that the highest-scoring candidate be appointed.

The controversy is further compounded by a landmark High Court judgment delivered on July 16, in which Justice Samwel Mohochi declared that the Office of the Chief of Staff and Head of Public Service had no legal role in approving or concurring with appointments of State corporation chief executives.

The court quashed the appointments of Dr Philip Kiptanui at Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital, Agnes Kalekye at Kenya Broadcasting Corporation, Joseph Kamau at Athi Water Works Development Agency and Abdalla Mohamed Hatimy at Kenya National Shipping Line.

Justice Mohochi found that the recruitment processes violated constitutional principles of transparency, accountability and merit, while faulting State corporations for surrendering powers reserved for their boards.

"There is no requirement by boards of State corporations requiring them to seek concurrence of their appointments with the Chief of Staff or any other officer," Justice Mohochi ruled.

The judge went further and declared the entire recruitment exercises—from advertisement to appointment—illegal and unconstitutional, directing fresh recruitment processes.

He also criticised public institutions for failing to provide documentary evidence demonstrating compliance with constitutional and statutory recruitment standards.

"The public bodies were to justify the recruitment as strictly complying with the constitutional tenets. They were unable to present to the court an auditable paper trail vouching for the integrity of the recruitment process," Justice Mohochi observed.

Under the TVET Act, the role of recommending a Director General rests squarely with the Authority's Board after a competitive recruitment process, while the appointing authority is the Cabinet Secretary.

The fresh developments have also reignited concerns over whether executive offices are exercising influence beyond what the law permits in appointments to independent State agencies.

Critics argue that where boards conduct competitive interviews, score candidates and make formal recommendations, any departure from those recommendations must be firmly anchored in law and transparently explained to avoid undermining public confidence in recruitment processes.