Artistic representation for County Speakers Move to Court Seeking Personal Car Alongside Official Vehicle

County Speakers Move to Court Seeking Personal Car Alongside Official Vehicle

SRC faces court battle over delayed car grants for county assembly speakers.

The Background

The Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) is a government agency responsible for determining the salaries and allowances of public officials in Kenya. The SRC has been in the news lately due to its handling of the county assembly speaker’s request for a one-time car grant. The commission has been accused of being slow in responding to the request, leading to a court case being filed against it.

The Request

  • The county assembly speakers have been requesting a one-time Ksh5 million car grant per county assembly term since The request was initially denied by the SRC, but the speakers appealed the decision. The SRC has been accused of being inconsistent in its application of the rules and regulations governing the grant. ## The Court Case*
  • The Court Case

  • The county assembly speakers have taken the SRC to court, seeking a court order to compel the commission to provide them with the car grant. The court case is based on the argument that the SRC has failed to respond to the request in a timely manner. The speakers are seeking a one-time payment of Ksh5 million per county assembly term.

    The first notice, dated July 2022, was issued to the University of Ghana’s (UG) Department of Computer Science and Engineering.

    The Petition Against the SRC Gazette Notice

    The petition, filed by a group of students, challenges the SRC (Student Representative Council) gazette notices issued in July 2022 and August 2023. The notices, which were intended to regulate the use of the university’s computer systems, have been met with resistance from students who feel that they infringe on their rights and freedoms.

    Key Issues with the Notices

  • The notices restrict the use of computer systems for personal purposes, such as social media and online gaming. The notices also restrict the use of computer systems for academic purposes, such as online research and collaboration. The notices have been criticized for being overly broad and vague, making it difficult for students to understand what is allowed and what is not. ## The Petition’s Demands*
  • The Petition’s Demands

    The petition, which was filed in September 2023, makes several demands that are aimed at addressing the concerns of the students. These demands include:

  • The SRC to review and revise the notices to make them more specific and clear. The SRC to provide students with more guidance and support on how to use the computer systems in accordance with the notices. The SRC to establish a clear and transparent process for addressing student concerns and grievances related to the notices.

    Politicians’ use of county assembly vehicles sparks heated debate over personal benefits and asset ownership.

    The Controversy Surrounding the County Assembly’s Official Car

    The controversy surrounding the county assembly’s official car has been a topic of discussion for several years. The issue has sparked heated debates among politicians, with some arguing that the car is a personal benefit, while others claim it is a county assembly asset that must be returned once they leave office.

    The Debate Over Personal Benefits

  • Politicians argue that the official car is a personal benefit, as it provides them with a means of transportation and allows them to travel to official events. Some politicians have even claimed that the car is a necessary tool for their work, as it enables them to attend meetings and events outside of their constituency. However, critics argue that the car is not a necessary tool for their work and that it is a luxury item that should not be provided to politicians. ### The County Assembly’s Perspective*
  • The County Assembly’s Perspective

  • The county assembly claims that the official car is not a personal benefit, but rather a county assembly asset that must be provided to politicians. The assembly argues that the car is a necessary tool for their work and that it is not a luxury item.

    Speaker seeks to quash transport benefits for MPs, alleging unfair favoritism.

    The Background of the Speaker’s Petition

    The Speaker of the National Assembly, Moses Wetangula, has petitioned the court to quash the gazette notices issued in 2022 and 2023 regarding transport benefits for Members of Parliament (MPs). The petition, which was filed in the High Court, seeks to have the gazette notices declared null and void, arguing that they unfairly favor deputy speakers and Members of County Assembly (MCAs) over the regular MPs.

    The Allegations Against the Gazette Notices

    The Speaker’s petition alleges that the gazette notices were issued without proper consultation with the House leadership and that they do not accurately reflect the current transport benefits policy. The petitioners claim that the policy unfairly benefits deputy speakers and MCAs by providing them with more favorable terms and conditions, such as higher allowances and more favorable travel arrangements. Key points of contention: + The gazette notices were issued without proper consultation with the House leadership.

    The Allegations Against SRC

    The allegations against SRC (Semi-Permanent Resident Committee) have sparked a heated debate in the county assembly. The committee, responsible for managing transport benefits for county assembly leaders, has been accused of favoring certain individuals over others. Key accusations include:

    • Allowing deputy speakers and MCAs to choose their preferred vehicles
    • Creating unfair disparities in how transport benefits are allocated among county assembly leaders
    • The Impact on County Assembly Leaders

      The allegations have significant implications for county assembly leaders, who rely on SRC for their transport benefits. If the allegations are true, it could lead to:

  • Unequal treatment of leaders, with some receiving better benefits than others
  • A lack of transparency in the allocation of transport benefits
  • Potential corruption and abuse of power
  • Concrete Examples

    To illustrate the impact of SRC’s alleged favoritism, consider the following examples:

  • In 2022, a deputy speaker was allocated a luxury vehicle, while another deputy speaker was given a more modest vehicle. This disparity was seen as unfair by some, who argued that the allocation should be based on need rather than preference. In another instance, an MCA was allocated a vehicle with a higher mileage limit than others, despite having a similar driving record. This raised questions about the fairness of the allocation process. ## The Response from SRC
  • The Response from SRC

    SRC has denied the allegations, stating that the allocation of transport benefits is based on a transparent and fair process.

    Similar Posts

    Leave a Reply

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