The National Police Service Commission(NPSC) has raised fresh questions about its constitutional powers over the recruitment and management of police officers and how its mandate relates to the Inspector-General’s role in running the National Police Service.
In a press statement issued on Friday, October 30, the Commission said it had filed a Notice of Appeal at the Supreme Court seeking clarification on the respective responsibilities of the two institutions following a Court of Appeal judgment delivered on October 16, 2026.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the Commission’s consolidated appeals, upholding an earlier decision by the Employment and Labour Relations Court on the management of members of the National Police Service.
The Employment and Labour Relations Court had delivered its judgment on October 30, 2025, addressing the respective mandates of the Commission and the Inspector-General, including recruitment and other human resource functions relating to police officers.
NPSC Seeks Clarity on Powers Over Officers and IG’s Role
NPSC’s mandate covers recruitment, appointments, promotions, transfers, disciplinary control and removal of members of the National Police Service.
The Commission said its establishment under the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, was part of wider police reforms aimed at improving professionalism, accountability and efficiency within the Service.
It cited recommendations from the Ransley, Waki, Akiwumi and Alston Reports, which informed efforts to separate human resource management from operational command.
According to the Commission, the reforms were intended to promote merit-based appointments, transparency and accountability in police administration while restoring public confidence in the Service.
“As part of the far-reaching police reforms aimed at promoting professionalism, accountability and efficiency within the National Police Service, the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 established the National Police Service Commission as an independent constitutional commission responsible for human resource management functions in the Service. These include recruitment, appointments, promotions, transfers, disciplinary control and removal of members of the Service,” NPSC said.
“Recommendations from key reform reports, including the Ransley, Waki, Akiwumi and Alston Reports, informed efforts to separate human resource management from operational command. These reforms sought to strengthen professionalism, accountability, meritocracy and transparency in police administration, restore public confidence in policing and promote good governance within the security sector.”
Also Read: Court Delivers Landmark Ruling on Police Recruitment
NPSC Explains Constitutional Powers of Commission and IG
The Commission maintained that the Constitution gives it and the Inspector-General distinct but complementary responsibilities.
It cited Article 245, which safeguards the Inspector-General’s independent command of the National Police Service, and Article 246, which establishes the Commission and sets out its human resource management mandate.
The Commission also pointed to Article 246(2), which provides for the membership of the Inspector-General and the two Deputy Inspectors-General in the Commission.
NPSC said these provisions should be read together with Article 249(1), which requires constitutional commissions to protect the sovereignty of the people, uphold democratic values and principles, and promote constitutionalism.
Article 249(2) further protects the independence of constitutional commissions in carrying out their duties.
The Commission argued that the Court of Appeal judgment raises important constitutional questions about the interpretation of Articles 245, 246 and 249.
It said the questions touch on the safeguards intended to promote fairness, meritocracy, accountability and professionalism within the National Police Service.
“The judgment raises weighty constitutional questions about the interpretation of Articles 245, 246 and 249, and the safeguards intended to promote fairness, meritocracy, accountability and professionalism in the Service. These questions extend beyond the human resource functions,” NPSC said.
“Given their significance for constitutional governance and the future of police reforms, they merit authoritative and final determination by the Supreme Court. The Commission has since filed a Notice of Appeal to obtain that clarification in the public interest.”
Also Read: Kenya Police Salary Scales: New Pay for Constables, Sergeants and Senior Officers
The Commission added that the issues go beyond human resource management and have wider implications for constitutional governance and the future of police reforms.
It said the Supreme Court should provide an authoritative and final interpretation of the constitutional provisions.
“The Commission respects the decisions of the courts and remains committed to the Constitution and the rule of law,” the statement read.
The Commission clarified that its decision to challenge the judgment was not an institutional contest or an attempt to interfere with the Inspector-General’s independent command.
Instead, it said it wanted clarity on the constitutional responsibilities of the two institutions and the checks and balances established under the Constitution.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and X Account for real-time news updates and subscribe to our YouTube Channel for in-depth interviews.
