The Office of the Attorney-General has been accused of presiding over a recruitment scam that saw candidates who never applied for jobs hired alongside those lacking the required academic qualifications, in a damning verdict that exposes deep-rooted irregularities in public sector hiring.
An independent audit by the Public Service Commission (PSC) found that the State Law Office—mandated to advise the government on legal matters and uphold the rule of law—breached multiple constitutional, statutory and regulatory requirements governing public sector recruitment.
The audit followed an order issued by the Employment and Labour Relations Court on May 29, 2025, directing the PSC to investigate, monitor and evaluate the organisation, administration and personnel practices in the Office of the Attorney-General.
The court ordered the commission to file its report by December 31, 2025.
The audit paints the picture of a State institution where recruitment procedures were routinely disregarded, with the PSC concluding that appointments were made outside the constitutional and statutory framework governing public service recruitment.
Among the gravest findings was that some successful candidates were appointed despite not appearing in the original long list of applicants, which means they never applied for the advertised positions.
Others were shortlisted and eventually hired despite lacking the mandatory academic and professional qualifications required in the job advertisements.
“There were candidates who were shortlisted, yet they did not meet the shortlisting criteria as per the advertisements and others were shortlisted yet they had not applied for the jobs as they were not in the long list,” said PSC chairperson Francis Meja in a report dated June 30, 2026, and seen by the Business Daily.
“There were candidates who were appointed and yet they were not in the long list or they did not provide the requisite academic and professional qualifications at the point of application,” added the report.
The recruitment under scrutiny was conducted through advertisements published between April and June 2024, with the main State Counsel II vacancies advertised on April 15, 2024, and closing on May 21, 2024.
The PSC found that at least 18 shortlisted Legal Clerk Assistant IV candidates and 27 shortlisted State Counsel II candidates did not meet the advertised qualification threshold.
It further established that 14 Legal Clerk Assistant IV candidates and eight State Counsel II candidates appeared in the recruitment process despite not being on the original long list of applicants.
The report also found that seven candidates for the position of State Counsel II were appointed despite lacking qualifications such as a Bachelor of Law degree, a postgraduate diploma from the Kenya School of Law or a certificate of admission as an advocate.
Twelve Legal Clerk Assistant IV candidates were similarly approved despite lacking mandatory qualifications, including computer proficiency certificates.
The audit further uncovered major procedural flaws.
The interview panel did not indicate the pass mark, failed to rank candidates and did not explain the basis upon which successful applicants were recommended for appointment.
The final appointment list submitted to the Attorney-General omitted interview scores, the selection criteria and the pass mark used to determine successful candidates.
In addition, the PSC found that different versions of applicant lists were used during recruitment, with one list capturing applicants’ qualifications while another omitting them.
The commission also established discrepancies between the number of applicants on the original long list and those who eventually appeared on the shortlist, raising questions about the integrity of the recruitment records.
The commission warned that shortlisting, interviewing and appointing candidates who lacked the requisite qualifications undermined service delivery, exposed public funds to misuse and eroded confidence in merit-based recruitment.
It also cautioned that failure to observe ethnic diversity in appointments risked breeding perceptions of discrimination and weakening public trust in government institutions.
The findings reinforce concerns raised by the Employment and Labour Relations Court when it nullified more than 200 promotions undertaken by the Attorney-General’s Office in late 2024.
In the May 29, 2025 judgment, Justice Byram Ongaya ruled that the promotions had been undertaken without competitive recruitment and failed to satisfy constitutional requirements on merit, gender and ethnic diversity.
The court also declared unconstitutional amendments introduced through the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act, 2024, that had transferred some of the PSC’s constitutional human resource functions to the Attorney-General.
Justice Ongaya held that the Advisory Board established under the Office of the Attorney-General Act lacked legal authority to appoint or promote officials and directed that all appointments and promotions be undertaken through fair competition under the PSC.
He further ordered the PSC to investigate the organisation, administration and personnel practices at the State Law Office, culminating in the latest audit.
The revelations come less than three years after the PSC launched a government-wide purge of public officials who secured jobs and promotions using forged academic and professional certificates.
At the time, the commission directed ministries, departments and agencies to dismiss officials found to have used fake credentials, declaring such appointments null and void and recommending criminal investigations where fraud was established.
