The search for the next chief executive of the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA) has been suspended by the High Court following a petition challenging the authority of the agency’s board to oversee the exercise.
The court halted the recruitment and appointment process pending the hearing and determination of an application seeking broader conservatory orders against the board.
The dispute centres on a selection process advertised on April 24, 2026, days after the terms of five KCAA board members allegedly expired, prompting claims that the board lacked the legal authority to oversee the hiring exercise.
The recruitment was triggered by the exit of Emile Nguza Arao, whose three-year term as KCAA director-general ended on April 22, 2026. Following his departure, KCAA appointed Nicholas Bodo in an acting capacity pending the appointment of a substantive office holder.
The case, filed by petitioner Humphrey Bulimu, claims that board vacancies, expired terms and quorum deficiencies undermined the validity of major decisions at the State agency.
Quorum question
Mr Bulimu argues that the board lacked the quorum required under Section 17(2) of the Civil Aviation Act when it resolved to advertise and commence the recruitment process for a new director-general.
He wants the court to declare the entire process unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void.
The petition also targets board member Anne Too, whose continued tenure is being challenged.
Mr Bulimu argues that Ms Too’s appointment was tied to the unexpired term of a previous board member and that her mandate ended on April 20, 2026.
He wants the court to declare that any participation by her in board business after that date was unlawful and contrary to the Civil Aviation Act.
According to the petition, the terms of five other board members also expired on April 20, leaving the board without the quorum required to transact business.
The petitioner contends that a board lacking quorum could not lawfully initiate or supervise the recruitment of the aviation regulator’s chief executive.
Wider challenge
Mr Bulimu claims the exercise contravenes various provisions of the Constitution, the Civil Aviation Act, KCAA’s Human Resource Policies and Procedures Manual and the Career Progression Guidelines, 2025.
He is seeking an order quashing the board’s decision to advertise and undertake the recruitment process.
He also wants a permanent injunction barring KCAA from proceeding with, concluding or making any appointment arising from the recruitment exercise unless the board is lawfully constituted.
The petition further seeks orders compelling the Cabinet Secretary for Roads and Transport to fill vacancies on the board through an open, transparent and competitive process.
Mr Bulimu is also asking the court to direct that any future recruitment of a KCAA director-general strictly complies with the Constitution, the Civil Aviation Act and the authority’s internal human resource rules.
Court documents state that the recruitment advertisement required applicants to submit applications through the board chairman’s email address.
The petitioner, however, argues that the arrangement compromised the integrity and independence of the process and departed from previous recruitment practices.
He also claims that the qualifications required for the position were lowered contrary to KCAA’s career guidelines and human resource policies.
Status quo
KCAA opposed the application at the preliminary stage. Its lawyers argued that the dispute was premature and questioned whether the Constitutional and Human Rights Division was the proper forum to hear the matter.
The authority maintained that the recruitment process had not reached the stage alleged by the petitioner.
However, the court said issues, including jurisdiction, would be determined after the parties filed substantive responses.
For now, the court said, the public interest favoured preserving the status quo.
The judge warned that completing the recruitment amid unresolved allegations of illegality could expose taxpayers to avoidable costs.
The court said reversing a completed appointment would carry “a heavy cost to the public coffer and reputational damage of a public entity in the aviation industry.”
The judge held that the recruitment had not been completed and found it necessary to preserve the dispute before the court.
“I am persuaded that the application for conservatory orders is urgent and that there is necessity to grant interim relief to preserve the substratum of the application and the petition,” the judge ruled.
The court added that completing the recruitment before the case is heard could render the proceedings nugatory.
The case will be mentioned on June 24.
