quarterly q4 report 2008-2009

1

THE FOURTH QUARTERLY REPORT FOR

THE YEAR 2008/2009 COVERING THE

PERIOD 1st APRIL 2009 TO

30TH JUNE 2009

THE PUBLIC COMPLAINTS STANDING

COMMITTEE

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 4

FOREWORD FROM THE CHAIRMAN ...................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ........................................................ 5

CHAPTER ONE................................................................................................................... 10

1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 10

1.1 Mandate of the PCSC ........................................................................................ 10

1.2 Jurisdiction of the PCSC ................................................................................... 11

1.3 Admissibility of Complaints ............................................................................ 12

CHAPTER TWO .................................................................................................................. 13

2.0 COMPLAINTS AND INQUIRIES ............................................................... 13

2.1 Lodging a Complaint ........................................................................................ 13

2.2 The Complaints-handling Process .................................................................. 13

2.3 Analysis of Complaints-handling in the Quarter ......................................... 16

2.4 Selected Complaints Reviews .......................................................................... 16

2.4.1 Complaints Where Advice were provided .................................................... 16

2.4.2 Complaints Determined to be Without Merit ............................................... 17

2.4.3 Complaints settled by the Public Institution ................................................. 18

2.4.4 Complaints that Revealed no Maladministration ........................................ 20

2.4.5 Complaints where an Explanation was Provided ........................................ 21

2.4.6 Complaints where PCSC Initiated Further Inquiries ................................... 21

2.4.6 Complaints where PCSC Promoted Mediation and Recommended

Compensation .................................................................................................... 23

2.5 Letters of Appreciation from Complainants ................................................. 25

2.6 Broader Aspects of Complaints-handling ..................................................... 25

3

2.7 Non-Responsive Government Institutions .................................................... 32

CHAPTER THREE .............................................................................................................. 41

3.0 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................ 41

3.1 Complaints Received ........................................................................................ 41

3.2 Classification of Complaints Received by PCSC Mandate .......................... 41

3.3 Analysis According to Action Taken by PCSC ............................................. 42

3.4 Analysis Based on Categories of Complaints ................................................ 44

3.5 Analysis Based on Ministries and Public Sector Institutions ...................... 46

3.6 Analysis of Complaints Based on Provinces. ................................................ 49

3.7 Analysis by Mode of Lodging Complaint .................................................... 51

3.8 Analysis by Gender ........................................................................................... 52

3.9 Monthly Analysis of Complaints in the Quarter ......................................... 54

3.10 Comparative Analysis by Quarters ................................................................ 55

CHAPTER FOUR ................................................................................................................ 57

4.0 COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES ............................................................. 57

4.1 Advocacy and Outreach ................................................................................... 57

4.2 Information Technology and Web Presence ................................................. 57

4.3 Media Activities ................................................................................................. 58

4.4 Information Literature ...................................................................................... 58

CHAPTER FIVE .................................................................................................................. 59

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 59

5.1 Recommendations made in the Current Quarter ......................................... 59

5.2 Recommendations made in Previous Quarters ............................................ 60

ANNEXTURE ...................................................................................................................... 64

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Report consists of five Chapters.

Chapter One is an introductory Chapter which outlines PCSCs legal mandate and

jurisdiction.

Chapter Two covers Complaints-handling in the Quarter under review. It outlines

the process of handling complaints and reviews complaints in the following

categories:

i. Complaints in which Complainants were advised to seek redress from other

appropriate agencies;

ii. Complaints determined to be without merit;

iii. Complaints settled by the public institution to the satisfaction of the

Complainant;

iv. Complaints that revealed no instance of maladministration after PCSC

inquiries;

v. Complaints in which the public institution provided a satisfactory

explanation;

vi. Complaints in which PCSC has initiated further inquiries.

vii. Complaints which the PCSC has reconsidered; and

viii. Complaints in which the PCSC promoted mediation.

Chapter Two also contains letters of appreciation from Complainants as well as a

list of non-responsive Government institutions based on the duration taken to

respond to PCSCs inquiries.

Chapter Three provides a statistical analysis of Complaints and Inquiries within the

Quarter as well as a comparative analysis with the previous Quarter. The analysis of

the Complaints received is based on the following categories; typology of

Complaint, public institutions or officers involved, gender, provincial distribution

and mode of lodging Complaints.

Chapter Four gives an outline of advocacy, outreach and media activities within the

Quarter.

Chapter Five outlines, in detail, administrative and legislative recommendations

which the PCSC has made in the Quarter arising from the complaints handled.

The Annexure catalogues the Complaints handled by PCSC and their status.

5

FOREWORD FROM THE CHAIRMAN

The mandate under which the PCSC operates is set out in Kenya Gazette Notice No.

5826 of June 29 2007, which requires the PCSC to submit Quarterly Reports to H.E

the President on the conduct of its activities in resolving complaints made to it by

the public against Ministries, Parastatals/State Corporations, Statutory Bodies or any

other public institution. The 4th Quarterly Report which is the present one, covers

the period 1st April to June 30th 2009 and has considered 1720 complaints received to

date of which 270 were received during the Quarter.

As has been the case previously, those complaints have been routinely taken up

with public bodies concerned with the aim of resolving them and with a measure of

considerable success as indicated in the report. This is brought about through

continuing consultative collaboration with the public bodies involved and by way

of PCSCs oversight authority over the activities of these public bodies.

As a further means of strengthening the PCSCs capacity in this regard, the recent

Performance Contracting Guidelines issued by the Office of the Prime Minister

require that all Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) with effect from 1st

July, 2009 establish mechanisms of working together with the Committee for

effective resolution of public complaints through the issuance by the PCSC of a

Certificate of due compliance.

To regularize the operations and to facilitate effectiveness of the PCSC as an

oversight institution, the Committee has taken the further steps of elaborating an

Ombudsman Bill in conjunction with the Kenya Law Reform Commission to

provide a legislative framework for the execution of the PCSCs mandate.

It is becoming increasingly clear to the PCSC that in the absence of dedicated public

complaints desks within public bodies, Ministries and other public bodies are

becoming less and less responsive to the complaints brought against them. In order

to arrest the situation, PCSC intends to help build complaints handling capacities in

these public sectors and a study is underhand to establish the magnitude of the

need.

I would like to commend the existing collaboration between the Permanent

Secretaries and chief executive officers of public institutions in dealing with issues

that we have had to raise in connection with resolving complaints and would urge

that this cooperation continues in the realization of the objectives and goals set out

in Kenya Vision 2030 towards a globally competitive and prosperous Kenya.

6

Finally, I would like to express PCSCs appreciation to the Ministry of Justice

National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs (MOJNCCA) for continued logistical

support extended to the PCSC in performance of its functions and activities. I would

also wish to appreciate the high standard of work performance exhibited by the

PCSC Secretariat in the production of this Report.

Amb. James Simani

CHAIRMAN

7

MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

The Quarter under review, covering the period 1st April 2009 to 30th June 2009, can

be described as a watershed Quarter for the PCSC for several reasons.

First, the statistics. In the Quarter under review, the PCSC processed 909

complaints, of which 270 (30%) were new while 639 (70%) were ongoing complaints

from previous Quarters. Of the 270 new Complaints, the PCSC took up 43 (or 16%)

for further action. A substantial 227 complaints received in the Quarter, or 84% of all

new complaints, were pushed forward to the next Quarter.

These are certainly not flattering statistics. Indeed, they are the sort of statistics no

Manager would wish to expose to the public. However, the statistics themselves tell

a story that is worth telling. On the flattering side, they say that more and more

Kenyans are now seeking the services and interventions of the PCSC in their

relations with Government. On the less flattering side, they say, clearly, that the

PCSCs institutional capacity (human, financial and operational resources) to service

the increasing number of Kenyans seeking its services is now demonstrably

overstretched.

It is for this principal reason that the PCSC is prioritizing migration of all its

operations and processes from a manual to an IT Platform in the next Quarter. It is

expected that this will increase the PCSCs internal efficiency while at the same time

providing a base upon which Kenyans seeking services from the PCSC do not suffer

the Delays that they may be coming to complaint about to the PCSC.

The statistics say even more. In the Listing of Non-Responsive Government

Institutions, as at 30th June 2009, there were 996 complaints against public

institutions where the public institutions concerned had totally ignored or refused

to address the complaints preferred. Of this figure of 996, there were 498 complaints

outstanding, without any response, for between 0-3 months, 204 complaints

outstanding without any response for between 3-6 months, 242 complaints for

between 6-9 months, 32 complaints for between 10 months to 1 year, and 20

complaints outstanding for more than 1 year without even a bare

acknowledgement.

Upon analysis, the Non-Response rate in Government and Public Institutions is a

staggering 58%. In other words, more than half of all complaints made against

public institutions are not even acknowledged in the first place, never mind

resolved.

I raise these issues to illustrate two main points; first, that there is an amazing depth

of impunity regarding service delivery in the public sector, and; second, that there is

8

an overwhelming need to move good service-delivery from the realm of the

optional to the realm of the compulsory.

As far as impunity in service delivery in the public sector goes, it is evident to the

PCSC that the greatest difficulty in the minds of many public officers is the spectre

of being held to account for their administrative actions and decisions. This happens

through PCSCs insistence that public officers provide a Statement of Reasons

underpinning administrative actions and decisions.

The failure to provide Reasons, either because there are none or because there are

no records, is a major loophole facilitating untold Injustice and Corruption in the

public sector. When a wronged individual complains to the PCSC, and the culpable

institution takes the position that the Complainant should go to litigation, this is

doubly sad for perpetuating Injustice and for contributing to the paralysis of the

Judicial system.

It must be accepted in the public sector that any administrative action that cannot be

supported by cogent Reasons cannot be allowed to stand. It must be accepted that

administrative powers have limits, and that the PCSC/Ombudsman is the custodian

of the citizens right to administrative justice.

Fortunately for the PCSC, the Office of the Prime Minister has dealt Public Service

Impunity a death blow through the inclusion of satisfactory complaints resolution

as a Performance Contracting Indicator in the 6th Cycle of Performance Contracting

Year 2009/2010.

What this means is that Permanent Secretaries and Chief Executive Officers of all

Ministries and public institutions who do not resolve public complaints to the

satisfaction of the PCSC stand to lose up to 10 marks (10%) in the annual assessment

of their performance as public sector managers.

As the Office charged with driving public sector reforms and improving public

service delivery, the PCSC wishes to acknowledge and thank the Office of the Right

Honourable The Prime Minister for this critical intervention to address Public

Service Impunity.

The PCSC has found that challenges to its legal status are a recurring theme,

particularly by intransigent public institutions which do not wish to have their

service delivery practices placed under any kind of external scrutiny. In this regard,

the PCSC has proceeded with considerable speed with work on the draft

Ombudsman Bill 2009, and its concomitant Constitutional grounding provision.

Between a Constitutional and Legislative grounding, and a role in determination of

the levels of performance of Permanent Secretaries and Chief Executive Officers,

9

Kenya is surely moving closer to the goal of excellent public service delivery

characterized by a lack of impunity in the exercise of administrative powers.

Finally, the PCSC wishes to express its appreciation to Government for the modest

increase in its budget. Every extra cent goes a long way in improving public service

delivery in Kenya. We look forward to continued cooperation and support from

members of the public, Government and stakeholders.

Kenneth Mwige

Executive Director

10

CHAPTER ONE

1 INTRODUCTION

The Public Complaints Standing Committee {PCSC} was established by H.E the

President through Kenya Gazette Notice No. 5826 of 29th June 2007.

1.1 Mandate of the PCSC

Kenya Gazette Notice No. 5826 of 29th June 2007 confers the PCSC with the following

functions:

1. To receive, register, sort, classify and document all complaints against public officers

in Ministries, Parastatals/State Corporations, Statutory Bodies or any other Public

Institution;

2. To inquire into allegations of misuse of office, corruption, unethical conduct, breach

of integrity, maladministration, delay, injustice, discourtesy, inattention,

incompetence, misbehavior, inefficiency or ineptitude etc;

3. To help set up and build complaint-handling capacity in the sectors of the public

service registering high incidences of Complaints (including but not limited to the

following areas; health, local authorities, police, lands, financial services etc);

4. To oversee, co-ordinate, monitor and follow up specific action on channeled

complaints;

5. To review regulations, codes of conduct, processes and procedures in the public

service and recommend changes necessary to avoid or reduce complaints;

6. To promote alternative dispute resolution through mediation;

7. To perform any other duties or tasks with regard to complaints, with a view to giving

meaningful effect to the same;

8. To ascertain whether on the face of it, there is merit in a complaint, and thereafter to

act on the complaint appropriately, which may include channeling it to the

responsible department of government for action;

9. To recommend, where the committee deems fit so to do, compensation or other

remedial action against Government or a public body or officer over any or some of

the complaints the committee attends to;

11

10. To prepare advisory opinions or proposals on appropriate remedial action to be taken

by the permanent secretaries or chief executives of affected ministries or public

bodies;

11. To recommend appropriate legislative reforms; and

12. To publish quarterly reports for public information on the number and nature of

complaints received and the action taken by the committee.

1.2 Jurisdiction of the PCSC

The PCSC has jurisdiction over public officers and public institutions. This

jurisdiction covers Ministries, Parastatals/State Corporations, Statutory Bodies and

any other public institutions.

The PCSC is mandated to receive and address complaints from any Kenyan citizen

or any person (including legal persons) lawfully present in Kenya concerning

maladministration in the conduct of public affairs. The exception to PCSCs

mandate is the Courts acting in their judicial capacity and Parliament in exercise of

its legislative functions. A complaint is therefore outside the PCSCs mandate if;

(a) It does not concern a public institution or a public officer; or if

(b) It concerns the Courts in exercise of their Judicial role or Parliament in

exercise of its Legislative functions; and if

(c) It does not concern possible maladministration by a public officer or

institution.

It is important to note that the PCSC receives and deals with complaints from or

concerning the conduct of private individuals or the private sector. However, the

PCSC entertains such complaints from the point of view and to the extent that the

conduct complained of is in one way or another regulated or overseen by a public

institution or public officer. In this way, the PCSC does not allow or admit lacunae,

or black holes in public service-delivery where it might be said that nothing can be

done or that nobody responsible can be identified.

12

1.3 Admissibility of Complaints

A complaint that is within the mandate of the PCSC must satisfy the further criteria

of admissibility before the PCSC can initiate inquiries;

i. The Complainant and the public institution complained against must be

clearly identified;

ii. The complaint needs to have first been lodged with the institution concerned,

or otherwise brought to their attention, with either no reaction or with an

unsatisfactory reaction;

iii. The relevant administrative intervention channels need to have been

exhausted;

iv. The complaint must not question the merits of a Courts ruling or judgment;

and

v. The complaint must not question the legislative process in Parliament.

13

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 COMPLAINTS AND INQUIRIES

The core task of the Public Complaints Standing Committee [PCSC] is to receive,

process, resolve and prevent future occurrence of complaints brought against public

officers and public institutions - Ministries, Parastatals/State Corporations, Statutory

Bodies or any other public institution. The PCSC also conducts inquiries on its own

initiative in suitable cases.

2.1 Lodging a Complaint

Complaints are received by the PCSC through personal visits to PCSCs offices,

email, telephone calls and postal mail. In PCSCs experience, the preferred way of

contacting the PCSC is through personal visits. However, a small but growing

number of complaints is received via PCSCs online complaint forms. Complainants initiate complaints with the PCSC by logging their complaint through

a Complaints Form - PCSC Form 1. A Complainant is required to provide the

following information;

(a) Complainants name and contact information.

(b) The Public institution or officer complained against.

(c) A Summary of the complaint.

(d) A Statement on exhaustion of other available remedies.

(e) The action expected from the PCSC.

(f) Copies of relevant documentation to support the complaint.

The PCSCs course of action on a complaint is based on the facts and circumstances

specific to each complaint. It is therefore in the best interests of the Complainant to

provide all relevant information.

2.2 The Complaints-handling Process

All complaints are registered and acknowledged. The complaints are then assessed

in order to determine if they fall within the PCSCs mandate. Straightforward

complaints are handled at the intake stage, usually by informally contacting the

Government Department complained against. This may involve telephone inquiries

seeking preliminary information on the complaint or referring the Complainant to

the Department for further assistance.

14

Assessment Stage

Complaint is examined

against PCSCs mandate.

Not Within PCSC mandate

Letter done to the Complainant

explaining why the PCSC

cannot initiate inquires and

where possible, suggesting an

alternative course of action.

Inquiry Stage

Allocated to a Case Officer

Enquiries initiated with

the public institution

concerned or complaints

channeled to the

appropriate Government

Agency.

Institutions response

considered in detail

Response reveals wrong

doing by public

institution. Response reveals no

Maladministration by

Public Institution

A detailed explanation

is issued to the

Complainant

explaining the PCSCs

decision not to initiate

further inquiries. The

complaint is closed.

Further Inquiries Stage

Complaint reviewed with

Complainant

Public institution given

opportunity to comment on

the Complainants

response.

PCSC reaches its findings and seeks a

meeting with the public institution or officer

involved to resolve the complaint.

Quarterly reporting on all complaints received and their fate.

Complaint Received by PCSC

(Personal visits, telephone, postal mail, email, referrals)

The Process

15

Assessment Stage

Each complaint is checked to ensure that;

The institution or person complained of falls within PCSCs jurisdiction ;

The matter complained of is within PCSCs jurisdiction;

The complaint has been lodged with the public institution concerned;

Sufficient information has been provided regarding the complaint; and

The complaint is not before the courts or another adjudicative body.

Where one or more of the above is not satisfied, PCSC writes to the Complainant

explaining why PCSC cannot initiate inquiries. Where appropriate, the letter will

detail a course of action which may be appropriate to the Complainant, such as

reference to a more appropriate Government Department, a request for further

details or reference to the internal complaints procedure of the public institution or

officer concerned.

Where a complaint satisfies the above requirements PCSC initiates inquiries with

the relevant Government Department.

Inquiry Stage

The purpose of the inquiry is to ascertain whether there is an instance of

maladministration by the public body concerned. The first step is to make detailed

inquiries to the public body. These inquiries usually take the form of a written

request for information to the Permanent Secretary or Chief Executive Officer of the

public institution concerned. Once these inquiries have been completed, a decision

is taken on to the appropriate course of action for each complaint. The possible

outcomes are;

Where there is no evidence of maladministration by the public institution

or officer concerned PCSC writes to the Complainant explaining that there

was no instance of maladministration and stating the reasons why the

complaint does not warrant further investigation;

Where there is evidence of maladministration PCSC initiates further

inquiries.

If, at the inquiry stage the maladministration and the injustice caused to the

Complainant can be readily identified, the PCSC writes to the public institution or

officer outlining the maladministration identified and suggesting an appropriate

remedy. If the proposed remedy is accepted, the complaint is quickly resolved.

However, if the proposed remedy is not accepted, the PCSC initiates further

inquiries.

16

Further Inquiries Stage

At this point, the complaint is reviewed with the Complainant. The public

institution or officer concerned is given an opportunity to comment on the facts as

presented, PCSCs findings and the redress recommended. Upon receipt of any

comments from the public institution or officer concerned, PCSC advises both the

Complainant and the public institution or officer concerned.

2.3 Analysis of Complaints-handling in the Quarter

During the Quarter, PCSC dealt with 909 Complaints. 270 of these were new

Complaints received in the Quarter while 639 were on-going inquiries carried

forward from previous Quarters.

In this Quarter, 269 of the 270 complaints, or 99% of the complaints received, were

within PCSCs mandate while 1%, or 1 complaint, was outside PCSCs mandate. Of

the 270 complaints received in the Quarter, action was taken and Inquiries initiated

in 43 complaints. 227 complaints were carried forward to the next reporting period.

Of the Complaints received in the Quarter, 28% originated from Nairobi Province,

followed by 22% from Central Province. Notably, Coast and North Eastern

Provinces recorded the least number of complaints. A full analysis of the

geographical distribution of complaints is provided in Chapter Three.

Despite a reduction in the total number of complaints received against the Kenya

Police, the Department still recorded the highest number of complaints at 14%

followed by the Ministry of Lands at 12%.

The main categories of complaints were avoidable delay at 28%, misuse of office at

22% and injustice at 16%.

2.4 Selected Complaints Reviews

The following complaint reviews focus on particular complaints handled in the

Quarter that provide examples of the diversity of complaint-issues received, the

measures taken by the PCSC to resolve individual complaints and the steps taken to

address general administrative problems across the public sector and Government.

2.4.1 Complaints Where Advice were provided

The PCSC may decline to inquire into a complaint for a number of reasons. PCSCs

jurisdiction is limited to inquiring into complaints about administrative decisions

and actions of public institutions and officers. When declining to investigate

complaints that do not meet the PCSCs admissibility requirements, the PCSC

advises the Complainant of other available avenues for redress, review or appeal.

17

Breach of integrity by an advocate

The Complainant alleged that he had obtained a court judgment for Ksh. 105,000/=.

However, the advocate on record only forwarded Kshs. 40,000/= to the

Complainant. The Complainant approached the PCSC seeking to have the advocate

compelled to pay him the balance. He also sought legal representation by the PCSC.

As the complaint was not against a public institution or officer, the Committee

advised the Complainant to lodge the complaint with the Advocates Complaints

Commission and to contact the National Legal Aid & Awareness Programme of the

Ministry of Justice, National Cohesion, and Constitutional Affairs for legal

representation. The PCSC is following up to ensure that the Advocates Complaints

Commission accords the Complainant satisfactory assistance.

In instances where the Complainant contacts PCSC without first contacting the

public institution complained against, the Committee advises the Complainant to

first seek resolution of the complaint by the public institution concerned. This

requirement is important as it gives Notice to the concerned institution and gives it

a chance to resolve the complaint before the matter comes to the PCSC.

Inattention by the Police

A Complainant lodged a complaint alleging that a police officer who had been

instructed to prosecute a Chief had failed to initiate the prosecution. The PCSC

considered that the Complainant had prematurely contacted the PCSC since the

complaint had not been lodged with the Police Complaints Department. The

Complainant was advised accordingly.

2.4.2 Complaints Determined to be Without Merit

In the Quarter, some complaints assessed and determined to be within the PCSCs

mandate, while technically admissible, did not reveal any instance of

maladministration. The complaints were closed and the Complainants advised

accordingly.

Allegations of Wrongful Dismissal

The Complainant alleged that he was dismissed from the University of Nairobi

because he raised allegations of corruption within the University. The Complainant

further alleged that his dismissal had been adjudicated upon by the court and

judgment entered ordering his reinstatement. However, the University of Nairobi

disregarded the Court Order. The PCSC reviewed the supporting documents

provided by the Complainant and noted that the Court Order only ordered the

University to pay the Complainants pension benefits and a refund of 50% deducted

from his benefits. The Complainant confirmed that he had been paid the benefits

and refunded the 50% deductions. The Committee wrote to the Complainant

18

advising that there was no merit in the complaint since the University had acted as

instructed by the Court.

2.4.3 Complaints settled by the Public Institution

In most instances, the PCSC strives to achieve a positive outcome that is satisfactory

to both the Complainant and the public institution or public officer complained

against. Below are examples of complaints which were settled by the public

institution concerned to the satisfaction of the Complainant.

Inattention by the police

A complaint was lodged in relation to failure by the Police to take action against

matatus plying Mpaka Road, Westlands. The Complainant alleged that the matatus

were causing noise pollution by hooting unnecessarily and playing loud music,

which was negatively affecting the Complainants business. The Complainant

further alleged that he had lodged the complaint with the Police on several

occasions but no action had been taken. The Committee initiated inquiries with the

Police Department. Following inquiries, the Police Department investigated the

allegations and deployed 4 police officers to specifically man Mpaka Road on a

daily basis. Subsequently, the Police Department informed PCSC that 23 cases had

been prosecuted and the offenders fined for various traffic offences. The

Complainant confirmed to PCSC that the matatu menace had ended. PCSC

considered the Complaint resolved satisfactorily.

Wrongful Suspension from Employment

A Complainant contacted the Committee alleging that his suspension from

employment by the Nairobi Water and Sewerage Company was wrongful. The

Complainant alleged that the suspension was premised on his failure to report to

work following a transfer to a new duty station. The Complainant alleged that he

could not relocate to the new duty station due to security concerns. He further

alleged that he was not issued with a Show Cause letter prior to the suspension. The

Committee took the view that the circumstances revealed an instance of Injustice

and initiated inquiries with the Nairobi Water and Sewerage Company. Following

consultations between the Committee and the Nairobi Water and Sewerage

Company, the Complainant was reinstated to employment.

19

Delay in Issuing a Certificate of Good Conduct

The Complainant applied for a Certificate of Good Conduct from the Criminal

Investigations Department (CID) in October 2007. He was advised to wait for four

weeks. In November 2008, the Complainant contacted the Committee alleging that

despite numerous visits to the CID, he had not received his Certificate of Good

Conduct. PCSC wrote to the CID inquiring into the reasons for delay. In response,

the CID explained the reasons for the delay and informed the PCSC that the

Complainants Certificate was ready for collection. PCSC advised the Complainant

accordingly and subsequently, the Complainant confirmed that he had collected the

Certificate. Despite the fact that the reasons for the delay were unjustifiable, PCSC

considered the Complaint satisfactorily resolved as the Complainant had received

the Certificate. The issue of the need to fully automate and computerize the

operational processes of the CID and the Kenya Police Department as a whole has

already been taken up by the PCSC in the last Quarter. It is hoped that reforms will

be effected in this area shortly, otherwise such complaints will continue recurring.

Wrongful Termination

The Complainant contacted PCSC alleging that her termination from employment

by the Masaku County Council was wrongful. In particular, the Complainant

alleged that there were errors of fact in the decision that formed the basis for her

termination; that her appeal was declined without consideration; and that a report

by her immediate supervisor absolving her from maladministration was ignored.

The Committee felt that there was administrative injustice and initiated inquiries

with the Masaku County Council. Subsequently the Council reconsidered the case,

reinstated the Complainant, and paid all her dues. PCSC considered the complaint

satisfactorily resolved.

Delay in Payment of Pension Benefits

The Complainant in this case was dissatisfied with the Pensions Department for

excessive delay in payment of her payment benefits. The Complainant alleged that

since March 2005, she had been following up on the payments of the benefits and

had not received the same by September 2008 when she contacted the PCSC. PCSC

initiated inquiries with the Pensions Department. The Pensions Department

informed PCSC that the delay was occasioned by failure of the Complainant to

inform the Pensions Department of her new pay point. The PCSC advised the

Complainant to submit her new pay point to the Pensions Department.

Subsequently the Complainant confirmed to the PCSC that she had received her

pension benefits. The Complaint was considered satisfactorily resolved.

20

2.4.4 Complaints that Revealed no Maladministration

In some complaints, PCSCs inquiries did not reveal any maladministration by the

public institution complained against. In such cases, the Committee decided that no

further inquiries were called for and closed the complaints.

Alleged Delay in Hearing a Death Inquest

The complaint related to alleged reluctance and generally inaction by police officers

to investigate and facilitate the Hearing of an Inquest. The Complainant alleged that

despite witnesses being bonded on several occasions, the Hearing had failed to

proceed and that police officers were claiming that the police file was missing. The

Complainant felt that there was a deliberate attempt by the police to subvert justice.

PCSC initiated inquiries with the Commissioner of Police seeking clarification on

the issues raised. The Commissioner of Police wrote back to the PCSC explaining

that the Inquest had failed to proceed on two occasions because the court had failed

to sit and on a third occasion because the presiding Magistrate had been transferred

to another station. The Commissioner further clarified that the police file was safely

with the Officer-in-Charge of the investigating police station and advised that the

Complainants should contact the Officer-in-charge if they were dissatisfied with the

handling of the Inquest. PCSC considered that there was no instance of

maladministration by the Kenya Police Department and advised the Complainant

accordingly.

Breach of Integrity by the National Aids Control Council

The Committee received a Complaint against the National Aids Control Council

(NACC) from a Youth Self Help Group. The Complaint related to disbursement of

funds to the Youth Group by the NACC. The Complainants alleged that they had

entered into a contract with NACC for an approved grant payable in two

installments. However, the Group alleged that NACC only disbursed the first

installment despite the fact that the Complainants fulfilled all the requirements for

the second installment. The Complainants alleged that failure by NACC to disburse

the second installment had tarnished the image of the Youth Group and also

negatively affected the beneficiaries of its activities. PCSC initiated inquiries with

the NACC. In response, the NACC clarified that the project under which the

Complainants grant was approved ended in December 2005 and communication on

the closure was done in both the print and electronic media. NACC further pointed

out that the contract contained a clause that the disbursement of the funds was

subject to the funds being availed for the project and that in view of the fact that the

project ended, further disbursements could not be done. NACC also advised that

the Complainants could apply for the Second Round the funding upon

advertisement in the usual way. The Committee considered the explanation

satisfactory, advised the Complainant accordingly, and closed the complaint.

21

2.4.5 Complaints where an Explanation was Provided

In the Quarter, some responses to the PCSCs inquiries were considered satisfactory

explanations on the action the public institution had taken to redress the complaint.

Inattention by the Ministry of Roads

A complaint was lodged against the Ministry of Roads relating to construction of a

manhole on Langata Road that was discharging rainwater runoff directly into

Uhuru Gardens Estate. The Complainants alleged that the run-off drained into the

houses located in the lower part of the estate thereby inconveniencing residents and

weakening the building structures. The Complainants further alleged that they had

reported the matter to the Provincial Roads Engineer but no action had been taken.

PCSC wrote to the Ministry of Roads asking the Ministry to take the necessary

action to redress the complaint. The Ministry wrote back to the PCSC explaining the

cause of the water run-off and stating the action the Ministry was taking to address

the complaint. The Complainants subsequently confirmed that the Ministry had

commenced maintenance works to address the Complaint. PCSC considered the

explanation satisfactory and is following up to ensure that the complaint is fully

resolved.

2.4.6 Complaints where PCSC Initiated Further Inquiries

Some responses to PCSCs inquiries were either not satisfactory or partially

addressed the issues that the PCSC had raised. PCSC invited the Complainant to

make comments on these responses and initiated further inquiries with the public

institution concerned.

Wrongful Retirement

The complaint was lodged against the Ministry of State for Provincial

Administration and Internal Security over wrongful retirement. The Complainant

alleged that in 1994, he was interdicted following allegations of corruption against

him. Later, he was exonerated of the allegations and the interdiction lifted. In 1998,

the Complainant was once again interdicted on allegations of misconduct and

malpractices. He was exonerated on some of the allegations, severely reprimanded

for others and the interdiction lifted. However, in June 2006 the Ministry of

Provincial Administration and Internal Security retired the Complainant in the

public interest for the same offences that he had been exonerated on and

reprimanded. PCSC considered that there was an instance of procedural injustice

revealed by the complaint and initiated inquiries with the Ministry of Provincial

Administration and Internal Security seeking clarification on the issues raised by

the Complainant. The Ministry wrote to PCSC stating that the Complainant was

retired through a decision by the Ministerial Human Resources Management

22

Advisory Committee and that the Public Service Commission had reviewed the case

and upheld the retirement. The Committee took the view that the Ministry did not

address the issues raised in the PCSCs inquiries and has initiated further inquiries

with the Ministry.

Non- Payment of Pension Benefits

The Complainant alleged failure to facilitate payment of his pension benefits by the

Ministry of Information and Communication on the basis that the Ministry could

not trace his Personnel file which contained the Complainants employment details.

The PCSC initiated inquiries with the Ministry. The Ministry wrote to the PCSC

indicating that the Complainants documents got lost when the Ministry was being

merged and that a skeleton file had been constructed but was lacking vital

documents, which the Ministry wanted the Complainant to provide. PCSC

forwarded the response to the Complainant who explained that he lost his personal

documents in a house fire. The PCSC took the view that the Ministry cannot be

absolved from responsibility since it is the duty of the Government to keep all

personnel records safely at all times. The PCSC is pursuing the Ministry to provide

an appropriate solution to payment of the Complainants pension benefits, as the

lack of documentation is not his fault.

Failure by NSSF to pay Withdrawal Benefits

The Complainant alleged that he was an employee of the Ministry of Environment

and Natural Resources between 1973 1996, during which time he made

contributions to the National Social and Security Fund (NSSF). However, his

contributions for the years 1977, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1995 & 1996 were not

programmed in the NSSF computer system. The result of this omission was that the

Complainant was not paid his benefits. PCSC initiated inquiries with the NSSFs

Managing Trustee who explained that the NSSF had written to the Complainant on

several occasions requesting him to provide evidence of contribution for the periods

1973-1977 and 19811982, but that the Complainant had not responded. The PCSC

took the view that it is the responsibility of the NSSF to keep records relating to

member contributions safely, and failure by NSSF to maintain such records should

not adversely affect the Complainant. PCSC is pursuing the NSSF in this regard.

23

2.4.7 Complaints that have been Reconsidered

Unfair Dismissal from the Police Force, Reinstatement and Subsequent Removal

The Complainant approached the PCSC in September 2008 alleging unfair/

wrongful dismissal from the Police Force. The Complainant, a police driver, alleged

that in August 2004, he was assaulted by a Base Commander and by a Chief

Inspector who was the Officer Commanding the Station which he was attached to.

The Complainant sustained serious injuries that left him bedridden for three (3)

years. During the period of convalescence, the Complainant was charged with

desertion of duty and consequently dismissed from the Police Force. In October

2008, PCSC initiated inquiries with the Commissioner of Police. Following PCSCs

inquiries, the Complainant was reinstated back to work on 11th May 2009 and

posted to a duty station. PCSC then closed the complaint as it was considered

satisfactorily resolved. However, on 12th May 2009 the Complainant received a letter

from the Police Force asking him to show cause why he should not be removed

from the Police Force. The Complainant responded to the letter but he was

subsequently informed, through a letter dated 25th June 2009, that his response was

not satisfactory and that he had been retired from the Police Force with effect from

29th July 2009. In the letter, he was advised to appeal against the removal to the

Commissioner of Police within seven (7) days. The Complainant informed the PCSC

of these developments. PCSC advised the Complainant to appeal against the

removal from the Police Force, reopened the Complaint and initiated further

inquires with the Police Department.

2.4.8 Complaints where PCSC Promoted Mediation and Recommended

Compensation

Kenya Gazette Notice 5826 of 29th June 2007 empowers the PCSC, in performance of its

functions;

(vi) To promote alternative dispute resolution through mediation; and

(ix) To recommend, where the Committee deems fit so to do, compensation or

other remedial action against Government or public body or officer over any

or some of the complaints the Committee attends to;

24

The complaint related to supply of a water purification system to the Kenya Bureau

of Standards (KEBS) in February 2004. The Complainant delivered the system based

on an agreement that it would be used for demonstration purposes and

bacteriological laboratory tests for a period of one week. However, KEBS continued

to use the water distiller after the expiry of one week under the guise that they were

processing the Complainants payments. In June 2004, KEBS made a written

undertaking to pay the Complainant a sum of Kshs. 289,600/= after certain internal

procurement procedures were completed. Subsequently, in August 2004 KEBS

wrote to the Complainant declining to pay on the grounds that certain procurement

procedures were not adhered to, making it unprocedural for KEBS to pay. KEBS

therefore asked the Complainant to collect the water distiller from their premises.

The complaint was lodged with the PCSC in August 2008. PCSC initiated inquiries

with the KEBS in September 2008. In response, KEBS indicated that the

Complainant failed to collect the water distiller after seven days and that the

Complainant had delivered the water distiller on his own will without the

prompting of KEBS. However, PCSC opined that there was manifest injustice and

invited the KEBS and the Complainant to a mediation meeting. At the mediation,

PCSC proposed compensation for depreciation for the water distiller for the period

that KEBS wrongly retained and used it. The recommendation was accepted by

KEBS and the Complainant was compensated as agreed. PCSC considered the

Complaint satisfactorily resolved.

25

2.5 Letters of Appreciation from Complainants

29

2.6 Broader Aspects of Complaints-handling

Review of complaints often indicates serious or systemic problems in Government

Departments that need to be addressed to improve their administrative practices

and procedures. A systemic problem is one where a structural defect in an agencys

administrative processes, rather than an error in judgment by a public officer,

causes or contributes proximally to a complaint.

PCSC continues to attach great importance to taking a proactive approach to

resolving systemic issues and pointing out major administrative problems and

concerns in public service delivery. To this end, the following activities were

undertaken.

Performance Contracting 2009/10 Guidelines

All Government Departments and Agencies have today developed service charters.

These charters make commitments on the standards of service that the public

should expect. They also provide the mechanisms of redress if the standards are not

met. Ensuring that complaints are handled effectively and that the right of redress is

upheld is a fundamental feature of effective service delivery.

How well complaints are handled is a key indicator of quality in the public services

at both systemic and service-recipient levels. Procedures that are easily accessible,

simple to invoke and operate, transparent and ensure the public is kept informed

build confidence in public service delivery.

In the Quarter under review, the PCSC initiated a significant initiative with the

Office of the Prime Minister, Department of Public Sector Reforms and Performance

Contracting, whereby timely and effective resolution of public complaints is now a

measurable indicator affecting the ranking of Ministries and Public Institutions in

the Performance Contracting cycle. More than anything else, this development will

go a long way towards accelerating the pace of public sector reforms and

addressing existing negative attitudes to complaints-handling in the public service.

Task Force on Police Reforms

While the PCSCs fundamental role is to examine individual complaints against

public institutions and public officers, there is often the added value that PCSC

develops from the complaints-examination process which unearths systemic

problems brought to light through individual complaints.

30

A second benefit is that responses in individual complaints feed into the systemic

level by highlighting issues that need further examination by specialist teams.

Based on lessons learned from individual complaints against the Police Department,

the PCSC made representations to the Police Task Force Reforms Committee, some

of which are

Restructuring of the Kenya Police Service.

Establishment of an independent Police Oversight Body.

Review of the Kenya Police internal bureaucracy to remove unnecessary

procedures.

Improvement of Service Delivery through better relations and partnerships

with local communities.

Improving and strengthening the structures and systems that support the

Police.

Increasing resource allocation to the Kenya Police for improved performance.

Divorce the Kenya Police from political interference and its disastrous

consequence on the rule of law.

The Public Service Commission

A significant number of complaints received by the PCSC relate to allegations of

Unfair Dismissal by the Public Service Commission. Most Complainants allege that

they were never given an opportunity to present their cases/ matters in person

before the Public Service Commission. In addition, there have been numerous

complaints relating to decisions made by the Public Service Commission.

The Public Service Commission has consistently maintained that it is not obliged to

give reasons for the decisions it makes. This is a position that the PCSC cannot agree

with. It flies in the face of Natural Justice for a body that makes decisions that affect

livelihoods and careers to make decisions thereon without giving or stating reasons.

Even Courts of law are obliged to provide or state the reasons for reaching the

decisions they do in matters before them. It therefore stands to reason that all bodies

exercising such powers must record the reasons underpinning their decisions for

two main purposes; first, to dispense with any appearance of arbitrariness, bias or

unfairness; and secondly, to enable an external review of the correctness of the

decision reached by the body.

The systemic attitude adopted by the Public Service Commission, where it proceeds

from the basis that it can do no wrong and makes no mistakes, has little to

commend itself where service-delivery in the public sector is concerned.

31

It is PCSCs opinion that notwithstanding the Constitutional provisions that

establish the Public Service Commission, it is subject to administrative oversight

from the PCSC.

The invitation to sue, or commence litigation, that is often extended by the Public

Service Commission to Complainants, is an example of the very instances of

maladministration that the PCSC/Ombudsman was established to deal with. A

reduction of litigation, especially when it is avoidable, is a key component of Public

Sector Reforms. Considering the importance of the Public Service Commission as

the main employer in the public service, this approach needs urgent re-evaluation.

The following are illustrative complaints.

Unfair Rescission of Terms of Service

A complaint was lodged against the Pensions Department regarding payment of the

Complainants retirement benefits. The Complainant alleged that while she was in

the service in the Ministry of Health, her terms of service were converted from

Contractual to Permanent and Pensionable in September 1996. However, upon

retirement, the Pensions Department declined to pay her benefits on the ground

that her terms of service were Contractual. The PCSC took the view that this

constituted a clear case of Injustice and initiated inquiries with the Pensions

Department. The Pensions Department clarified that it was the Public Service

Commission that rescinded its earlier decision on the conversion of the

Complainants terms of service to Permanent and Pensionable. The PCSC has

initiated further inquiries with the Public Service Commission on the reasons for

rescinding the Complainants conversion of terms, and is awaiting a response.

Improper Rescission of Promotion

The Complaint related to improper rescission of promotion by the Public Service

Commission. The Complainant alleged that he had been appointed/ promoted to

the position of Director, Performance & Efficiency Audit, in the Public Sector

Reform and Development Secretariat by the Public Service Commission. The

Commission later rescinded the decision and ordered disciplinary proceedings to be

instituted against the Complainant. The Complainants authorizing officer declined

to institute disciplinary action on the basis that there was no justifiable reason for

the same. PCSC opined that there was an instance of Administrative Injustice and

initiated inquiries with the Public Service Commission. The Public Service

Commission responded to PCSCs inquiries stating, summarily, that they upheld

their earlier decision. In May 2009, the PCSC wrote to the Public Service

Commission requesting a meeting to resolve the complaint. However, the request

for a meeting was verbally declined by the Chairman of the Public Service

Commission.

32

Pyramid Schemes

In the last Quarterly Report, the PCSC pointed out that pyramid schemes were

under consideration and that the PCSC had made representations to the Task Force

on Pyramid Schemes. Since then, the PCSC notes with appreciation that the Minister

for Finance, in his budget speech, undertook to ensure that legislation is enacted

outlawing both pyramid schemes and participation in pyramid scheme activities.

Upon a review of the Report of the Task Force on Pyramid Schemes, PCSC will take

appropriate action where necessary.

Liaison with Public Sector Agencies

The PCSC continued to develop effective liaison arrangements with public

institutions, including other oversight agencies, where a Departmental officer (s) is

nominated as the point of contact for PCSCs inquiries. Such arrangements have

facilitated the PCSCs preliminary inquiries as well as PCSCs attempts to resolve

complaints informally and through mediation. These liaison arrangements also

mean that the PCSC can refer Complainants to the appropriate officers in these

institutions when the complaint is assessed by the PCSC as premature.

As reported in the last Quarterly Report, the PCSC has established formal liaison

arrangements with the Ministry of Labour and Human Resource Development, the

Ministry of Cooperative Development and Marketing and the Kenya Police

Department. The arrangements continued to work well in the Quarter.

In the instant Quarter, the PCSC held meetings with the Permanent Secretary,

Ministry of Information and Communications, following which the Committee was

able to obtain pertinent information on outstanding complaints against the Ministry.

In addition, the Committee held meetings with the Police Complaints Department,

with the Kenya Power and Lighting Company and with the Ministry of State for

Defence to discuss modalities of handling PCSCs inquiries. .

2.7 Non-Responsive Government Institutions

The PCSCs efficiency in resolving complaints is determined by the timeliness of

responses to its inquiries by concerned public institutions. It is therefore imperative

that public institutions respond to PCSC inquiries within the shortest time possible.

Failure by a public institution to respond to inquiries by the PCSC is a telling sign

about the attitude of that public institution to Reforms and to good Service Delivery.

It is impossible to claim Reform credentials while at the same time exuding an

33

attitude to official inquiries by the PCSC that clearly indicates a complete lack of

interest in resolution of complaints. While failure to respond to inquiries by the

PCSC is a good pointer to the poor level of service delivery in the concerned public

institution, this failure also points out the priority reform areas in the public sector

that require urgent attention.

The listing below comprises Non-Responsive public institutions grouped according

to the number of PCSC inquiries Not-Responded-To. An institution is classified as

Non-Responsive by the PCSC if the institution fails and/or refuses to respond to

PCSCs inquiries for three (3) months - 90 days. This is a generous window within

which any institution, if minded to do so, should be able to reply to an initial

inquiry arising from a complaint, if not to resolve it altogether.

As the list shows, the cavalier attitude to official correspondence by some public

institutions and public officers is widespread in the public sector, and begs the

question; if the institution will not bother to even respond to inquiries by the PCSC,

how much worse is it for the individual Complainant who deals with such an

institution?

It is useful to bear in mind that an institution may be condemned not because it is

incurably non-reformist, but because its management is wanting in reform

credentials. Consequently, care ought to be taken not to wield the list of non-

responsive public institutions as a blunt instrument; rather, the peculiarities and

dynamism of public sector management ought to be borne in mind at all times.

Having said that, the PCSC hastens to commend public institutions and officers that

respond to inquiries timeously and that collaborate with the Committee to improve

service-delivery.

34

The listing below comprises public institutions that have not responded to the

PCSCs initial inquiries and gives the corresponding number of inquiries Not

Responded- To.

TABLE 1: Non-Responsive Government Institutions

PUBLIC INSTITUTION No. OF PCSC INQUIRIES

NOT RESPONDED TO

PERCENTAGE

Kenya Police 104 21

Ministry of Local Government 77 15.4

Provincial Administration 55 11

Ministry of Labour 46 9

Ministry of Lands 32 6

State Law Office 19 4

Ministry of State for Defence 17 3

Judiciary 16 3

Teachers Service Commission 14 3

Ministry of Education 12 2

Pensions Department 11 2

Ministry of Transport 10 2

Ministry of Finance 7 1

Advocates Complaints

Commission 6 1

Public Service Commission 6 1

Ministry of Medical Services 6 1

Kenya Revenue Authority 5 1

Ministry of Agriculture 5 1

Office of the Vice-President

and Ministry of Home Affairs 4 1

Ministry of Public Works 4 1

Ministry of Wildlife and

Forestry 4 1

Ministry of State for

Immigration and Registration

of Persons

4 1

Ministry of Water and

Irrigation 4 1

Ministry of Information and

Communications 4 1

Kenya Power & Lighting

Company 4 1

35


NOT RESPONDED TO

PERCENTAGE

Ministry of Gender, Children

and Social Affairs 3 1

Ministry of Cooperative

Development and Marketing 3 1

Ministry of Roads 3 1

Ministry of Higher Education 2 0.4

Ministry of National Heritage

and Culture 2 0.4

Ministry of Environment and

Natural Resources 2 0.4

Ministry of Livestock

Development 2 0.4

Ministry of Industrialization 1 0.2

Ministry of Justice, National

Cohesion and Constitutional

Affairs

1 0.2

Ministry of Housing 1 0.2

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1 0.2

Ministry of Youth Affairs and

Sports 1 0.2

TOTAL

498 100%

36

PCSC INQUIRIES NOT RESPONDED TO FOR 3-6 MONTHS

Of the 498 inquiries made by the PCSC set out above, the following listing

comprises those public institutions that have NOT responded at all for 3-6 months.

TABLE 2: Inquiries Not Responded To For 3-6 Months

PUBLIC INSTITUTION NO. OF PCSC INQUIRIES

NOT RESPONDED TO

PERCENTAGE

Kenya Police 40 20



Ministry of Local Government 17 8


Judiciary 9 4






Ministry of Agriculture 5 2.5


Kenya Revenue Authority 4 2

Ministry of Finance 3 1.5


Irrigation 3 1.5

Public Service Commission of

Kenya 3 1.5

Kenya Power & Lighting Co. 3 1.5


Forestry 2 1


Development and Marketing 2 1



Ministry of Livestock

Development 2 1

Telkom Kenya 2 1

Office of the VP & Ministry of

Home Affairs 1 0.5

37


NOT RESPONDED TO

PERCENTAGE

Ministry of Housing 1 0.5

Ministry of Higher Education 1 0.5


Natural Resource 1 0.5


and Culture 1 0.5

Ministry of Youth Affairs and

Sports 1 0.5

Ministry of Roads 1 0.5

Ministry of Justice, National

Cohesion and Constitutional

Affairs

1 0.5

Ministry of State For


of Persons

1 0.5

TOTAL 204 100%

38


The following provides a listing of public institutions that have NOT responded to

PCSCs inquiries for duration of 7-9 months.



NOT RESPONDED TO

PERCENTA

GE


Kenya Police 53 22






Judiciary 6 2.5

Advocates Complaints

Commission 6 2.5





Office of the Vice-President

and Ministry of Home Affairs 3 1



Public Service Commission 2 1

Ministry of State for


of Persons

2 1


Communications 2 1

Kenya Revenue Authority 1 0.4


Forestry 1 0.4


Irrigation 1 0.4

39


NOT RESPONDED TO

PERCENTA

GE

Ministry of Roads 1 0.4

Ministry of Industrialization 1 0.4


and Social Affairs 1 0.4

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1 0.4


and Culture 1 0.4


Development and Marketing 1 0.4

Kenya Power & Lighting

Company 1 0.4

TOTAL

242 100%


The following provides a listing of public institutions that have NOT responded to

PCSCs inquiries for between 10 months and 1 year (12 months).


PUBLIC INSTITUTION NO. OF PCSC INQUIRIES NOT

RESPONDED TO

PERCENTA

GE

Kenya Police 8 25








Judiciary

1 3

Ministry of Higher Education 1 3


and Social Affairs

1 3

40

PUBLIC INSTITUTION NO. OF PCSC INQUIRIES NOT

RESPONDED TO

PERCENTA

GE


Forestry 1 3

Kenya Institute of

Administration 1 3


TOTAL

32

100%

PCSC INQUIRIES NOT RESPONDED FOR OVER ONE YEAR

The following institutions have not responded to specific inquiries for over one

year.

TABLE 5: Inquiries Not Responded To For OVER ONE YEAR


NOT RESPONDED TO

PERCENTAGE


Kenya Police 3 15






Natural Resource

1 5

Ministry of Roads 1 5


Ministry of State For


of Persons

1 5

Ministry of Medical Services

1 5


and Social Affairs

1 5

TOTAL 20 100%

41

CHAPTER THREE

3.0 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

3.1 Complaints Received

In this Quarter, PCSC received a total of 270 new complaints. 90 complaints were

received in April 2009, 81 in May 2009 and 99 in June 2009 as shown in the table

below.

TABLE 1: Complaints received in the Quarter

MONTH NUMBER PERCENTAGE

April 90 33

May 81 30

June 99 37

TOTAL 270 100%

TABLE 2: Statistical Summary

NO CATEGORY TOTAL %

1. Total number of complaints received by PCSC from

July 2007 to 30th June 2009

1,720 -

2. Number of matters resolved from July 2007 to 30th

June 2009

371 22

3. Number of ongoing inquiries from July 2007 to 30th

June 2009

1,349 78

3.2 Classification of Complaints Received by PCSC Mandate

Within mandate: 269 (99.6 %)

Outside mandate: 1 (0.4%)

42

FIGURE 1: Distribution of Complaints According to the PCSC mandate.

Proportion of complaints within and outside PCSC mandate

Outside mandate

0.4%

Within mandate

99.6%

3.3 Analysis According to Action Taken by PCSC

TABLE 3: Analysis on Processing of Complaints Received

No. CATEGORY TOTAL %

1. Complaints where inquiries were initiated. 32 12

43

2.

Complaints channeled to responsible

departments of government for action e.g. The

Police Complaints Department.

5 2

3. Complaints resolved1 6 2

4. Complaints carried over to the quarter. 227 84

TOTAL 270 100%

FIGURE 2: Categorization of Complaints Processed by the PCSC

Carried over to the next

Quarter

84%

Ongoing inquiries

12%

Channeled to other

.Govt. Dept

2% Resolved

2%

1 Complaints resolved is a generic term comprising; complaints withdrawn by

Complainants, complaints settled by the public institution, complaints found to be without

merit and complaints where Complainants were referred to other agencies for appropriate

action or redress.

44

3.4 Analysis Based on Categories of Complaints

This report captures categories of complaints received as stipulated in the mandate

as follows:-

(a) Injustice; includes allegations of wrongful dismissals from work, premature

retirement, negative ethnicity and discrimination by public officers and

public institutions.

(b) Delay; refers to unexplained and unnecessary time taken to perform or

deliver normal and routine duties and services by public officers.

(c) Misuse of Office; includes claims of harassment by public officers and

allegations of improper or forceful charges levied upon Complainants.

(d) Inattention; refers to unjustifiable failure to attend to necessary detail, e.g.

failure to respond to Complaints, failure to charge suspects, cases not

investigated to a reasonable standard by relevant institutions, and the like.

(e) Inefficiency; Inability to perform /render services to the expectation and

satisfaction of the citizens.

(f) Unethical conduct; want of probity by public officers in the conduct of public

affairs

TABLE 4: Complaints Categories

CATEGORY NO. OF COMPLAINTS PERCENTAGE

Delay 76 28

Misuse of Office 59 22

Injustice 44 16

Inattention 34 13

Unethical conduct 19 7

Incompetence 13 5

Inefficiency 7 2

Others 18 7

TOTAL 270 100%

45

Based on the above statistics, the bulk of public complaints have to do with poor

service delivery, law enforcement issues and concerns touching on delivery of

Justice. 50% of complaints against the Provincial Administration related to Misuse

of Office, whereas Delay was prominent in Complaints against the Pensions

Department, the Judiciary and the Ministry of Labour. The Complaints received

against the Ministry of Lands were diverse, ranging from delay in settling land

matters, Misuse of Office by various land officers and injustice in settling cases.

Curbing maladministration in the public sector requires a concerted effort from the

public to demand quality services on the one hand, and public officers to reform

public service delivery on the other hand.

FIGURE 3: Graphical Representation of Complaints Categories.

28%

22%

16%

13%

7%5%

2%

7%

Delay Misuse ofOffice

Injustice Inattention Unethicalconduct

Incompetence Inefficiency Others

Complaints categories

46

3.5 Analysis Based on Ministries and Public Sector Institutions

TABLE 5: Ministries and Public Sector Institutions Complained Against.

No. PUBLIC INSTITUTION NO. OF

COMPLAINTS %

1 Kenya Police 39 14

2 Ministry of Lands 33 12

3 Provincial Administration 30 11

4 Ministry of Labour 25 9

5 Ministry of Local Government 21 8

6 The Judiciary 19 7

7 Pensions Department 14 5

8 Ministry of Education 8 3

9 Ministry of State for Defence 7 3

10


Communications

7

3

11 State Law Office 7 3

12 Teachers Service Commission 5 2

13 Ministry of Agriculture 5 2

14 Advocates Complaints Commission 5 2

15 Ministry of Forestry & Wildlife 4 2

16 Ministry of Medical Services 4 2

17 Ministry of Roads 4 2

18 Ministry of Transport 4 2

19


Development & Marketing

3

1

20 Ministry of Finance 3 1

21 Kenya Revenue Authority 3 1

47

22 National Social Security Fund 3 1

23 Public Service Commission 3 1

24 Ministry of Industrialization 2 1

25 Ministry of Public Works 2 1

26

Office of the Prime Minister- Public

Sector Reforms and Performance

Contracting

1 0

27 Ministry of Energy 1 0

28 Ministry of Foreign Affairs 1 0

29 Ministry of Livestock Development 1 0

30

Ministry of Regional Development

Authorities

1

0

31 Ministry of Water and Irrigation 1 0

32 Constituency Development Fund 1 0

33 Kenya National Assurance Co. Ltd 1 0

34

National Environment Management

Authority

1

0

35 National Youth Service 1 0

TOTAL 270 100

The complaints received involved a wide range of Government Ministries and

public sector institutions. The highest number of Complaints received was against

the Ministry of State for Provincial Administration and Internal Security, totaling 69,

which represents 25% of the total Complaints received. The Ministry remains at the

top for the fourth Quarter running despite a reduction in the number of complaints

compared to the previous quarter where it recorded 98 complaints.

48

Out of the 69 Complaints received against this Ministry, 39 Complaints were

against the Kenya Police while 30 Complaints were against the Provincial

Administration.

The Ministry of Lands recorded 12% of the total Complaints received. It was

followed by the Ministries of Labour and Local Government with 9% and 8%

respectively.

Other key institutions complained against include the Judiciary with 7%, the

Pensions Department with 5%, the Ministry of Education with 3% and the Ministry

of State for Defence at 3%. Institutions with only one complaint against them

include the Office of the Prime Minister, Public Sector Reforms and Performance

Contracting Department, the Ministries of Energy and Foreign Affairs and The

National Youth Service.

Based on these empirical statistics, some key public service institutions like the

Kenya Police, the Provincial Administration, the Ministry of Local Government and

the Judiciary have a clear obligation to urgently address their service-delivery and

complaints-management systems and standards. This applies not just to the

highest-ranking institutions in terms of the number of complaints registered, but to

all public sector institutions.

The PCSC applauds the on-going public sector reforms and challenges all

stakeholders, whether in the public sector, private sector, or individual citizens, to

support the ongoing systemic and structural reforms in public sector institutions.

49

FIGURE 4: Graphical Representation of Complaints Received by Ministries and

Public Sector Institutions.

14%

12%

11%

9%

8%

7%

5%

3%

3%

3%

3%

21%

Kenya Police

Min. of Lands

Provincial Admin.

Min. of Labour

Min. of Local Govt

Judiciary

Pensions Department

Min. of Education

State Law Office

Min. of Defence

Min. of Information

Others

Complaints by Ministries and Public Sector institutions

3.6 Analysis of Complaints Based on Provinces.

The highest number of Complaints was received from Nairobi Province at 28%,

followed by Central Province at 22% and Eastern Province at 14%. The least number

of Complaints was received from Coast and North Eastern Provinces at 4% and 1%

respectively. This variance in distribution can be attributed to the proximity or

otherwise of PCSCs services which are presently only available in Nairobi.

These statistics highlight the urgent need to spread PCSCs presence to, at the very

least, all Provincial Headquarters, and subsequently to District Headquarters. This

is emphasized by the fact that 64% of all Complaints received by the PCSC come to

our attention through personal visits to PCSC offices at Shell & BP House,

Harambee Avenue, Nairobi see Table 6 below.

50

It is regrettable that only 1% of North Eastern Province residents reported their

complaints to PCSC during the Quarter. The figure of 1% does not indicate a deep

satisfaction by the citizens in North Eastern Province with public service delivery;

rather, it graphically illustrates the effect lack of proximity to essential public

services such as the PCSCs has in disenfranchising citizens. In its Provincial tours

in the second Quarter of the last financial year, the Committee got a clear sense in

Garissa, Mombasa and Kisumu that it is not only essential, but vital, that PCSCs

services be cascaded to Provincial Headquarters urgently, and to District

Headquarters in the short to medium term.

TABLE 6: Distribution of Complaints across the Provinces

PROVINCE NO. RECEIVED PERCENTAGE

Nairobi

75 28

Central

59 22

Eastern 38 14

Western 36 13

Rift Valley 30 11

Nyanza 19 7

Coast 10 4

North Eastern

3 1

TOTAL 270 100%

51

FIGURE 5: Graphical Representation of Complaints received by Province

28%

22%

14% 13%11%

7%

4%

1%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Nairobi Central Eastern Western Rift valley Nyanza Coast N/EasternProvince

Geographic d istribution of complaints received

3.7 Analysis by Mode of Lodging Complaint

TABLE 7: Mode of Lodging Complaints

MODE OF REPORTING NO. RECEIVED PERCENTAGE

Personal Visit 173 64

Postal mail 81 30

Referral from other institutions 16 6

TOTAL 270 100%

52

FIGURE 6: Graphical Representation of Mode of Reporting Complaints.

64%

30%

6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

%

Personal Visit Post ReferralsMode

Mode of reporting complaints to the PCSC

3.8 Analysis by Gender

TABLE 8: Complaints Distribution by Gender.

GENDER NUMBER PERECNTAGE

Male 225 83

Female 32 12

Organizations/Groups 13 5

TOTAL 270 100%

53

There was a large disparity in the number of complaints received from women as

compared to men. As the PCSC conducted provincial visits in November and

December 2008, women were enlightened on the PCSCs mandate and encouraged

to lodge their complaints with it. PCSC is specifically targeting women as

Complainants through Civic Education countrywide and through engagements

with women groups, faith and community-based organizations.

FIGURE 7: Graphical Representation of Complaints received by Gender

Complaints distribution by gender

Male

83%

Female

12%

Organizations/Groups

5%

54

3.9 Monthly Analysis of Complaints in the Quarter

TABLE 9: Status of Current Quarter Complaints.

STATUS

TOTAL %

APRIL MAY JUNE

Inquiries initiated

by the PCSC 21 7 4 32 12

Carried over 64 70 93 227 84

Complaints

resolved 1 3 2 6 2

Channeled to

other government

institutions

4 1 0 5 2

Referred to other

oversight

agencies

0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 90 81 99 270 100%

55

FIGURE 8: Monthly comparative analysis of the Quarter Complaints

21

64

1 47

70

3 14

93

2 0

April May JuneMonth

Monthly comparative analysis of complaints processed during the Quarter

Ongoing Carried over Resolved Channeled

3.10 Comparative Analysis by Quarters

TABLE 10: Comparison of Complaints Processed in the 3rd Quarter, 2008/09 and 4th

Quarter 2008/09.

STATUS Q3 % Q4 %

Inquiries initiated by PCSC 48 14.4 32 12

Carried Over 261 78 227 84

Complaints channeled to responsible

department of government for action e.g.

The Police Complaints Department.

1 0.3 5 2

56

Referred to other oversight agencies e.g.

KACC and KNHCR 1 0.3 0 0

Resolved by the PCSC 23 7 6 2

TOTAL 334 100% 270 100%

FIGURE 9: Graphical Representation of Complaints processed in the 3rd & 4th

Quarters of 2008/09.

0.3% 0%

0.3% 2%

7% 2%

14.4% 12%

78% 84%

Referred

Channeled

Resolved

Ongoing

Carried over

Complaints processed in the 3rd & 4th Quarters

3rd Quarter 4th Quarter

57

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES

Communication is a vital part of the work of PCSC. This encompasses publicizing

the role of PCSC and the service that PCSC provides through public engagements.

Following an analysis of PCSC complaints by end of the 3rd Quarter, which

indicated that complaints numbers were under-represented in areas outside

Nairobi, the Committee undertook targeted awareness campaigns during the

Quarter to increase awareness of our services. Our key messages reinforced how the

public can access PCSC services and encouraged the public to contact the

Committee if they had complaints concerning the public sector.

4.1 Advocacy and Outreach

In the Quarter, PCSC staff continued to promote outreach services through regional

activities. To this end, the Committee visited Central Province, Eastern Province,

Western Province, and North Eastern Province.

In addition, the Committee conducted training of Community Based Organizations

on the PCSCs mandate, functions and services. The training targeted community

leaders at the grassroots level who were trained in order that they could in turn

train members of the community. This followed a similar initiative in the 2nd

Quarter of the last financial year 2008/2009 in which Committee Members and staff

visited all the provinces.

4.2 Information Technology and Web Presence

The PCSC continues to be hosted on the World Wide Web by the Ministry of Justice,

National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs on its website. In the next Quarter, the

PCSC will endeavour to establish an independent website dedicated to complaints

58

receiving, processing, managing and communicating. Focus will be on simplicity

and ease of access, together with innovative software and information technology

solutions to harness the full power of modern communications to broaden and

d

quarterly q4 report 2008-2009

Documents

analysis of complaints

public complaints

classification of complaints

admissibility of complaints

complaintshandling process

broader aspects of complaints

selected complaints

pcsc mandate