A fresh oversight battle is brewing in the Nairobi City County Government after concerns were raised over the continued occupation of the Office of the County Secretary Godfrey Akumali in an acting capacity far beyond the period allowed by law.
The issue was formally brought before the County Assembly through a statement request by an MCA seeking clarification from the Assembly’s Sectoral Committee on Labour and Social Welfare over what he termed as a prolonged and unlawful acting appointment.
In the request tabled before the Assembly, the legislator argued that the continued stay of the acting County Secretary undermines statutory provisions governing public service appointments and raises serious accountability questions within the county executive.
The Office of the County Secretary is one of the most critical administrative positions in county governments.
It is responsible for coordinating the functions of the county executive, ensuring implementation of cabinet decisions and facilitating effective service delivery across departments.
However, according to the law, the position cannot remain under an acting holder indefinitely.
The legislator cited Section 44 of the County Governments Act, 2012, which requires that a substantive County Secretary be appointed through a competitive and transparent recruitment process.
Further provisions under Section 34 of the Public Service Commission Act, 2017 limit acting appointments in public offices to a maximum of six months.
Under the law, an officer may initially be appointed in an acting capacity for a short period while recruitment is undertaken, but the appointment cannot exceed six months without the position being substantively filled.
Despite these legal requirements, the assembly has been told that the Office of the County Secretary in Nairobi has continued to operate under an acting arrangement well beyond the statutory limit.
The development has now triggered concerns among MCAs who argue that failure to regularize the position weakens institutional accountability and may expose the county government to legal challenges.
In his request to the committee, the MCA asked the Assembly to investigate why the position has remained unfilled despite clear legal timelines.
He also demanded a comprehensive report detailing the exact duration the office has been held in an acting capacity and a chronological account of all acting appointments made for the position.
The statement further called for explanations on the justification for exceeding the six-month legal threshold.
More significantly, the Assembly has been asked to scrutinize compliance with an earlier court directive issued in Constitutional Petition No. E480 of 2024.
In that ruling, the court reportedly directed the county governor to ensure that a substantive County Secretary is appointed within 60 days.
MCAs now want to know whether the directive was implemented and, if not, why the county executive has failed to comply with the court’s orders.
The matter is expected to be handled by the Assembly’s Labour and Social Welfare Committee, which will summon relevant officials and present a report to the House.
Oversight experts say prolonged acting appointments in key government offices often weaken accountability structures because acting officials may lack full authority or security of tenure to make long-term decisions.
They also argue that failure to fill positions substantively may signal deeper governance challenges within public institutions.
For Nairobi County, the unfolding dispute adds to ongoing debates about governance, transparency and compliance with the law in the management of the county executive.
MCAs say the Assembly will insist on strict adherence to legal provisions governing public service appointments.
“The law is clear on acting appointments. Public offices cannot remain indefinitely occupied in an acting capacity,” the legislator stated in the request
.
Once tabled, the committee’s findings could determine whether the county executive violated statutory provisions and whether further administrative or legal action will be recommended.
The issue is likely to intensify scrutiny of senior appointments within the county government as the Assembly continues to exercise its constitutional oversight role.