The Employment and Labour Relations Court has ruled that the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) unlawfully removed 23 police officers from its payroll and sent them back to regular police duties in 2023, ordering the tax agency to pay each officer compensation equal to four months’ salary.
- •KRA had recruited the police officers through a competitive process and embedded them in its investigations and enforcement department.
- •The officers had been placed on KRA pay scales and received benefits significantly higher than those of regular police service.
- •Their secondment letters outlined salaries, medical cover, pension contributions, insurance, leave entitlements, and working conditions that aligned with KRA grades.
“Despite the fact that KRA had a right to terminate the said contracts, due notice was necessary to allow for planning and allow the petitioners arrange their families for relocation and change in salary fall given the commitments already made such as school for children, housing payments, and loans,” ruled Justice Hellen Wasilwa.
The judge noted that the officers’ contracts ended abruptly, without notice or explanation, despite the predictable financial and personal disruption such a move would cause. This breached the officers’ right to fair labour practices and fair administrative action, and amounted to degrading treatment under the Constitution.
In January 2023, KRA issued letters terminating the secondments with immediate effect. The officers were notified days later and instructed to return to the National Police Service (NPS). No reasons were given, no notice period was provided, and no transition arrangements were made.
The petitioners then argued that KRA’s decision was procedurally unfair and economically disruptive. They told the court that they had reorganized their lives around the secondment income, taking on housing commitments, loans, and family obligations that became untenable overnight.
While they did not lose their jobs as police officers, they said the sudden withdrawal of pay and benefits amounted to unfair treatment and violated constitutional protections on fair labour practices, dignity, and administrative justice.
KRA did not dispute that it ended the secondments early but argued that the contracts allowed termination on disciplinary or other grounds, and that public service law permits the early return of officers to their parent institutions when secondment is no longer necessary.
The authority maintained that the officers remained primary employees of the National Police Service, continued to earn salaries, and therefore suffered no unlawful termination. Any reduction in pay or benefits was a natural consequence of returning to their substantive employer and not a matter for which the tax authority could be held responsible.
In weighing the arguments, the court did not focus on whether KRA had the legal authority to end the secondment. The court examined how that authority was exercised and found that while KRA could lawfully terminate a secondment, it was still bound by constitutional standards of fairness, reasonableness, and humane treatment.
