Law Society of Kenya v Attorney General & another [2021] eKLR legislation. 4. The Cabinet Secretary responsible for police services may lawfully give a direction to the Inspector-General with respect to any matter of policy for the National Police Service, but no person may give a direction to the Inspector General with respect to— (a) the investigation of any particular offence or offences; (b) the enforcement of the law against any particular person or persons; or (c) the employment, assignment, promotion, suspension or dismissal of any member of the National Police Service. 5. Any direction given to the Inspector-General by the Cabinet secretary responsible for police services under clause (4), or any direction given to the Inspector-General by the Director of Public Prosecutions under Article 157(4), shall be in writing. 82. Article 157(4) of the Constitution provides that: The Director of Public Prosecutions shall have power to direct the Inspector General of the National Police Service to investigate any information or allegation of criminal conduct and the Inspector-General shall comply with any such direction. 83. The independence of the 2nd Respondent is constitutionally-insulated from any form of interference or directional command. Apart from the Director of Public Prosecutions and only to the extent so provided, no other person, body or entity has the power to give any form of directives to the 2nd Respondent on how to discharge its functions. 84. The above is further ring-fenced in that even the power donated to the Cabinet Secretary under Article 254(4) of the Constitution to issue any directives to the 2nd Respondent is only limited to policy issues. 85. The Supreme Court In the Matter of Interim Independent Electoral Commission [2011] eKLR, discussed the meaning and extent of the independence in relation to constitutional Commissions and independent offices. The Court emphasized the need for such entities to co-ordinate for effective service delivery, but delineated the discharge of their respective mandates as follows: [60] While bearing in mind that the various Commissions and independent offices are required to function free of subjection to “direction or control by any person or authority”, we hold that this expression is to be accorded its ordinary and natural meaning; and it means that the Commissions and independent offices, in carrying out their functions, are not to take orders or instructions from organs or persons outside their ambit. 86. Applying the foregoing to this case, it therefore, follows that the Inspector General as the one in command of the National Police Service while discharging the duties of the office should not be under the direction or control of any person or authority and should not take any orders or instructions from organs or persons outside his/her ambit. As said, the only exception is what is provided for in Article 157(4) of the Constitution relating to the powers of the Director of Public Prosecutions over the Inspector General. 87. The Respondents, however, argue that the National Police Service is part of the executive arm of Government under the President. For that reason, they further argue that, in the spirit of coordinating government business the whole executive arm of Government, including the organs and offices therein, is under the general control and direction of the President and by extension the Cabinet. 88. This Court does not find the Respondents’ argument persuasive. The Constitution provides the manner in which the sovereign power of the people may be exercised. Such power may be exercised by Parliament and the legislative assemblies in the county governments, the national executive and the executive structures in the county governments, the Judiciary and independent tribunals, the Constitutional Commissions and the Independent offices. The design of our Constitution is that it deliberately ringfences the independence of each of those organs. 89. On the part of the National Police Service, Article 245(2)(b) and (4) of the Constitution speaks clearly of the independence of http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 25/34