Cofek challenges appointment of CA Board chair Charles Kamau
Cofek further argues that the appointment process was undertaken without public participation, thereby breaching constitutional requirements.
The Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) has moved to the High Court to challenge the appointment of Charles Kamau Karondo as the new chairperson of the Communications Authority of Kenya (CAK) Board.
In an application filed under a certificate of urgency, Cofek is seeking court orders suspending Karondo’s appointment, arguing that President William Ruto unlawfully appointed him to the role for a three-year term without convening the required selection panel.
More To Read
- Ruto revokes Mary Wambui's appointment as CA board chair, names Karondo as replacement
- Communications Authority on the spot after audit uncovers asset management failures
- Why Kenyan SMEs struggle to break into export market despite government push
- State warns landlords against restricting access for telcos
- Communications Authority cracks down on unlicensed tracking services
- Court upholds freeze on Safaricom's Bonga points expiry
The federation claims that Karondo was appointed on August 8, 2025, without the President constituting the mandatory selection panel as stipulated under Section 6B of the Kenya Information and Communications Act.
Cofek further argues that the appointment process was undertaken without public participation, thereby breaching constitutional requirements.
“Despite clear constitutional and statutory provisions, the President purported to appoint Charles Kamau Karondo as the non-executive chairperson of the CA Board for three years, without involving the mandatory selection panel,” Cofek states in court papers.
The organisation is seeking conservatory orders to suspend the Gazette Notice announcing Karondo’s appointment, pending the hearing and determination of the case.
It is also asking the court to bar the National Assembly, the Cabinet Secretary for Information, Communications and the Digital Economy, and the Attorney General from making further appointments to the CA Board unless in strict compliance with the law.
Cofek contends that the current CA Board is not independent as envisaged in the Constitution, as it answers to the Executive and thereby undermines media freedom, consumer protection, and the integrity of the country’s communications regulatory framework.
“The continued operations of the impugned Board are unconstitutional and offend the national values of good governance, accountability and integrity as set out under Articles 73 and 232 of the Constitution,” Cofek argues.
The federation further claims that the existence of the current Board infringes on consumer rights guaranteed under Article 46 and erodes transparency in independent constitutional institutions.
Top Stories Today
