Garissa High Court rejects Jua Kali bid to block outsourcing of county goods
By Joseph Ndunda |
The artisans had asked the court to issue an order restraining the county from ordering the items produced elsewhere during the hearing of the suit filed on April 2, 2024.
The High Court in Garissa has declined to issue an injunction restraining the county government from buying wheelbarrows, rakes and spades from outside the county as sought by the Garissa Jua Kali Association.
Through Osman Mohamed Barkhadale, the Jua Kali Association sued the county secretary and sub-county administrator for outsourcing the items from outside the county yet they are locally available.
The artisans had asked the court to issue an order restraining the county from ordering the items produced elsewhere during the hearing of the suit filed on April 2, 2024.
In their suit, the association is arguing that their county government has continually offered contracts to people outside Garissa County to supply such goods yet the same are readily available and can easily be supplied by the locals.
"These are goods that can be locally manufactured so as to create employment for the youths in the county in aiming the sharing of devolution power and resources instead of getting the same outside the county," Osman states in the suit, on behalf of the association.
Osman argued that the youths in Garissa County are likely to be rendered jobless because what they are able to do is taken away from them.
According to Osman, the association had engaged the county on several occasions over the issue but their prayers landed on deaf ears.
He had argued that the respondents – the county secretary and sub-county administrator- have curtailed the Vocational Training Students' right to career progression.
"Given that these students have placements in this sector, taking such work outside the county is thus not only unfair but also inhuman," Osman stated.
But Justice John Onyiengo declined to issue the temporary injunction as sought by the traders.
Justice Onyiengo noted that the county government had not opposed the application by the association but said for the injunction to be issued, the association needed to prove that they would suffer an irreparable injury if the temporary order was not issued.
He said the association did not demonstrate that they are likely to suffer irreparable damage that cannot be compensated in monetary terms if the temporary injunction sought is not granted.
"In my considered view, the order desired by the (association) is tantamount to gagging the (the county government). I say so for the reason that it is not within this court's duty to determine the kind of businesses the county government engage in and by whom," Justice Onyiengo stated in his ruling.
"In commercial law, the same provides for willing seller and willing buyer in matters of settling contracts. It therefore follows that ordering the (county) to trade solely with the applicant in regards to the goods mentioned herein would be akin to curtailing their rights of free trade."
The judge said the main contention by the association is pegged on the fact that despite engaging the county government to allow them to supply the goods in question, it failed.
The judge said the application by Osman is inviting the court to direct the county on who to trade with and ordering the county to acquire the goods solely from the Jua Kali association.
He noted that the reason for the petition is that the youths in Garissa County are likely to be rendered jobless because what they are able to do is taken away from them.
The objectives of the association led by Osman are to promote value addition for their products, easier accessibility, marketing products and expanding knowledge through interacting with traders and creating an income through trading.
The association wanted the court to stop the county government from acquiring the same products outside the county which Justice Onyiengo declined.
"In my view, the prayers sought cannot be issued at the interlocutory stage. The same can await the hearing of the main petition before substantive orders can be made. I hold the view that a temporary injunction cannot be issued in the circumstances herein," the judge ruled.
Reader comments
Follow Us and Stay Connected!
We'd love for you to join our community and stay updated with our latest stories and updates. Follow us on our social media channels and be part of the conversation!
Let's stay connected and keep the dialogue going!