Police officers in Kenya's National Police Service are challenging delayed salary upgrades and alleged discriminatory practices in job group assignments, filing a lawsuit against senior officials including Inspector General Joseph Boinnet and Attorney General Paul Kariuki.
The dispute centers on the National Police Service Commission's (NPSC) handling of job group classifications, which determine pay scales. Officers with university degrees submitted certification for review in May 2019 but report inconsistent processing, leaving many in lower-paying job group F despite qualifications. Some received immediate upgrades, while others with similar credentials remain in lower ranks.
Officers describe financial hardship, with some taking loans to pursue education only to face stagnant salaries. One officer stated, "We took out loans of up to Sh500,000 for undergraduate studies to improve our capacity to deliver better services to Kenyans. But after undertaking further studies we are not getting a pay rise." Others report earning as little as Sh7,000 monthly, insufficient to cover basic needs.
Legal Claims and Institutional Defense ¶
The lawsuit, filed by Musyoka Murambi law firm, alleges the NPSC and National Police Service (NPS) violated constitutional rights by failing to align pay with qualifications. Petitioners argue that officers with identical ranks, responsibilities, and qualifications are paid differently, constituting discrimination.
The NPS defends its actions, citing 2015 recruitment and promotion guidelines that do not recognize a "graduate constable" rank. A joint affidavit from NPS officials states the 1995 directive allowing salary increases for degree-holding officers was superseded by newer policies. They argue the 1995 letter applied only to officers recruited as constables who later earned degrees during training, not those who obtained qualifications post-employment.
Broader Institutional Concerns ¶
Officers also criticize the government's recent recruitment of 800 specialists, arguing it overlooks experienced, qualified personnel. "Some of us have been in the service for up to 10 years and hold degree certificates... What makes those being hired as graduates better than us?" one officer questioned, alleging favoritism in appointments.
The case highlights tensions between institutional policies and officer expectations, with legal proceedings pending to resolve disputes over fair treatment and compensation.
