BY SAM ALFAN.
The implementation of the private security (General) Regulations, which was to come into force this month has been challenged in court.
In an urgent application, activist Okiya Omtatah sought to stop it implementation of the regulations, pending hearing and determination of the suit.
In the petition, Omtatah accused Interior Cabinet Secretary Fred Matiang’i and Private Security Regulatory Authority of persistent on implementing private security regulations 2019 despite the fact that they were annulled for non-conformity with the constitution.
He wants the court to suspend the Private Regulatory Authority’s ongoing exercise of inspecting and vetting private security companies based on the press statement dated Monday December 9, 2019.
“Pending hearing and determination of the application or petition court to issue an interim order prohibiting private security authority, private security Regulatory Authority board, Interior ministry, Attorney General, Yusuf Mohamed Fazul and Prof Stephen Ng’ang’a from giving effect in any way to the private Regulatory Authority’s ongoing exercise of inspecting and vetting private security companies based on the press statement dated Monday December 9, 2019,” urged Omtatah.
Omtatah accused Dr Matiang’i of appointing Fazul as the Authority chief executive officer yet he has been found unfit to hold public office. He wants Fazul removed as the CEO and orders disbanding the board directors.
He wants Matiang’i compelled to de-gazette Prof Ng’ang’a as the board chairman, quash the inspection and vetting of private security providers and compel CS Matiang’i to Gazette new regulations in strict compliance with the law.
He argued that with the current nationwide stay-at-home orders and distancing directives issued by the government to fight the spread of the Cavid-19 pandemic, it is not practical and it is irresponsible, unreasonable and unlawful for the authority’s officers to visit offices of private security companies to inspect and vet them.
The nationwide lockdown to contain Covid-19 pandemic is legitimate and any person going against it acts against the public.
“The inspections and vetting exercise constitutes a threat to article 43 if the constitution the right to health. This is because, to comply with the requirements, security companies must hold meetings involving a significant number of people meeting physically in order to comply.
In view of current government directives regarding physical distancing to void coronavirus infections, such meetings would , under these circumstances be unjustified threats to the participating individual’s right to health,” added Omtatah.
There is a great danger that those security companies and individuals that have not been vetted are likely to be locked from conducting business based in the unlawful process and after March 31, 2020 providers of the private security services are likely to be victimized for noncompliance with conditions for registration set in the press statement.
