INSO’s precedent setting legal battle against the Kenyan government was determined in the charity’s favour.
The High Court ruled that the NGO Co-ordination Board has no power to suspend operating licences and could therefore not purport to temporarily freeze INSO’s permits.
Justice Odunga’s decision throws a spanner in the works for the board, which has suspended licences of other charities.
The list of charities whose licences have been suspended in the past few months includes the Evans Kidero Foundation and the Kalonzo Musyoka Foundation.
International NGO Safety Organisation (INSO), the British charity whose operating licence was suspended for sharing sensitive security information on Kenya with foreign governments, has won a reprieve after the court revoked all the notices that stopped its operations.
INSO’s precedent setting legal battle against the Kenyan government was determined in the charity’s favour after High Court judge George Odunga ruled that under Kenyan law, the NGO Co-ordination Board has no power to suspend operating licences and could therefore not purport to temporarily freeze INSO’s permits.
Justice Odunga held that Section 16 of the NGO Co-ordination Act only allows the charity organisations’ regulator to deregister parties found to be in violation of their operation permits, and that the law does not say anything about suspensions.
The NGO Co-ordination Board had in 2015 accused INSO of sharing sensitive national security information with the UK and Swiss governments as well as the European Union and withdrew its operating permit, setting the stage for the legal battle.
Kenyan authorities had also accused the British charity of employing foreigners in Kenya without work permits.
Justice Odunga’s decision throws a spanner in the works for the board, which has suspended licences of other charities.
The list of charities whose licences have been suspended in the past few months includes the Evans Kidero Foundation and the Kalonzo Musyoka Foundation.
Both charities have filed petitions in court challenging their suspension and bank accounts freeze.
“In fact according to the board, it did not deregister INSO, but simply suspended its certificate. It is, however, clear that Section 16 of the Act deals with cancellation of the certificate and not suspension thereof. Clearly therefore the board took an action that is unknown to Section 16 while purporting to be acting thereunder,” Justice Odunga ruled.
The judge argued that while the NGO Co-ordination Board’s decision may have been justified, it did not follow the law in stopping INSO’s operations, forcing him to overrule the regulator.
“Therefore by taking an action that adversely affected INSO without following the due process of the law, the board’s decision was tainted with illegality and procedural impropriety. Whereas, the board’s decision may well be justified on merits, once it is found to violate the rules of natural justice it cannot be permitted to stand,” the judge added.
INSO during the hearing admitted to sending security alerts to its partners, including foreign governments, but says it thought the government has always been aware of the “transparent” activities.
The British charity operates in several countries worldwide where it issues security alerts to other NGOs and provides them with support services to humanitarian aid workers.
The NGO Co-ordination Board in 2015 also separately instructed Barclays and Standard Chartered banks to freeze INSO’s three bank accounts before the British aid agency obtained a court order temporarily allowing it access to funds held in the accounts.
INSO said in suit papers that it has since the suspension of its licence become the subject of investigations by the Interior ministry and the CBK, adding that the NGO Co-ordination Board’s letter is a misrepresentation of its presence in Kenya.
PAYE Tax Calculator
Note: The results are not exact but very close to the actual.
