By Billy Mijungu
The current push and pull between the Police Service Commission and the National Police Service over who should control the standard payroll raises important questions about accountability, fairness and the future of our security institutions. At the heart of the matter lies a simple question: if the Police Service Commission is already the official employer through its authority over recruitment, why should it not manage the payroll as well?
There should be no controversy if there is no hidden motive. Recruitment has already been placed firmly in the hands of the Commission. It is now widely accepted that this step was a bold move towards professionalism, fairness and merit-based entry into the service. Extending this logic, payroll management should naturally rest with the same body. After all, an employer who recruits is best placed to handle salaries, promotions and welfare matters. Splitting these roles only breeds duplication, delays and unnecessary internal wars.
Those resisting this change should be asked what exactly they fear. If the Commission is tasked with standardising and managing payroll, the majority of police officers, who make up the real muscle of the service, stand to benefit. Salary delays, arbitrary deductions and inconsistencies would reduce significantly. Transparency and predictability would become the norm rather than the exception. The top leadership may resist because of the fear of losing control, but for the ordinary police officer, this reform offers hope.
Other constitutional commissions offer a clear example of how payroll management aligns with employment authority. The Teachers Service Commission not only recruits teachers but also handles their payroll and promotions. The Judicial Service Commission is empowered to oversee judicial officers’ terms and remuneration. The Public Service Commission retains similar authority across the wider civil service. These commissions are not only employers but custodians of salaries and benefits, ensuring that human resource functions remain in one place.
It is therefore curious why the National Police Service should be treated differently. The argument that the police service is too sensitive or too large for the Commission to handle does not hold water. Teachers number in the hundreds of thousands and the Teachers Service Commission manages them efficiently. The Judiciary is the custodian of justice itself, yet its payroll is not placed in the hands of judges but in the commission tasked with oversight. Why then should the police remain an outlier?
Kenya has come of age in governance. Institutions must evolve beyond personalities and power struggles. The growth of the police service depends on reforms that entrench professionalism, transparency and fairness. Allowing the Police Service Commission to manage payroll is not a loss to the National Police Service but a gain for the men and women in uniform who keep watch over the country every day.
It is time to stop resisting change for the sake of protecting fiefdoms. Payroll management by the Commission is the logical next step in reforming the police service. It is time to grow, it is time to move.
