Vol. 9(4) pp. 34-50, September 2017 DOI: 10.5897/JPAPR2016.0381 Article Number: 9D418C265931 Journal of Public Administration and Policy ISSN 2141-2480 Copyright © 2017 Research Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournals.org/JPAPR Full Length Research Paper Administrative impact of restructured provincial administration on selected aspects of maintenance of law and order in Kenya in 2010 to 2014: A case study of Bomet county Josphat Safari Mutisya1*, Moses Mpuria Kindiki2 and Ambrose Kipkering Rono1 1School of Arts and Social Sciences, Maasai Mara University, Nairobi, Kenya. 2Department of Social Studies, Maasai Mara University, P. O. Box 2899-00100, Nairobi, Kenya. Received 18 May, 2017; Accepted 13 July, 2017 The aim of this study is to investigate the administrative impact of Restructured Provincial Administration (RPA) as independent variable on maintenance of law and order as dependent variable in Bomet County, Kenya from 2010 to 2014. Based on the theory of new-institutionalism, it focused on four selected aspects of maintenance of law and order measured from 2006 to 2010 and from 2010 to 2014, namely analysis of the nature and causes of crimes committed, the frequency of joint security operations on illicit brews and reasons for not conducting them, the duration of response to scenes of crimes and why and the frequency of security committees meetings and what informed them. It employed a descriptive survey design that targeted 223 respondents with a sample size of 143 from four security agencies purposively chosen namely the National Administration, the Kenya Police Service, the Administration Police Service and the National Intelligence Service. Data was collected through a questionnaire and analysis of written records. The study argues that the RPA had significant negative administrative consequences on the selected aspects in 2010 to 2014 compared to the period before. It contributed to increased personal, property and statutory crimes, the frequency of joint security operations on illicit brews dropped from weekly basis to monthly and need basis, the duration of response to scenes of crimes increased from minutes to hours, and that the frequency of security committees meetings increased to weekly and need basis from monthly and need basis. This negative administrative impact on the selected aspects is attributed to the changed command structure in the RPA, independent security institutions, inadequate resources and entry of County government of Bomet in 2013. The government should consider restructuring the four security agencies to streamline the command structure to enhance enforcement and coordination, establish a clear law and policy on liquor that is universal to all Counties to streamline joint operations on illicit brews, avail adequate resources to enhance response to scenes of crimes and fully operationalize Article 239 (5) of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 to empower security committees. Key words: Administrative impact, restructured provincial administration (RPA), maintenance of law and order, selected aspects, security agencies, periods 2006 to 2010 and 2010 to 2014, Bomet County. INTRODUCTION Public administration in common practice refers to the organization and operations of the executive branch of Mutisya et al. 35 government (Sahni and Vayunandan, 2012). It of government that adheres to the rule of law and good constitutes the public service that implements governance (Republic of Kenya, 2014b). These reforms government policies. According to Ranney (1993), it is include the 1997 Inter- Parties Parliamentary Group the obligation of any government to ensure security of its (IPPG) resolutions, the Governance, Justice, Law and people and property and enhance socio-economic and Order Sector (GJLOS) reforms of 2002, and the new political development. To achieve this objective, all Constitution of Kenya, 2010 that required restructuring of nations whatever their system of government have a the Provincial Administration to align it with the County bureaucracy responsible for the administration of the governments. internal affairs of the state and whose role and status are Restructuring of the PA is a new phenomenon in not political (ECA, 2010). Kenya, and has been implemented in 2010 to 2014, Kenya at independence in 1963 inherited a system of pursuant to Section 17 of the Sixth Schedule of the administration called Provincial Administration (PA) from Constitution of Kenya, 2010. However, the meaning and the British colonial government. It was a ‘top down’ scope of restructuring the PA elicited a lot of public system of administration with its headquarters at the debate because of different interpretations given to it by Office of the President and cascaded to all parts of the various interested parties. country. It comprised of the Provincial Commissioner Some of these parties include the new County heading a province, the District Commissioner heading a governments, the National Police Service with the Kenya district, the District Officer heading a division, the Chief Police Service and the Administration Police Service, the and the Assistant Chief heading a location and a sub defunct Provincial Administration and the general public. location respectively, up to the village elders (Bagaka, Some interpreted it to mean ‘scrapping’, ‘abolition’ or 2011; Republic of Kenya, 2014a) A key function of the ‘disbanding’ Provincial Administration. Others held the Provincial Administration before and after independence view that restructuring entails re-organizing the Provincial was maintenance of law and order. Administraton to place it under the County government so The structure of the PA also comprised of other that provincial administrators report directly to the security agents namely the Administration Police (AP), Governors to avoid a situation of parallel system of the Kenya Police (KP) and the Special Branch. These administration at the County level. were the enforcement wing of the Provincial Others interpreted that restructuring involved re- Administration. The Kenya Police structure followed that organization of the PA in terms of its functions, of the PA from top to bottom, while the Administration administrative procedures, institutional, policy and Police worked under the direct command of the provincial legislative frameworks. This group supports the retention administrators. This was provided for in the of the PA but with reforms of the institution. The fact that Administration Police Act Chapter 85 Laws of Kenya and the new constitution does not define the parameters of the Chiefs Authority Act Chapter 128, both of which are restructuring the PA explains why there are many repealed. According to Mbuba and Mugambi (2011), interpretations (Republic of Kenya, 2015b, c). these agencies worked as one intact team in Bomet County pursued the interpretation that implementing security matters under the District Security restructuring entails re-organizing the Provincial Intelligence Committee (DSIC) chaired by the District Administraton to place it under the County government so Commissioner. The armed wing executed the decisions that provincial administrators report directly to the of the DSIC without citing operational independence. Governor to avoid a situation of parallel system of As personal representatives of the President at the administration at the County level. local levels, the provincial administrators exercised This interpretation was more pronounced in the County upward accountability as they followed orders of their than in any other part of the country because of the fact seniors without question even when those orders were that Bomet County was the first one to host the Chairman detrimental to the public interest. The executive exploited of the Council of Governors for two years consecutively in this upward accountability mechanism for political 2013 to 2015. It was also favoured by the new police reasons especially during the one party, Kenya African services, which argued that the new constitution has set National Union (KANU) rule in Kenya. Consequently, the them independent of the Provincial Administration. institution was regarded as repressive and unresponsive The management and coordination of security and to peoples’ needs and advancing bad governance other national government functions were increasingly (Bagaka, 2011). constrained by the politics of devolution in Bomet County However, institutional reforms have been implemented which, apparently was indifferent to the PA in its over the years to transform the PA to an effective agency restructured form and the security agencies also seemed *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]. Author(s) agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License 36 J. Public Adm. Policy Res. entrenched in the confusion. to have limited capacity for institutional design and reform According to reports from the Bomet County and in particular for achieving intended effects of re- Commissioner’s office (2013), the Chiefs were reporting organization. However, Lufunyo (2013) argue that in any that the APs had refused to take orders from them, citing society, public sector reforms on service delivery keep on their operational independence from the new changing based on the circumstances at hand and the constitutional order. The working relationship among the goal to be achieved with those