Tribunal quashes Sasha Mutai’s suspension as KRU chief
The board was accused of non-compliance with procedures which put the age-old federation in bad light
Embattled Kenya Rugby Union Chairperson Sasha Mutai has gotten reprieve by the Sports Disputes Tribunal (SDT) after his suspension by the Board as happened in February was quashed.
The SDT in its ruling had huge misgivings about operational order and constitutional violations by the Kenya Rugby Union (KRU) board even as it reinstalled Mutai to his position forthwith. The ruling, delivered this week, showed a worrying trend of internal wrangles afflicting sporting organisations in the country with governance structures lacking. The KRU board was accused of non-compliance with procedures which put the age-old federation in bad light.
The dispute emanated from controversial board meeting held on March 6 during which Mutai was suspended following a motion of no confidence. The tribunal found that the meeting was convened in breach of Article 10.16.2 of the KRU Constitution, which mandates that only the Chair or in his absence, the Vice-Chair can call a board meeting, and only after a proper 14-day notice period following a requisition.
“The notice was issued on March 5 for a meeting the following day. No persuasive reason was given to justify this blatant disregard of the Constitution,” the Tribunal ruling said in part.
The process was thus found to be “procedurally flawed, unduly restrictive, and inadequate,” ultimately rendering the decision to suspend Mutai “illegal, null, and void.”
KRU board argued that Mutai overlooked internal dispute resolution mechanisms and prematurely took the matter to the Tribunal. However, the SDT dismissed this objection, pointing out that that the mechanisms in place lacked independence and fairness, especially when the aggrieved party was expected to appeal to the very board that suspended him.
The tribunal, however, declined to grant a permanent injunction preventing any future motions of no confidence, stating that such a request was against the spirit of democratic governance. It further recommended urgent constitutional and structural reforms to plug gaps in decision-making, transparency, and accountability.
The tribunal noted with concern that some of the grounds cited in the attempt to oust Mutai, echoed a previous case involving the same parties hinting at deeper, unresolved divisions.
It warned that KRU risks “season after season of internal power struggles instead of rugby development.”
