The Employment and Labour Relations Court has issued an injunction halting disciplinary proceedings against a senior manager at Unga Limited, following allegations that the company illegally accessed his private M-Pesa records.
Justice Hellen Wasilwa granted the temporary reprieve to the executive, identified in court documents as WM, after finding that the manufacturer had violated its own internal human resource policies and failed to observe the standards of procedural fairness.
The court observed that the disciplinary process appeared rushed and non-compliant with the law. “The manner in which the respondents handled this disciplinary process was indeed an indication of failure to follow their laid-down processes and the law,” Justice Wasilwa stated.
Privacy Concerns
The legal battle began after Unga Limited served WM with a suspension notice and a show-cause letter on September 15, 2025. The company accused the manager of receiving Sh449,000 from suppliers and transporters, citing mobile money transaction records as evidence.
WM moved to court to challenge the move, contending that the company obtained his financial data without his consent or a valid court order. He argued that the intrusion was a gross violation of Article 31 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to privacy.
Unga Limited, in its defense, argued that the manager’s employment contract allowed for the processing of personal data during internal investigations. The firm’s legal team maintained that as a senior employee, WM was held to a higher standard of integrity and that his actions constituted a breach of the company’s Code of Conduct.
Procedural Lapses
While the company insisted it acted on a whistleblower’s report and subsequent police investigations, the court focused on the administrative handling of the case. Justice Wasilwa noted that Unga’s own HR manual mandates a minimum of three days for an employee to respond to allegations.
However, the manager was only given 48 hours to provide a written defense and was denied an extension or access to the investigation report used against him.
“The applicant has established a prima facie case with a likelihood of success,” the judge ruled, noting that the shortened response time amounted to procedural unfairness.
Next Steps for the Firm
The court’s decision does not permanently clear the manager of the allegations but requires the company to reset the process. Justice Wasilwa noted that Unga Limited remains at liberty to initiate a fresh disciplinary hearing, provided it complies with the Data Protection Act, the Constitution, and its internal manual.
The case continues to be watched closely as a potential precedent for how corporate entities handle private digital data during internal audits and the limits of contractual clauses in the face of constitutional privacy protections.
