Arson fears do not give school heads the right to suspend and punish students collectively, the High Court has ruled, quashing the suspension of four students at State House Girls High School over an alleged plot to burn the institution.
The court said a genuine and credible security threat facing learners cannot be used as a blanket excuse to punish students without evidence.
It ruled that each suspension must be backed by facts linking the individual learner to the alleged wrongdoing, warning that students cannot be punished merely because they were part of a group associated with a disciplinary incident.
The court faulted State House Girls High School for suspending all 15 learners who visited the dispensary when the alleged arson discussion took place, rather than identifying those actually involved in the alleged plan.
They were suspended on June 5, 2026, and ordered to appear before the school’s Board of Management with their parents on June 15.
“Being at the dispensary when the discussion happened, without more, does not establish any basis for suspending the Applicants,” Justice Nabil Orina said.
Four students, identified in the judgment only by initials because they are minors, challenged the decision in court. They were in Grade 10 and Form Three.
The applicants asked the court to cancel the suspensions, stop the scheduled disciplinary process and ensure that statements taken before the suspension were not used against them. They said the school had acted before identifying those actually involved in the alleged plan.
The case arose after a student allegedly told the school matron on June 4 that a group was discussing plans to set parts of the institution on fire that night.
High Court ruled that arson fears do not give school heads the right to suspend and punish students collectively.
Photo credit: File
The report allegedly named one learner as the ringleader and identified a house and part of a hostel used as a mattress store as possible targets.
The school said the report triggered urgent questioning by an ad hoc disciplinary committee. During the inquiry, officials said they learnt that an unauthorized meeting had taken place earlier at the school dispensary. The school nurse supplied a list of 15 students who had been there.
All 15 were questioned, statements were taken, and the principal suspended them pending further investigations and a hearing. The school defended the action as necessary to protect more than 1,000 learners and staff from a potentially deadly fire.
The students challenged both the suspension and the manner in which the inquiry was conducted. They said the matron summoned them at about 11.30pm, kept them waiting for hours and subjected them to questioning that continued beyond 2.30am.
They also complained that some statements were destroyed when they failed to reflect what the disciplinary committee wanted, and that the suspension letters did not give enough detail about the accusations.
Justice Orina rejected the argument that the late-night questioning, by itself, breached the students’ rights. He acknowledged the serious security situation in schools and said authorities had to act quickly where they believed learners faced imminent danger.
The dormitory at Utumishi Girls Senior school that caught fire, killing scores of students while others are nursing serious injuries.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
The court referred to the unrest in other schools and the deaths of 16 learners at Utumishi Girls Academy after a dormitory fire. The court said protecting students during that period was “non-negotiable”.
“The practical considerations within which the ad hoc committee operated did not give the first respondent (School principal) a carte blanche,” the judge said.
He held that schools have power to discipline learners, but must exercise it lawfully, reasonably and fairly. A suspension, even before a final disciplinary decision, must have sufficient grounds and comply with education regulations.
State House Girls High School. High Court faulted the school for suspending all 15 learners who visited the dispensary when an alleged arson discussion took place at the institution.
Photo credit: File
The judge found that the material presented to the court did not show that the four students had participated in the alleged arson plan. Their presence at the dispensary was the link relied upon by the school.
One student said she walked away when talk of a strike began. Another said she was only reporting what she had heard, while her participation in the alleged scheme remained unclear.
“Suspending an entire group of students who had visited the dispensary at the material time for the indiscipline of a few is tantamount to collective or group punishment,” Justice Orina ruled.
He said the decision lacked a logical connection to the facts relied upon and was therefore open to judicial review.
The judge quashed the suspension letters dated June 5. He said the school’s disciplinary powers remained intact, but they had to be exercised on evidence connecting each learner to the alleged misconduct.
