The Kenya School of Law (KSL) is in the process of checking its records to establish whether or not the revocation of a student’s admission to the Advocates Training Programme (ATP) was an administrative error, a court has heard.
The institution, through lawyer Pauline Mbuthu, told Justice Olga Sewe that it would be willing to settle the case out of court if the action was deemed to have been an administrative error.
The High Court had temporarily restrained the school and its director from revoking the admission of Mr Dennis Mucheru. The Kenya School of Law was further restrained from taking any further steps regarding the revocation of Mr Mucheru’s admission.
The court issued the orders pending the hearing of an application for conservatory orders by Mr Mucheru’s mother, Ms Elizabeth Mburu, who has filed a petition challenging the cancellation of the admission offer.
“This matter is hereby stood over to June 6 for further directions. A response, if any, to be filed before then,” Justice Sewe ruled.
Ms Mburu says in her petition filed through her lawyer Wamuti Ndegwa that the school offered her son a provisional admission offer on January 31, subjected him to the admission process and subsequently offered him full admission after which he signed a nominal roll.
She says the school, without any valid reason, decided to revoke her son’s admission on April 15, which was 38 days after he had gained full admission and had undertaken a substantial part of the programme.
Prerequisite qualifications
“It is only fair that [Mr Mucheru] be allowed to pursue his ATP having been admitted upon being established that he met all the prerequisite qualifications,” part of the petition states.
The petitioner is seeking a declaration that the revocation of her son’s admission is null and void as it disregards the principles of fair administrative action.
“Failure to halt this process would embolden the respondents [to engage in] illegal and unconstitutional ventures that contradict the fundamental principles of governance,” she says. She adds that her son risks suffering a grave miscarriage of justice and violation of his rights and fundamental freedoms.
She argues that failure to engage Mr Mucheru in a transparent and inclusive process denies him the opportunity to participate fully in a matter that affects his position and livelihood. The Council for Legal Education and the Law Society of Kenya have been named as interested parties.
