Kenya – Moi High School Kabarak has defended its suspension of a Form Four student accused of bringing an electronic cigarette (vape) into the school, stating that proper disciplinary procedures were followed.
The school and its Board of Management filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection arguing that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case at this stage.
They assert that disputes over disciplinary actions should first be brought before the Education Appeals Tribunal, as provided under the Basic Education Act No. 14 of 2013.
"The applicant has bypassed the statutory framework and improperly invoked the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court," the school argued through lawyers from HS Law Advocates LLP.
The school also cited the Fair Administrative Action Act, which requires exhaustion of internal dispute resolution mechanisms before approaching the courts.
Additionally, they noted that the student had voluntarily withdrawn from school before the disciplinary process concluded, rendering parts of the suit moot.
Disciplinary Process Followed
According to a court affidavit by the Deputy Principal in charge of Administration, Richard Rono, the student was admitted on January 10, 2024, and placed in Form Four, Class C, Athi House.
On February 12, 2026, credible reports indicated the student had brought a vape device into the dormitory, violating school rules on drugs and smoking.
The school issued a temporary suspension pending investigation, with a disciplinary hearing scheduled for February 24, 2026, which the student and his mother attended.
The student admitted in writing that he had purchased the vape near Capital Centre in Nairobi and brought it to school.
Court Orders Readmission
Despite the school’s objection, the High Court last week ordered that the student, identified as M.L.A, be immediately readmitted pending the hearing of the case.
"Respondents are hereby directed to forthwith readmit M.L.A into class unconditionally," Justice John Chigiti ordered in interim orders issued on March 4, 2026.
The applicant’s lawyer, Danstan Omari, contends that excluding the student violates his constitutional and statutory right to education.
The school now seeks to have the case struck out, maintaining that the matter should first go through the statutory education dispute resolution framework.
Tags
Education