Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) &179; others v Teachers Service Commission & another; Kenya National Union of Teachers (Interested Party) [2019] KEELRC 1704 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's High Court refused to expand the judges hearing a teachers' rights case, saying the issues were straightforward and needed a quick decision, not delay.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Petition raises a substantial question of law under Article 165(4) of the Constitution
The Petition does not warrant certification for empanelment of an uneven number of judges
The court accepted that questions of constitutional interpretation are of great importance, but held that the issues in this Petition concern employee rights and employer duties and are not complex. The court also weighed the delay already suffered: the Petition was filed in October 2018 and the application in February 2019, and further empanelment would delay resolution of the teachers' plight. The certification power is discretionary and must be exercised judiciously in the interest of substantive justice and timely, cost-affordable disposal under the Constitutional Rules.
Whether the application should be refused in light of delay and the need for timely justice
The application was refused, partly because allowing it would further delay the Petition
The court noted the Petition was filed under certificate of urgency in October 2018 and over six months had lapsed without a comprehensive solution to the plight of teachers and students in Northern Kenya. Rule 3(3) of the Constitution of Kenya (Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) Practice and Procedure Rules, 2013 requires petitions to be determined in a timely and cost-affordable manner, and Rule 15 sets strict timelines for responses. Time is therefore of the essence, and empanelment would take the parties further behind while the situation of children and teachers remained unresolved.
Legal principles established
#- Not every question concerning interpretation of the Constitution or constitutional rights automatically warrants certification and empanelment under Article 165(4); the issues must be complex and the discretionary power is exercised judiciously against the need for timely disposal
- Certification under Article 165(4) requires that the matter be of general public importance, directly and substantially affect the rights of the parties, not be finally settled by the Supreme Court, not be free from difficulty, or call for discussion of alternative views
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 18th February 2019 seeking certification under Article 165(4) of the Constitution is dismissed
- 2.Costs in the cause
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Articles 156(5) & (6), 163(3)(d) of the Constitution; Section 6(2)(a) of the Office of the Attorney-General Act; Article 165(4) of the Constitution (certification sought)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) &179; others v Teachers Service Commission & another; Kenya National Union of Teachers (Interested Party) [2019] KEELRC 1704 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2019). Petition filed October 2018 (Application dated 18th February 2019). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2019/1704/eng@2019-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.