- A legal review has questioned a recent court decision on the Nakuru KUPPET leadership elections.
- The critique argues the court recognised constitutional concerns but failed to provide effective remedies.
- The judgment has reignited debate on judicial intervention in constitutional disputes within private organisations.
A legal critique of a recent court decision involving the leadership elections of the Nakuru branch of the Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (KUPPET) has sparked debate over the role of courts in addressing constitutional violations within private organisations.
In a review authored by Peter Kipkurui Bett, the judgment delivered by Justice James Rika in JR RONO v. KUPPET & Others is criticised for allegedly failing to provide effective remedies despite acknowledging ethnic bias in the electoral process.
According to the critique, the court correctly identified ethnic mobilisation as a major factor influencing the Nakuru KUPPET branch elections, resulting in what was described as an ethnically imbalanced outcome.
The judgment reportedly observed that teachers had adopted divisive ethnic political practices, a finding Bett argues was both factually and constitutionally sound.
However, the review questions the court’s handling of an application by the petitioner to withdraw the judicial review proceedings shortly before judgment was scheduled to be delivered.
Bett argues that while withdrawal of cases is generally permitted under civil procedure rules, disputes involving constitutional compliance and matters of public interest should not be terminated solely at the discretion of private litigants.
The critique further contends that although the court acknowledged that withdrawal was not automatic and that parties could not dictate judicial outcomes, it ultimately allowed the matter to be withdrawn and the file closed without issuing substantive orders.
According to Bett, this denied the court an opportunity to enforce constitutional principles relating to equality, inclusivity and national values.
Debate over judicial intervention
The review also challenges the court’s decision not to nullify the election results despite concerns regarding constitutional compliance.
Bett argues that the prior registration of elected officials by the Registrar of Trade Unions should not have prevented the court from declaring the electoral process unconstitutional and directing corrective measures.
According to the critique, the court could have issued declarations on the alleged constitutional breaches and ordered fresh elections while safeguarding the rights of those already elected through suspended implementation orders.
Bett concludes that although the court recognised the dangers of ethnicised union politics, it stopped short of providing meaningful remedies.
He argues that the decision could establish a precedent in which constitutional violations within associations are acknowledged but left uncorrected, potentially weakening efforts to promote inclusivity, accountability and constitutional governance in leadership elections.
READ ALSO: DP Kindiki hails President Ruto for record KSh784 billion education budget
The judgment continues to generate discussion among legal scholars and practitioners on the balance between procedural rules, public interest litigation and the enforcement of constitutional values within private organisations.
By Philip Koech
You can also follow our social media pages on Twitter: Education News KE and Facebook: Education News Newspaper for timely updates.
>>> Click here to stay up-to-date with trending regional stories
>>> Click here to read more informed opinions on the country’s education landscape
