High Court Rules Parts of Kenya’s Bursary System Unconstitutional

The High Court has delivered a major ruling that could change how education bursaries are distributed across Kenya.

The court declared that key parts of the country’s current bursary allocation system are unconstitutional, saying they unfairly disadvantage vulnerable and needy students who depend on financial assistance to continue with their education.

In its landmark judgment, the court found that Kenya lacks a coordinated national system for tracking bursary and scholarship beneficiaries.

According to the judges, the absence of a central database has created serious gaps in the management of public education funds, allowing unfair distribution of bursaries and denying many deserving students the support they need.

The court also criticized the current bursary framework for having inconsistent eligibility requirements and weak monitoring systems.

It noted that different institutions use different criteria when selecting beneficiaries, making the entire process less transparent and increasing the risk of favoritism, duplication, and misuse of public funds.

While delivering the judgment, the court stated that the lack of a coordinated national database for tracking bursary and scholarship allocations, the absence of a transparent needs-assessment mechanism, and weak oversight of bursary funds managed by the National Government Constituencies Development Fund (NG-CDF) and county governments raise serious constitutional concerns.

The judges said these shortcomings violate Articles 10, 27, 53, and 201 of the Constitution, which promote national values, equality, protection of children’s rights, and responsible use of public resources.

The case was filed by former Kiambu Governor Ferdinand Waititu, who challenged the country’s fragmented approach to financing basic education.

He sued the Cabinet Secretary for Education and several other state agencies, arguing that the existing bursary system has failed to ensure fairness and equal access to education funding.

In his petition, Waititu questioned the way bursaries are administered through the Ministry of Education, NG-CDF, county governments, and other public institutions.

He argued that these agencies operate independently without proper coordination, resulting in an unfair system where some learners benefit from multiple bursaries while many equally deserving students receive no assistance at all.

The petitioner further claimed that the fragmented structure has opened the door to political influence, favoritism, and abuse of public resources.

According to him, bursaries should be distributed based on genuine financial need rather than political connections or administrative loopholes.

Justice Bahati Mwamuye, who presided over the case, ruled that although Kenya’s overall model for funding basic education is not entirely unconstitutional, the way it is currently implemented violates important constitutional principles.

He said the existing system fails to uphold fairness, transparency, accountability, and equal treatment of all learners.

The judge pointed out that Kenya currently has no single national database that records all students receiving bursaries and scholarships from different government agencies.

As a result, authorities cannot easily determine who has already received financial support and who still requires assistance.

Justice Mwamuye observed that without a centralized tracking system, one student may receive funding from several different sources while another equally needy student receives nothing simply because there is no mechanism to identify, compare, and prioritize applicants across the various bursary programs.

He said this situation leads to unequal distribution of public funds and undermines the objective of supporting the most deserving learners.

The court also expressed concern over the governance of NG-CDF bursary committees. Justice Mwamuye noted that Members of Parliament currently have significant influence over the appointment of Constituency Oversight Committee members, giving them excessive control over the bursary allocation process.

According to the judge, allowing MPs to appoint committee members without sufficient independent oversight weakens checks and balances.

This arrangement increases the risk of political interference, making education bursaries vulnerable to manipulation and reducing public confidence in the fairness of the system.

Although the petitioner had asked the court to compel the government to establish a National Basic Education Fund, Justice Mwamuye declined to issue such an order.

However, the court made it clear that the government has a constitutional duty to address the weaknesses identified in the current bursary system.

The ruling is expected to have significant implications for the future management of education funding in Kenya.

It places pressure on both the national and county governments to introduce reforms that will improve transparency, strengthen oversight, establish a centralized bursary database, and ensure that financial assistance reaches the students who need it most rather than being influenced by politics or administrative inefficiencies.

Join TUKO KADI Official WhatsApp Channel to stay updated on time
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaWT5gSGufImU8R0DO30