In a significant legal decision, the High Court in Nairobi has ruled against the government’s directive requiring parents to pay school fees through the eCitizen platform. The court found that the policy had no legal foundation and imposed an unfair financial burden on parents.
Justice Chacha Mwita, who presided over the case, ruled that the directive was unconstitutional, irrational, and lacked justification. The directive, issued by former Education Principal Secretary Belio Kipsang on January 31, 2024, required all payments for government learning institutions to be made exclusively via the digital platform.
The court further ruled that the additional Sh50 convenience fee amounted to an unlawful double charge. “People cannot be forced to use a system they did not ask for and be made to sustain it by paying an extra charge,” Justice Mwita stated. He also noted that there was no transparency regarding who would receive the extra fees or how they would be utilized, making the policy legally indefensible.
The case was brought forward by Nakuru-based surgeon Dr. Benjamin Magare-Gikenyi, who argued that the decision to compel parents, guardians, and students to use the platform was made without public participation and disregarded statutory and constitutional safeguards.
The ruling also raised concerns about data security, with Justice Mwita pointing out that using eCitizen for school fee payments posed a risk to users’ personal information. He emphasized that compelling parents to use an online system without guaranteeing their data protection was a violation of their rights.
Moreover, the judge highlighted the discriminatory nature of the directive, acknowledging that many parents lack internet access, mobile phones, or rely on in-kind payments. “The directive causes potential indirect discrimination,” he remarked.
In response to the ruling, an order of prohibition was issued, barring the Cabinet Secretaries for the Treasury, ICT, and Education, as well as their agents, from enforcing or supporting the directive in any manner. This decision ensures that parents retain the freedom to choose their preferred method of payment.
While President William Ruto had defended the platform’s use as a means to curb illegal levies in schools, critics argued that the directive unfairly restricted parents’ options and disproportionately affected low-income families.
With the court’s decision, schools must now return to previous payment methods, allowing parents the flexibility to pay through traditional bank deposits, mobile money transfers, or direct cash payments, as had been the norm before the directive was introduced.
This landmark ruling underscores the importance of public participation in policymaking and ensures that government directives align with constitutional provisions that safeguard fairness, transparency, and inclusivity in the education sector.
