Student expelled over vape wins temporary reinstatement in court

A student who was expelled from school after being found with an electronic cigarette has won temporary reinstatement following a High Court order.

In a ruling delivered on Thursday, Judge Lawrence Mugambi directed that the learner, identified by the initials AOA, be conditionally readmitted to the school while the court considers his petition challenging the expulsion.

The ruling temporarily suspends the expulsion until the main case is heard.

AOA was first suspended indefinitely on January 20, 2026, and later expelled on February 9, 2026, after electronic cigarettes, commonly known as vapes, were discovered in his school bag.

The school also accused him of skipping clubs and societies, which was against school rules.

Although the facts of the incident were not in dispute, the student argued that the school’s disciplinary process was flawed.

“This factual account is not disputed; nevertheless, the petitioner challenges whether the disciplinary procedure followed the Basic Education Act, its regulations, and the school’s own student behaviour policy,” the judge said.

The school opposed the petition, claiming that AOA had other legal options, such as appealing to the Education Appeals Tribunal or filing a judicial review.

However, the court rejected this argument, noting that under Article 23 of the Constitution, a constitutional petition is a valid way to seek enforcement of fundamental rights, including the right to education.

The court also found that there was no evidence that the case had been forwarded to the County Director of Education, as required under regulations.

The Education Appeals Tribunal, the judge observed, only handles appeals arising from decisions made by the County Director, and in this case, no such decision had been made.

The court further noted that the student had been out of school for more than 50 days, raising concerns over his right to education under Article 53 of the Constitution.

"The absence of the county director reports before the drastic action of expression was undertaken demonstrates that the petitioner established an arguable case concerning the propriety of process which implicates his right of access to education," Justice Mugambi stated.

The judge emphasised that while schools have a duty to maintain discipline, disciplinary measures must follow legal procedures and constitutional safeguards to ensure fairness.

"The court is very much aware of the need to maintain the equilibrium between the minor's right of access to education, with the respondent's duty to enforce discipline in the school so as to provide a conducive learning environment for the rest of the pupils and the school community at large," the judge said.

However, the court noted that while the school was justified in taking disciplinary action, it must strictly follow the procedures laid out in the law and the school’s own policies to ensure fairness and prevent any injustice.

 Further, the judge affirmed that the law requires that a student be given a chance to correct their behaviour before expulsion.

The court’s order allows AOA to return to school while the petition is ongoing, with any further orders to be decided after the main hearing.