The High Court has temporarily blocked the Kenya Medical Practitioners and Dentists Council from expanding the scope of practice for community oral health officers.

The publication whose implementation was blocked sought to allow non-dentist officers to provide advanced dental care services.

Justice Patricia Nyaundi of the Constitutional and Human Rights Division issued conservatory orders pending the hearing and determination of a petition filed by Dr Kahura Mundia, Dr Arnold Malit and Dr Mildred Mavindu, officials of the Kenya Dental Association.

The petitioners challenged a publication dated July 21 and posted on the council’s website, arguing that it purported to expand the scope of practice for non-dentist community oral health officers to provide advanced dental care services reserved for general and specialist dentists.

They asked the court to stop the council, its officers, agents or anyone acting under its authority from implementing, enforcing or relying on the publication.

They also sought preservation of the existing legal and regulatory framework governing dentistry pending determination of the petition.

The court heard two applications seeking to join other parties to the case. The Oral Health Association of Kenya sought to be joined as the second respondent, while the Consumers Federation of Kenya (Cofek) sought to be joined as a third interested party.

Justice Nyaundi declined the applications in their original form.

The judge ruled that the Oral Health Association did not meet the threshold for joinder as a respondent because there was no allegation that it had denied, violated, infringed or threatened to violate any right or fundamental freedom.

However, she found that the outcome of the petition could directly affect the association’s members and the interests it seeks to advance. She therefore joined it as the second interested party.

The court rejected Cofek’s application, applying Supreme Court principles requiring an applicant to demonstrate a clear and proximate interest, possible prejudice and relevant submissions that do not merely duplicate those of other parties.

Justice Nyaundi noted that the Law Society of Kenya had been joined as an interested party and that Cofek had not demonstrated with sufficient particularity how its proposed submissions would differ from or materially add to those already before the court.

On the conservatory orders, the judge said the dispute raised questions of public interest concerning the regulation of dental practice and the scope of professional authority.

“The dispute raises questions of public interest concerning the regulation of dental practice and the scope of professional authority pending determination of the petition. In the circumstances, justice is best served by preserving the existing position,” she said.

The court, however, limited the order to the part of the publication that expands the scope of practice of non-dentist community oral health officers.

The final orders disallowed the applications dated July 27 and July 29, joined the Oral Health Association of Kenya as the second interested party and restrained the council, its officers, agents or anyone acting under its authority from implementing, enforcing or relying on the publication to the extent that it expands the scope of practice of non-dentist community oral health workers.

The court ordered each party to bear its own costs.

There was no appearance by the parties.