The petitioners argued that section 12(a) of the Advocates Act, limiting their admission to the Roll of Advocates, was unconstitutional for excluding South Sudan citizens, violating equal treatment rights based on EAC membership. They emphasized international and domestic instruments ensuring equal education for refugees. The first respondent's decision to bar the petitioners from exams and withhold results was deemed a violation, constituting discrimination due to refugee status. The exclusion of South Sudan from eligible countries under section 12(a) was held discriminatory, disadvantaging the petitioners. The court ordered the amendment of the discriminatory provision to align with the Kenyan Constitution, acknowledging violations of domestic and international obligations.
Unequal treatment, exclusion from statute, right to education
The petitioners were citizens of South Sudan and registered refugees in Kenya. They were initially barred from taking final exams in the Advocate Training Programme. Despite obtaining a conservatory order allowing them to write exams, the first respondent denied access to their results. The petitioners secured a court order for result release. They sought a declaratory order, asserting the invalidity of section 12(a) of the Advocates Act, which excludes them from Kenyan Roll admission. The petitioners also challenged decisions regarding their admission. They argued that there was a violation of constitutional or international obligations in their treatment under the Advocates Act.
The court ordered that section 12(a) of the Advocates Act should be amended to be in line with the Constitution of Kenya.
Section 12(a) of the Advocates Act discriminated against citizens of South Sudan by excluding them from being admitted to the Kenyan Roll under the Act.