Court suspends new KSL admission rules for trainee lawyer

The High Court in Makueni has temporarily suspended the implementation of new admission criteria for the Advocates Training Programme (ATP) for the 2027/2028 academic year, pending the hearing of a petition challenging their legality.

Justice John Onyiego issued conservatory orders restraining the Kenya School of Law (KSL) and the Council of Legal Education (CLE) from admitting or enrolling students under the disputed criteria.

The orders followed a petition by Elizabeth Achieng’ and Kioo Cha Jamii, who argue that KSL has introduced new admission pathways through an advertisement without a valid legislative or regulatory framework.

The court certified the application as urgent and directed that it be served on the respondents, who have seven days to file their responses. The matter will be heard on October 13.

At the centre of the dispute is KSL’s advertisement for admission to the ATP for the 2027/2028 academic year, which the petitioners say introduces alternative routes for law graduates who do not meet some of the traditional secondary school grade requirements but possess specified additional qualifications and/or pass a Pre-Bar Examination.

The petitioners argue that the changes amount to a substantive alteration of the statutory requirements for entry into the legal profession and could not lawfully be introduced through an annual admission advertisement.

“The 1st Respondent (KSL) has no unfettered discretion to amend, supplement or replace statutory admission requirements through an annual advertisement,” they said.

They contend that the advertisement does more than communicate existing requirements, instead creating or expanding categories of people eligible for admission to the ATP.

“The impugned advertisement is not merely an administrative notice setting out existing statutory requirements. It purports to create, alter, expand and/or operationalise substantive categories of persons eligible for admission to the ATP,” the petition states.

The petitioners further argue that any substantive changes to admission requirements must be made by the body legally empowered to do so and through the procedure prescribed by the Constitution and relevant statutes.

They have raised questions touching on legality, public participation, transparency, fair administrative action and the rule of law.

A separate petition by High Court advocate Jared Gekombe is scheduled for hearing before the High Court in Nairobi on October 7.

Mr Gekombe is challenging the same KSL advertisement and has also asked the court to suspend its implementation and the processing of applications pending determination of his petition.

He argues that the new admission criteria lack a clear statutory foundation and rely on legal education reforms and proposals that have not acquired the force of law.

His petition relies heavily on a Court of Appeal decision in which the appellate court held that the Legal Education Act provides the overarching framework for legal education and training in Kenya and considered the regulatory role of the Council for Legal Education in prescribing admission standards.

Mr Gekombe argues that no regulations prescribing the disputed ATP admission requirements have been approved, gazetted or brought into force following that decision.

“That no regulations prescribing ATP admission requirements have been approved by Parliament, enacted or brought into force pursuant to the Legal Education Act following the said Court of Appeal Decision,” he said.

Historically, admission to the ATP has been anchored on relatively high academic thresholds, including a minimum mean grade of C+ at KCSE and a minimum grade of B plain in either English or Kiswahili, among other requirements.

The petitioners argue that the new criteria represent a significant departure from those thresholds and could have implications for professional standards governing entry into the legal profession.

The dispute has also brought into focus the respective mandates of KSL and the CLE. The petitioners rely on the Court of Appeal decision to argue that the power to prescribe admission criteria for legal education programmes lies with the CLE and not KSL.

The cases come against the backdrop of ongoing reforms in legal education. A Working Committee on Legal Education Sector Reforms was established to review, among other issues, admission criteria for the ATP, regulation of legal education and professional training standards.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.