Lawyer Danstan Omari has urged High Court to put in place transitional measures to safeguard the education and welfare of about 1,800 pupils at Gatoto School following the institution’s transition from public to private ownership. He told Court that the ownership change could disrupt learning if urgent measures are not taken to address the status of teachers, support staff, examinations, school feeding programmes and government-funded infrastructure. Omari raised concerns over the impending transition, arguing that the immediate priority should be protecting the best interests of the children in line with Article 53 of the Constitution, which guarantees every child the right to basic education.
The court was informed that the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) was expected to withdraw teachers from the institution following its transition to private ownership. The court was asked to consider allowing the teachers, including the school’s management and teaching staff, to remain temporarily to ensure continuity of learning.
Another concern raised was the dissolution of the school’s Board of Management, which previously oversaw the institution while it operated as a public school. The court heard that the board was responsible for hiring support staff who handle essential services such as cleaning, administration and management of school facilities, including buses.
He also raised concerns over the school’s examination status. The new private institution is reportedly not registered as a national examination centre, prompting a request for directions to the Kenya National Examinations Council (KNEC) to either extend the existing examination centre or register the school as a centre. The court was further told that the transition could create complications concerning assessments already undertaken by the pupils under the previous public-school system. Under the Competency-Based Curriculum, assessment is continuous, and concerns were raised over the custody and transfer of pupils’ assessment records following the change in ownership.
The court also heard that government-funded infrastructure, including a bus donated through the Constituency Development Fund and furniture purchased using public resources, could no longer remain in the institution once it becomes privately owned.
Another major concern was the government’s school feeding programme, which has been supporting pupils at the institution. The court was told that the change in ownership could affect the programme because government support is structured around public schools. The parties urged the court to consider orders allowing the feeding programme to continue to ensure pupils are not affected by the ownership dispute. Concerns were also raised over the provision of sanitary towels to girls and other government-supported services previously available to the pupils.
The lawyer urged the new owners to provide the court with a clear roadmap showing how they intend to manage the transition and ensure that pupils are not denied access to education or essential services. He warned that without clear transitional arrangements, pupils could report to school on Monday only to encounter uncertainty over fees, teachers, learning materials and other basic services.
The court was told that if the new management had secured donor funding to cover school fees for the pupils, it should disclose the arrangement to reassure the court that no child would be sent away from school. The lawyer urged the court to focus on the welfare of the children rather than the competing interests of the parties involved in the ownership dispute. “There are no private children in this country,” the lawyer told the court, stressing that constitutional protections apply to every child regardless of whether they attend a public or private institution. He described the transition from public to private ownership as a novel issue requiring practical transitional arrangements to prevent disruption of learning.
The court questioned whether the transition would necessarily result in the dire consequences outlined by the lawyer, noting that some institutions had previously operated under different ownership arrangements. The lawyer maintained that the specific circumstances at Gatoto presented unique logistical challenges that required an immediate solution. With approximately 1,800 pupils expected to report to school, the court was urged to develop a workable formula before Monday to ensure a seamless transition.
The lawyer appealed to all parties to put aside their differences and work towards a solution that would allow the pupils to continue learning without disruption. He asked the court to consider transitional orders addressing the teachers, support staff, examination registration, assessments, feeding programme, learning materials and government-funded infrastructure.
The case highlights the complex challenges that can arise when an institution serving hundreds of children moves from public to private ownership, with the court now being asked to balance the implementation of its ownership orders with the constitutional right of the pupils to uninterrupted education.
