The High Court on Thursday, October 31, upheld the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) directive on the stipend rate for medical interns set at Ksh 70,000.
The ruling dismissed five petitions that sought to overturn SRC’s decision on grounds of discrimination and alleged overreach.
Additionally, the Court found that SRC acted within its constitutional authority and that its actions were justified by budgetary realities and the unique nature of internship training programmes.
“With regard to petition No. 3 of 2024 the Petitioners sought orders declaring the Respondents advise of 13th March 2024 REF: SRC/TS/19(111) setting the remuneration for healthcare professional interns at a maximum of Kshs. 70,000 to be contrary to Articles 27, 41(5), 230(4)(b) and (5)(d) as read with sections 12, 13(c) and (d), and 15 of the Salaries and Remuneration Commission Act and sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 17 of the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (Remuneration and Benefits of State and Public Officers) Regulations, 2013 and Article 4 of the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 and the quashing of the letter and subsequent letters of employment issued by the 2nd and 3rd Interested Parties for being discriminatory,” red the ruling in part.
“As I have found above, the letter dated 13th March 2024 from SRC was an advisory to the Ministry of Health and did not violate any of the provisions cited by the Petitioners.”
Also Read: Meet Accomplished Kenyan Medic Elected as World Medical Association President
The consolidated petitions, filed by healthcare interns and related professional bodies, argued that SRC’s decision to set standard stipend rates was unconstitutional, claiming it created disparities between medical and non-medical healthcare interns and disregarded previously established remuneration structures.
However, the court’s ruling reaffirmed SRC’s authority to determine remuneration rates for public service interns based on budgetary constraints and fiscal sustainability.
“The High Court found that SRC acted within its constitutional authority, and its actions were justified by budgetary realities and the unique nature of internship training programmes,” the court ruled.
“Discrimination, as defined under Article 27 of the Constitution, applies only when individuals in comparable circumstances are treated differently without reasonable justification. The court ruled that SRC’s stipend directives, given the financial context, were lawful and not discriminatory.”
Also Read: Hundreds of Graduates Stranded as Govt Agency Cancels Internship
The petitions filed following SRC’s directive of 13 March 2024, alleged that SRC had failed to consult stakeholders adequately, ignored prior stipend levels, and created disparities among healthcare interns.
SRC argued that differences in stipend levels among healthcare interns are justifiable and based on economic realities, rather than discriminatory intent.
Lady Justice Maurine Onyango maintained that SRC stated that the reduced stipend was necessitated by the budget constraints following advice from Treasury.
“It was necessary because the funds available were not sufficient to pay the new cohort at the same rate as the previous cohort,” she said.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and join our WhatsApp Group for real-time news updates.
