The High Court of Kenya has rejected a request to stop media reporting on the Moi Kabarak School vape case, ruling that gagging the press would violate Article 50 of the Constitution.
HS Law Advocates LLP, the representative of Moi Kabarak, had urged the court to restrict media access to the case.
“My Lord, I pray that whatever directions the court may give is that we have a media guard to the extent that this matter is only prosecuted before yourself.”
However, Justice John Chigiti noted that while the child’s identity must remain undisclosed under Article 31, media coverage of the proceedings cannot be restricted.
The oral application to guard the media has been declined. Second, a gag order cannot be issued against unnamed media houses in the world. Such an order, if issued, will offend Article 50 of the Constitution.” Said Justice Chigiti.
Court Orders Readmission of Moi Kabarak Student Involved in Vape Case
The court, while confirming compliance with its earlier orders directing the unconditional readmission of the student, noted that the school had not yet readmitted him.
According to advocate Danstan Omari, the family representative, the student had not been readmitted when he was taken to school.
Omari said the father, who pays the school fees, wants his child back at the school.
“The father who is the applicant in this matter is the one who pays school fees.He’s the one who has the child. He wants his child back at the prestigious Kabarak High School. What counsel is not being told by his clients is the instructions the principal has given,” said Omari.
Also Read: High Court Sentences Nicholas Macharia to Death for Killing Minor
He added that any attempt by the school or its counsel to circumvent the court’s instructions would amount to contempt of court.
Earlier, on March 12, 2026, the High Court ordered Moi Kabarak to unconditionally readmit the Form Four student expelled over alleged possession of a vape.
The court also instructed the applicant to file a supplementary affidavit by 5 p.m. on March 12, 2026, and required submissions from both parties to address a Notice of Preliminary Objection raised in the case.
Moi Kabarak Defends Suspension
Moi Kabarak previously defended its disciplinary action against the Form Four student accused of bringing a vape into the school, telling the court that proper disciplinary procedures were followed.
The school, together with its Board of Management, filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection arguing that the case filed against them should be struck out because the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the dispute at this stage.
They argued that the matter ought first to have been taken before the Education Appeals Tribunal, as provided under the Basic Education Act No. 14 of 2013.
According to the respondents, Section 85 of the Act allows any person aggrieved by decisions of education authorities to appeal to the tribunal, while Section 93 establishes the tribunal to determine disputes arising from the administration of basic education.
Also Read: Judiciary Explains Why Court Dismissed Tuju’s Bid to Stop Property Auction
Through lawyers from HS Law Advocates LLP, they also cited Section 9 of the Fair Administrative Action Act, which requires parties to exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms before bringing a case to court.
In a replying affidavit filed in court, the Deputy Principal in charge of Administration at Moi Kabarak, Richard Rono, revealed to the court that the school received credible reports on February 12, 2026, that the student had brought an electronic cigarette (vape) into the school.
He said the device is associated with smoking substances, and its possession violates school rules on drugs and smoking.
Following the report, the school’s discipline department launched preliminary investigations that established the student had brought the vape device into the dormitory.
