Student lawyers sue CLE over credibility of April bar tests released in July

Controversy has rocked an examination body for student lawyers in Kenya.

Over 200 law students have sued the Council for Legal Education (CLE) over the credibility of the April 2024 exam results released in July.

They allege several profligacies in the administration of the tests, including ‘curiously’ releasing the results on July 9 via the students’ portals but on the same day pulled them down without notice.

‘New’ results were then uploaded but were different from the ones uploaded during the first time.

To be an advocate of the High Court, one needs to have completed a law degree from a recognised university and then obtain a postgraduate diploma in law from the Kenya School of Law (KSL).

To get the KSL diploma, one takes classes under the Advocates Training Programme (ATP).

At KSL, they then do a project and oral exams which account for 40 per cent of the total marks.

The remaining 60 per cent comes from exam results of nine units which are examined and marked by CLE.

The exams are offered twice a year in November and in April.

To sit the nine units, a student pays Sh5,000 for each.

In the event of failure and one is not satisfied with the results, they can apply for a remark which costs Sh15,000.

To re-sit a failed unit, one pays Sh10,000.

The fight by the 211 petitioners is over failed units and the failure by CLE to give them access to their answer booklets.

“The petitioners had varying marks between the different series/batches of the released results, raw marks that ranged between a pass and fail in their respective units that they had sat for a re-sit,” they say in the petition.

“A couple of the petitioners had a fail on units that they had already passed units, the affected candidates had not sat for re-sits in the said units, as they were not subject to a re-sit.”

On their part, CLE did not respond to the petition, instead, the institution filed a preliminary objection saying the case had been filed in the wrong court.

The council added that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and wanted it heard by the Legal Education Appeals Tribunal.

In their suit, the students argue that requiring one to pay more money for a re-sit or a remark amounts to extortion.

“The CLE by inhibiting the petitioner’s attainment of the 50 per cent pass mark, by having a policy of not computing their oral and project work marks in the re-sit examinations further violates the national values of non-discrimination, equity, equality, inclusiveness and social justice.”

They want a notice by CLE calling for the application of remark for the April bar exams suspended and CLE ordered not to meddle with the exam booklets and avail them for perusal and comparison.

The students want CLE to avail marking schemes and for the institution to be barred from further tampering with the results.

“That the process of scrutiny and verification will only be possible and efficient if the marking schemes for all the 9 units of the April 2024 Advocates Training Programme Bar exam are also availed in this court.”

In their application, they say that the exam results were marred by a lack of transparency and that the council failed to release credible or verifiable results.

They allege the actions by the council amount to maladministration and mismanagement of the ATP 2024 bar exams which violate the constitution and rule of law.

They call it a violation of their right to education, social and economic rights as well as fair administrative action.

The students fault the council’s requirement for one to produce a court order to be allowed access to their exam booklets.

They accuse CLE of failure to uphold good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability as required by the constitution.

“That the sequential change of individual students’ raw marks hours after official release of the results vide the CLE’s General Notice No.16 of 2024 in their respective student portals as the day of 9th July progressed, casts a legitimate concern of maladministration, lack of integrity and transparency and accountability in the administration of the April 2024 bar examination.”

They accuse CLE of failing to communicate about the change of marks for different student’s portals hours after the release of the said results.