Court Backs UoN Shift to Physical Exams for Evening Law Students

The High Court has upheld the University of Nairobi’s decision to shift examinations for its Bachelor of Laws (LLB) Module II Evening Programme from online to physical sittings, citing widespread cheating concerns and the need to safeguard the credibility of academic assessments.

In a petition filed by 39 class representatives, the students challenged the abrupt withdrawal of online examinations, arguing that the move was unlawful, unreasonable and undertaken without public participation.

They told the court that they had enrolled specifically because the programme was offered through online distance learning, which enabled them to balance work and studies.

The first petitioner, Leonard Omondi Aluko, warned that the change could have far-reaching consequences.

“The abrupt decision to change the mode of examinations may force some students to drop out of law school,” Aluko stated in his court filings.

However, the university defended the move, saying online examinations had been introduced as a temporary Covid-19 intervention and were never meant to be permanent. It further cited mounting concerns from academic staff over examination malpractices, including cheating and plagiarism.

The respondents told the court that “numerous reports of cheating and plagiarism were documented and reported by academic staff,” prompting the faculty to revert to physical examinations as provided for under university regulations.

A key issue for determination was whether the Faculty Academic Committee acted beyond its mandate by authorising the change. The students argued that only the University Senate had the authority to alter examination policy, with faculties limited to making recommendations.

But the university countered that its charter permits the delegation of such powers to faculties and departments, including determining modes of assessment.

In his ruling, the judge sided with the university, finding that the faculty acted within its lawful authority.

“The faculty did not exceed its mandate in authorising an inquiry into the matter,” the court held.

He added that the decision could only be overturned if proven to be unreasonable.

“The decision by the respondents was intra vires, and unless the petitioners demonstrate that the powers were exercised unreasonably, the decision must stand,” the judge ruled.

On claims of lack of public participation, the court noted that students had been involved in the formulation of academic guidelines and that a memo notifying them of the change had been issued five weeks before the examinations.

The judge found the notice adequate and fair.

“I disagree that the notice given was abrupt. In my view, the respondents dealt with the matter reasonably,” he said.

He further observed that reverting to physical examinations was necessary to preserve academic integrity.

“In my considered view, the decision was taken to protect the credibility of examinations following reported malpractices. It was an appropriate measure,” the court ruled.

The judge also noted that the students remained enrolled and had not been deregistered, adding that the university had made provisions for special examinations in August for those with valid challenges.

Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, with each party ordered to bear its own costs.

news@businessdayafrica.org