High Court Backs SRC's Standard Stipend Rates for Healthcare Interns

• Oct 31, 2024

The High Court has upheld the directive issued by the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) that sets standard stipend rates for healthcare interns, dismissing five petitions that challenged the directive on grounds of discrimination and overreach. The petitions, brought forward by healthcare interns and professional associations, argued that SRC’s decision created unjust disparities and failed to follow proper consultation processes.

The petitioners claimed that the stipend rates, announced by SRC on March 13, 2024, were unconstitutional because they favored some medical interns over others and undermined established payment structures. They argued that these rates resulted in unequal treatment of medical and non-medical healthcare interns, violating Article 27 of the Constitution of Kenya, which guarantees equality and non-discrimination. Additionally, they contended that the directive lacked adequate engagement with key stakeholders in the healthcare sector.

Another crucial point in the petitioners' case was their demand that healthcare interns be recognized as “public officers” under Article 260 of the Constitution. This classification, they argued, would entitle interns to equitable treatment across all public service roles, ensuring fair and uniform stipends. They claimed that treating interns differently without clear justification amounted to unconstitutional discrimination.

In response, the SRC defended its authority to regulate public service compensation, including intern stipends. The commission emphasized that internships are training periods, not formal employment, and the stipends reflect what the government can afford given current budget constraints. SRC further noted the Ministry of Health's financial challenges, highlighting an additional funding requirement of Ksh 9.6 billion as evidence of the difficult fiscal environment.

The SRC argued that while stipend rates may vary, they are determined by economic and budgetary realities rather than any intent to discriminate. The commission stressed that its mandate is to ensure responsible and sustainable compensation practices, taking into account available resources.

The High Court concluded that SRC acted within its constitutional powers, finding no basis for the claims of discrimination. The court ruled that Article 27’s provisions on equal treatment apply only when individuals in comparable situations are treated differently without adequate justification. Given the government's fiscal constraints and the nature of internships as training, the court agreed that the stipend directive was justified.

This ruling confirms SRC’s authority to balance equitable remuneration with economic realities, ensuring that public sector compensation remains fiscally responsible. The decision allows SRC to continue managing intern stipends in a way that aligns with the country's budgetary limitations, reinforcing the commission’s role in safeguarding sustainable remuneration practices across Kenya’s public service.