Two teachers have moved to Kisumu Employment and Labour Court seeking to block the Teachers Service Commission’s (TSC) decision to migrate all teachers and their dependents from the MINET medical insurance scheme to the newly established Social Health Authority (SHA).
The petitioners, Peter Kodhek Amunga and Martha Omollo, have filed the suit against TSC, SHA, the Ministry of Health, National Treasury, and the Attorney General.
In their petition, the duo argues that the migration raises constitutional and legal concerns and could negatively affect the welfare and rights of over 400,000 teachers nationwide.
At the centre of the dispute is TSC’s directive to discontinue the long-standing contractual medical insurance scheme offered through MINET, a licensed private insurance provider, and replace it with SHA, a statutory fund established under the Social Health Insurance Act.
The petitioners contend that this move fundamentally alters teachers’ terms and conditions of service without adequate consultation. “The impugned move exposes teachers to serious risks, including lapse of cover, denial of treatment, lack of emergency evacuation guarantees, and loss of contractual rights previously enjoyed under the MINET insurance scheme,” they state.
They insist that the Constitution requires transparency, accountability, fair labour practices, public participation, and compliance with legal procurement processes. According to the petition, TSC should have conducted adequate engagement with teachers, their unions, and other stakeholders before implementing the decision.
Amunga and Omollo further argue that SHA is not an insurance provider and therefore lacks the legal and structural capacity to replace a contractual, indemnity-based medical cover. They claim the shift undermines the constitutional right to the highest attainable standard of health.
The petition also notes that the Social Health Insurance Act does not obligate TSC or any public employer to move employees from private insurance to SHA. “SHA is established as a fund, not an insurance provider. Section 27 requires progressive and actuarially sound implementation, which has not been demonstrated,” the petition states.
The teachers are seeking several declarations and court orders. They want the court to declare TSC’s migration decision unconstitutional, invalid, and null and void. They also argue that SHA cannot lawfully substitute the comprehensive medical insurance previously enjoyed under negotiated employment terms.
Among the remedies requested, the petitioners seek an order to quash the migration directive, compel the reinstatement of the medical insurance or conduct of a lawful, competitive, and participatory procurement process, and restrain the respondents from enforcing the migration or deducting salaries toward SHA without following the law.
They further request the court to compel the respondents to produce all records, reports, procurement documents, actuarial assessments, and policy papers related to the contested decision, highlighting concerns over governance, labour rights, and the rule of law.
