The High Court Thursday dismissed a constitutional petition challenging the mandatory retirement age for employees in both the public and private sectors.
The court declared the age limits lawful, reasonable, and non-discriminatory.
In the petition, Charles Chege Gitau contested the regulations that require employees to retire at 60 years or 65 for persons with disabilities — arguing they contravene constitutional rights to equality, dignity, and fair labour practices.
He claimed the policy perpetuates stereotypes about older workers’ productivity, fails to guarantee employment for youth, and is inconsistent with retirement exemptions for judges, MPs, and university researchers.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi, however, ruled that the court had jurisdiction to hear the matter as it challenged the constitutionality of legislation rather than arising from an employer-employee dispute.
He found that the petitioner had failed to prove unlawful discrimination, noting that variations in retirement ages for certain roles were rooted in distinct legal and institutional frameworks.
The judge said setting a retirement age is a policy decision within the constitutional mandate of the Public Service Commission (PSC) and does not amount to a fundamental right.
He further noted that both the PSC Act and its regulations provide for the retention of exceptional talent on post-retirement contracts where rare skills are required.