- Hillary Muhalya argues that teachers should not permanently lose their careers merely for contesting elections.
- He proposes structured political leave allowing unsuccessful candidates to return to teaching after the polls.
- The framework, he argues, could protect political neutrality, teachers’ careers and learners ahead of 2027.
As Kenya moves towards the 2027 General Election, an important question is emerging from the teaching profession: Should a teacher who wants to contest for elective office be forced to sacrifice an entire professional career merely to exercise the right to seek public leadership?
The Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT) has proposed a 90-day political leave arrangement for teachers seeking elective positions. The proposal deserves much more than a passing labour-relations debate. It should become part of a wider national conversation about democracy, public service, professional mobility and the protection of institutional continuity.
Under the current Teachers Service Commission (TSC) regulations, a teacher intending to contest an election must retire or resign from service at least six months before the election.
At the heart of the matter is a simple question:
Should losing an election mean losing a profession?
Kenya should seriously consider a structured political-leave framework that allows teachers to temporarily step away from their employment, contest elections and, if unsuccessful, return to their professional careers.
This would not be a political privilege for teachers. It would be a carefully regulated mechanism for reconciling two legitimate public interests: the right of citizens to seek elective office and the need to preserve the political neutrality and effectiveness of public education.
Kenya does not have to invent the idea
There are international examples that demonstrate that public servants can be permitted to contest elections without automatically destroying their professional careers.
New Zealand provides perhaps the clearest model.
Under its electoral framework, state servants who become candidates for Parliament must take leave from their positions from Nomination Day until the first working day after polling day. If they are unsuccessful, they can return to work after the election. If elected to Parliament, they must leave their state-service positions.
The principle is therefore straightforward:
Leave the public-service job. Contest the election. Lose and return. Win and transition into elected office.
That is remarkably close to the philosophy behind the proposal being advanced by Kenyan teachers.
Canada provides another instructive example.
Under Canada’s Public Service Employment Act, a federal public servant who wants to become a candidate in a federal, provincial or territorial election must obtain permission from the Public Service Commission. During an election period, candidacy requires leave of absence without pay. The Commission’s decision takes into account political impartiality, the nature of the election and the employee’s duties and level of visibility.
Canada therefore demonstrates another important principle: political participation can be accommodated within a professional public service without abandoning the requirement for political neutrality.
These international examples do not mean Kenya should copy foreign systems word for word.
They show, however, that there is a credible alternative to a rigid resignation-or-retirement approach.
Kenya should move from resignation to structured political leave
The current debate should therefore be reframed.
Instead of asking whether teachers should be given a special 90-day political holiday, Kenya should ask whether it should establish a Teachers Political Leave Framework.
The framework would allow a teacher who formally enters an electoral contest to leave the classroom for a defined period.
The teacher would cease performing teaching and administrative duties.
The teacher would not campaign in school.
The teacher would not use school facilities, public vehicles, pupils, colleagues, official communication channels or public resources for political purposes.
And the teacher would have no ambiguity about the separation between professional duties and political activity.
This distinction is crucial.
Kenya must never create a system in which teachers campaign while simultaneously exercising authority over learners.
The classroom must remain politically neutral.
But political neutrality does not necessarily require permanent professional exile.
The learner must come first
Any political-leave policy must begin with the interests of learners.
If a teacher leaves school to contest an election, TSC must ensure that the affected institution receives an adequate replacement.
There should be no prolonged vacancy.
There should be no disruption of learning.
There should be no situation in which pupils lose valuable instructional time because their teacher has entered politics.
This is why the proposed reform should be accompanied by a strong replacement mechanism.
Political ambition should not become an educational burden.
TSC should know exactly when a teacher leaves, who takes over the duties, how long the replacement lasts and how the teacher returns if unsuccessful.
This would make political leave an administrative process rather than an institutional crisis.
The 90 days should be a starting point, not the entire policy
KNUT’s proposal for 90 days deserves consideration, but Kenya should avoid becoming trapped in a debate over whether 90 days is the perfect number.
The real issue is the structure.
When exactly should leave begin?
Should it start at nomination?
Should there be a distinction between seeking a party nomination and becoming an officially nominated candidate?
Who approves the leave?
Should it be paid or unpaid?
What happens to medical cover, pension contributions and other employment benefits?
Who replaces the teacher?
What happens if the candidate withdraws?
What happens if the candidate loses?
What happens if the candidate wins?
These questions require clear answers.
New Zealand’s system offers an especially useful lesson because its leave is linked to the formal electoral process rather than an indefinite political ambition. A state servant who becomes a candidate is required to step away from the public-service role, and an unsuccessful candidate can return after polling day.
Kenya could adapt that principle.
Losing should not necessarily mean starting life again
This is perhaps the strongest argument for reform.
Imagine a teacher who has served for 15 or 20 years, acquired professional qualifications, risen through the ranks and built a substantial career.
The teacher decides to contest a parliamentary or county assembly seat.
The election is fiercely contested.
The teacher loses by a few hundred votes.
Should that person permanently lose a professional career because voters chose another candidate?
There is a compelling argument that the answer should be no.
An election is a democratic contest. Winning is never guaranteed.
If society encourages competent citizens to offer themselves for leadership, it should also recognise that unsuccessful candidates remain valuable citizens and professionals.
A teacher who loses an election does not suddenly lose his or her teaching skills.
The experience gained during a political campaign may even broaden the individual’s understanding of public policy, community needs and governance.
A regulated return-to-service mechanism could therefore benefit both the teacher and the education system.
But winning must mean leaving the classroom
There should be no ambiguity on this point.
A teacher who wins an elective seat must transition fully into political office in accordance with the Constitution and applicable law.
Political leave cannot become a mechanism for holding two incompatible public positions simultaneously.
The formula should be simple:
Lose — return to teaching.
Win — leave teaching and serve the electorate.
This creates a clean institutional boundary.
It also protects the teaching profession from accusations that teachers are being allowed to use public employment as a political safety net while simultaneously occupying elective office.
Kenya can borrow the best from other systems
The international experience suggests that there is no single perfect model.
New Zealand offers Kenya a clear example of mandatory election-related leave with a return pathway for unsuccessful candidates.
Canada offers a model based on permission, political impartiality and leave without pay for federal, provincial and territorial candidacy.
Kenya could combine elements of both.
A Kenyan framework could require formal approval, mandatory withdrawal from professional duties, unpaid political leave during the campaign, replacement of the teacher, strict political-neutrality rules and a guaranteed administrative pathway back to teaching for unsuccessful candidates.
That would be more sophisticated than simply declaring that teachers should receive 90 days away from school.
This should apply beyond teachers
The debate could ultimately lead to a broader conversation about public servants.
Teachers are an important starting point because of the size and significance of the profession, but the underlying principle is wider.
Kenya should examine whether its public-service framework adequately balances political rights with professional neutrality for public employees who seek elective office.
A modern public service should be politically neutral—not necessarily politically disconnected from democracy.
The distinction matters.
A public servant should not use his or her office to advance partisan interests.
But a public servant is also a citizen with the right to participate in democratic life, subject to reasonable constitutional and statutory restrictions.
Canada’s framework attempts to balance political activity with political impartiality, while requiring permission and, for federal, provincial and territorial candidacy during an election period, leave without pay.
Kenya can pursue the same balance in its own constitutional context.
TSC should lead, not wait
The Teachers Service Commission, KNUT, KUPPET, the Ministry of Education, the Public Service Commission and Parliament should now examine the proposal seriously.
The issue should not be allowed to emerge only during the final months before an election.
A proper framework requires legislation or regulatory amendments, administrative procedures, consultation and preparation of replacement teachers.
The 2027 election provides an opportunity to settle the matter before the political season reaches its most intense stage.
TSC should therefore commission a comparative review of countries that allow public servants to contest elections through structured leave arrangements.
The question should be evidence-based:
What works? What does not work? What safeguards protect public institutions? And what model can Kenya afford and administer effectively?
Kenya should protect both the classroom and democracy
There is no contradiction between protecting education and facilitating democratic participation.
The mistake would be to imagine that Kenya must choose one or the other.
It can protect both.
A teacher can step away from the classroom.
A replacement can take over.
The teacher can campaign without using public resources.
The electorate can make its choice.
If the teacher loses, the professional door can remain open.
If the teacher wins, the teacher can transition into elective leadership.
That is a far more balanced approach than forcing every aspiring teacher-politician to make an irreversible career decision before voters have spoken.
The debate around teachers and the 2027 elections should therefore not be reduced to whether KNUT’s proposed 90 days are sufficient.
The bigger question is whether Kenya should modernise its public-service rules so that legitimate democratic ambition does not automatically destroy a professional career.
New Zealand and Canada demonstrate that structured mechanisms are possible.
Kenya can develop its own model—one suited to its Constitution, electoral laws, public-service regulations and education needs.
The guiding principle should be unmistakable:
Political ambition should temporarily interrupt a teaching career—not necessarily permanently destroy it.
The teacher who wants to serve should be allowed to step forward.
The teacher who loses should be allowed to come home.
The teacher who wins should be allowed to serve the electorate without holding two incompatible public roles.
And throughout the entire process, the learner must remain protected.
That is not a political favour.
It is a proposal for a more mature democracy.
READ ALSO: TSC promotion guidelines expired on June 30: Which rules will govern the 34,016 promotions?
Kenya should seriously consider structured political leave for teachers before the 2027 elections—and build a system in which democracy does not require professionals to burn their bridges before asking voters to open another door.
By Hillary Muhalya
Get more stories from our website: Education News
To write to us or offer feedback, you can reach us at: editor@educationnews.co.ke
You can also follow our social media pages on Twitter: Education News KE and Facebook: Education News Newspaper for timely updates.
>>> Click here to stay up-to-date with trending regional stories
