A former secondary school principal, who claimed he had offered a Form Four student an innocent lift in his car, has suffered a blow after the Employment and Labour Relations Court upheld the decision of the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) to sack him over immoral behaviour.
The court sitting in Nakuru agreed with the TSC that the teachers' employer had an obligation to act against Mr Leonard Wambuluwa Barasa for engaging in immoral behaviour with a Form Four student who was 21 years old.
“‘The court is satisfied that Mr Barasa was dismissed and deregistered by the TSC as a teacher, on valid ground, and in accordance with the law. The prayer for reinstatement or compensation, has no merit,” the court noted.
The court said the age of the student did not matter and clarified that the term “learner” has no age bracket under laws that protect learners.
On the question of returning to the register of teachers, the court advised Mr Barasa that he could pursue the matter under Section 31 of the TSC Act and Regulation 36. However, it said the decision to re-register him would remain at the discretion of the Commission after hearing him independently from the court proceedings.
Mr Barasa, who had worked for TSC since 1995, was interdicted in 2021.
He later moved to court seeking a declaration that termination was unfair and unlawful, reinstatement and payment of his benefits.
Mr Barasa told the court that he had served as a teacher since 1995 after graduating from Kenyatta University with a Bachelor of Science degree in Education. Over the years, he rose through the ranks and, at the time of his dismissal on August 21, 2021, was the principal of Chebotoi Mixed Day Secondary School in Olenguruone, Nakuru County.
He traces his problems to April 2021, when he allegedly offered a 21-year-old student a lift after examinations. Mr Barasa said his removal from service followed allegations that he had engaged in sexual relations with a Form Four student identified in court documents as MC on April 14, 2021.
Explaining the events of April 14, 2021, Mr Barasa said that after Form Four students completed their examinations, he drove several staff members and students towards Saptet junction before preparing to travel to his home in Kitale.
While refuelling near his residence, he said he encountered the student, who requested help to transport a bag of fertiliser to her home. He agreed and briefly stopped at his house to collect his travel bag.
He told the court that local administrators later appeared and confronted him after receiving a message alleging that he had a student in his vehicle.
“The student was in my car, not in my house, and I had only agreed to help transport her fertiliser,” Mr Barasa said.
He was taken to Kiptagich Police Station and later charged before the Molo Chief Magistrate’s Court with offences under the Sexual Offences Act.
Mr Barasa maintained that medical findings initially showed no evidence of a sexual offence and said DNA tests did not link him to the alleged act. He was acquitted of the criminal charges on January 18, 2023.
However, he told the court that his employer proceeded with disciplinary action that led to his dismissal and deregistration as a teacher.
“I was presumed guilty from the beginning and was not given a fair opportunity to defend myself,” he said, arguing that key witnesses he had brought were not allowed to testify during the disciplinary hearing.
He denied the accusation and said the claims formed part of a wider scheme orchestrated by individuals unhappy with reforms he had introduced at the school.
According to Mr Barasa, tensions began after he implemented measures to stop what he described as irregular supply arrangements involving food deliveries to the school. He alleged that a local administrator and some teachers opposed the reforms and later conspired to remove him from office.
He told the court that disciplinary conflicts with some staff members, including a teacher he had earlier issued a notice to show cause to, contributed to hostility within the school community.
“The allegations against me were orchestrated in retaliation after I stopped the exploitation of school resources,” he said, adding that some members of the school’s Board of Management were also drawn into the dispute.
Mr Barasa further claimed that before the April 2021 incident, he had already faced intimidation and pressure from individuals linked to the school.
He recounted incidents where he was allegedly threatened over payments demanded by a contractor and said he had been arrested on separate occasions following complaints related to school management matters.
In his testimony, he argued that these incidents formed part of a pattern intended to undermine him because he was considered an outsider in the area.
“There was a deliberate effort to force me out of the school,” he told the court.
The commission opposed Mr Barasa’s claim, saying its decision to dismiss him followed investigations into allegations that he had engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a student while serving as principal of Chebotoi Mixed Day Secondary School.
According to the Commission, it received reports in April 2021 that Barasa had been found with a Form Four student identified as M.C. at his residence in Kiptagich Shopping Centre.
A joint team comprising officials from the Commission and the Ministry of Education conducted investigations at the school on April 15, 2021. They interviewed several individuals, including the student, local administrators, the deputy principal, the student’s father and Barasa.
“The investigations were undertaken to establish the circumstances under which the principal was found with the learner,” the Commission stated.
The Commission told the court that the student gave a detailed account of the events leading to the encounter.
According to her statement, she completed her examinations and later received a call from the principal asking about her whereabouts.
She said he picked her from Kiptagich Shopping Centre and drove her to his house, where she alleged they engaged in an intimate encounter before leaving the residence. The teacher allegedly gave her Sh1,000 after offering refreshments, including bread and soda.
The Commission said local administrators later confronted the two and took them to the police station for further action.
“The learner gave a consistent account during investigations and at the disciplinary hearing,” the Commission told the court.
The Commission also relied on statements from local administrators and other witnesses, saying they corroborated the student’s account.
Investigators concluded that Mr Barasa picked the student from the shopping centre and took her to his house, conduct the Commission said contravened Circular No. 3 of 2010 on the protection of learners.
According to the Commission, Mr Barasa acknowledged during investigations that he picked up the student and drove her to his residence.
“Witnesses who appeared before the disciplinary panel gave credible and consistent evidence that was not successfully challenged,” the Commission argued.
The Commission maintained that it accorded Barasa due process. It said it interdicted him, invited him to submit a written defence and later summoned him to a disciplinary hearing where he presented his case and cross-examined witnesses.
After considering the evidence, the panel concluded that he maintained an inappropriate relationship with the student and terminated his employment.
“The termination was based on valid grounds and was carried out fairly in the interest of safeguarding learners and preserving the integrity of the teaching profession,” the Commission said.
According to the Commission, the fact that Barasa faced criminal charges of rape and abuse of office and was acquitted did not prevent it from disciplining him after finding him guilty of immoral behaviour.
In its decision, the court found that the early interrogation of Barasa shortly after the incident did not prejudice his defence. Although he argued that investigators did not give him seven days to prepare at the investigation stage, the court noted that he later received ample time before the disciplinary hearing conducted several months later.
“Any prejudice suffered by Mr Barasa at the interrogation stage was cured by the long period given for him to prepare for the disciplinary hearing,” the court observed.
The court also addressed Barasa’s reliance on his acquittal in the criminal case before the Molo Chief Magistrate’s Court.
It held that the outcome of criminal proceedings does not automatically determine the outcome of an employer’s disciplinary process unless the governing law expressly requires it.
In this case, the applicable regulations allowed the Commission to discipline a teacher even where criminal proceedings were pending or had resulted in an acquittal.
“The claimant cannot rely on the criminal acquittal to invalidate the disciplinary process undertaken by the Commission,” the court stated.
On the evidence presented, the court found that the claimant admitted picking up the student and taking her to his residence, conduct considered inappropriate under the TSC Code of Conduct and relevant regulations.
The judge observed that a teacher’s professional responsibility extends beyond the question of whether a criminal offence occurred.
“The offence of immoral behaviour does not depend on proof of sexual intercourse or medical evidence,” the court noted.
The court concluded that the Commission followed the required procedures under the law and acted within its mandate to safeguard learners and maintain professional standards in the teaching profession.
“The court is satisfied that fair procedure was followed and that there were valid grounds for the termination and deregistration of the claimant," the court said.
The court noted that acts such as flirtation with a learner or sending a learner to a private residence justify a charge of immoral behaviour against a teacher.
