The idea that a person can seek the presidency of Kenya without a university degree should worry anyone who believes the country ought to demand more from those seeking its highest office.
It is not because a degree automatically makes someone intelligent. It does not. There are highly educated people with questionable judgement, just as there are Kenyans without university qualifications who possess remarkable intelligence, leadership ability and practical experience.
The concern is what comes after removing the academic requirement.
For 63 years, education has been presented as one of the principal foundations of Kenya’s development. Parents have sacrificed to educate their children, while millions of young Kenyans have spent years in universities believing that knowledge and qualifications would prepare them for greater responsibility.
Yet the person seeking to lead the entire republic does not necessarily have to possess a university degree.
Legally, that may be permissible. But legality should not end the national conversation about competence.
State House is not an experiment
The presidency is arguably the most demanding public office in the country because decisions made by the occupant of State House affect millions of people and influence virtually every major sector of the economy and society.
The President is expected to understand public finance, national security, diplomacy, constitutional law, international relations, healthcare, education, infrastructure, taxation and debt management while making decisions that can affect Kenya for decades.
That raises an uncomfortable question: if a university degree is not required, what alternative standard should Kenyans use to determine whether a presidential candidate possesses the knowledge and competence necessary to lead the country?
A person does not need a certificate to be intelligent, but intelligence alone is also not enough to run a modern state.
The bar should be higher
The debate should therefore move beyond the narrow question of whether a candidate possesses academic credentials and focus on whether the candidate can demonstrate the ability to govern.
A presidential aspirant should be able to explain how they intend to manage Kenya’s multitrillion-shilling public debt, expand employment, finance public services and protect the economy from external shocks.
They should understand the Constitution sufficiently to explain the limits of presidential power, understand international affairs well enough to defend Kenya’s interests abroad and demonstrate the judgement required to make difficult decisions during national emergencies.
A candidate’s record should also matter. Leadership experience, integrity, policy knowledge, decision-making ability and understanding of government should carry far greater weight than political popularity alone.
Kenya should not lower standards
The danger lies not in allowing someone without a degree to participate in democracy, but in creating a political culture in which the minimum legal requirements become the maximum standards expected of leaders.
Kenya has been independent for 63 years, and this should be a period of raising expectations rather than lowering them.
The country should not demand a university certificate simply for the sake of having one, but it should demand something equally important: demonstrable competence to govern Kenya.
The central question should therefore not be whether an aspirant has a degree, but whether that person understands the responsibility that comes with occupying State House.
A presidency is not merely a prize for winning an election. It is a responsibility over a nation of millions.
After 63 years, Kenya should be asking not how little a presidential candidate needs to qualify, but how much the country should reasonably expect from anyone seeking its highest office.
