Recommendations not implemented: Commissioner for Education upholds complaints on educators’ freedom of expression

Recommendations not implemented: Commissioner for Education upholds complaints on educators’ freedom of expression

Published June 20, 2025

The Commissioner for Education investigated two separate, but similar, complaints related to Directive DG DES 28/2024, which imposed restrictions on educators' participation in media. One complaint was filed by the Executive Head of the Union of Professional Educators (UPE), and the other by a Member of Parliament and a teacher in the public service. Both complainants raised concerns about the directive’s impact on freedom of expression within the education sector.

The complaints

The Executive Head of the UPE filed the complaint both in his personal capacity and on behalf of the UPE, arguing that the directive would deter educators from engaging in public discourse aimed at improving the education system. The Member of Parliament similarly contended that the directive effectively silenced educators from expressing their views on the State education system and forced them to align themselves with official policy.

Both complaints were formally communicated to the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry for Education, Sport, Youth, Research and Innovation (MEYR) in November 2024.

The facts and findings

Directive DG DES 28/2024 required educators to seek prior approval for media participation and stipulated that any public statements must reflect the Ministry’s policies and objectives. While the directive claimed to encourage public debate, it simultaneously imposed conditions that restricted personal opinion and discouraged critical engagement.

The Commissioner noted that this constituted a form of "doublespeak" — outwardly promoting healthy dialogue while demanding total conformity. Such a stance contradicted the provisions of Directive 5 issued by the then Principal Permanent Secretary on 24 February 2011, which allows public officers in certain grades to express personal opinions, as long as these are clearly personal and not official positions.

Furthermore, the requirement for prior approval from line managers and the Director General added another layer of administrative control, which could have a chilling effect on educators’ willingness to speak publicly.

Conclusions and recommendations

The Commissioner concluded that the directive was not a mere restatement of existing rules, as argued by MEYR, but introduced new constraints inconsistent with the principles of freedom of expression in a democratic society. In any case, even Directive 5 fell short of human rights standards in so far as it forbade all public officers, irrespective of grade “from commenting on matters that pertain to their ministry and in particular their area of work, even if in a personal capacity.”

Both complaints were upheld in terms of Article 22(1)(a), (b), and (d) of the Ombudsman Act (Cap. 385). The Commissioner recommended that MEYR issue revised guidelines ensuring that teachers and educators, particularly those not holding managerial roles, are free to express personal views on their work and the educational system without fear of disciplinary action.

Outcome

In response to the Union head complaint, MEYR disputed UPE’s standing, stating that only the recognised majority union may address collective issues. Nevertheless, the Ministry reaffirmed its adherence to the Public Service Management Code (PSMC) in guiding its policies.
In reply to the Member of Parliament’s complaint, MEYR also cited the PSMC as its guiding document but did not address the substance of the Commissioner’s findings.

Sequel

Since the MEYR did not implement the recommendations, the Ombudsman and the Commissioner for Education referred both Final Opinions to the Prime Minister. As no action was taken, both reports were subsequently sent to Parliament, tabled, and therefore made public.