For years, the threat of dissolving Parliament over its failure to implement the constitutional two-thirds gender rule has hovered over Kenya’s political landscape.

The debate resurfaced recently after the High Court ruled that former Chief Justice David Maraga’s 2020 advisory to dissolve Parliament was issued prematurely and did not meet all constitutional requirements.

But what would actually happen if Parliament were dissolved today?

The answer lies at the intersection of constitutional law, governance, public finance and politics, and the consequences would be far-reaching.

The Constitution of Kenya provides a mechanism for dissolving Parliament when it fails to enact legislation required under the Constitution.

Article 261 establishes a process through which courts can determine whether Parliament has failed to pass required legislation. If Parliament remains in default after court directives, the Chief Justice may advise the president to dissolve Parliament. The provision was designed as a constitutional enforcement tool rather than a political weapon.

The most prominent case relates to Parliament’s failure to implement the two-thirds gender rule, a constitutional requirement intended to ensure that no more than two-thirds of members of elective or appointive bodies are of the same gender.

However, the High Court recently held that Maraga’s advisory was premature because certain procedural steps had not been completed, including the formal transmission of court orders to Parliament and the Attorney General as required by the Constitution.

Would both Houses go home?

One of the biggest legal questions is whether dissolution would affect only the National Assembly or both the National Assembly and the Senate.

Kenya operates a bicameral Parliament, meaning Parliament consists of two Houses. The Constitution refers to “Parliament” as a single institution, creating debate among legal scholars about whether dissolution would automatically send both Houses home. Constitutional analysts have long argued that the issue remains largely untested because Kenya has never dissolved Parliament under Article 261.

A dissolution order would likely trigger immediate constitutional and legal challenges seeking clarity on whether senators would also lose their seats.

Fresh elections would become inevitable

If Parliament were dissolved, Kenya would almost certainly require fresh parliamentary elections.

This would mean voters returning to the polls to elect Members of Parliament, Women Representatives and potentially Senators, depending on how the courts interpret the dissolution order.

The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) would be required to organise the exercise, a process that would involve significant logistical and financial costs.

The country would effectively be plunged into an unexpected election cycle years before the next scheduled General Election.

Legislative business would grind to a halt

Perhaps the most immediate effect would be the suspension of parliamentary business.

No new laws could be passed.

No amendments could be made to existing legislation.

No committees would be available to investigate government spending, vet nominees or exercise oversight over the Executive.

Parliament is responsible for approving budgets, taxes, borrowing plans, treaties and appointments. Without it, the government’s ability to undertake many functions would be severely constrained.

Bills currently before either House would effectively stall until a new Parliament is elected and constituted.

What happens to the budget?

One of the most pressing concerns would be public finance.

Parliament authorises government spending through appropriation laws and provides oversight over public expenditure.

If dissolution occurred in the middle of a budget cycle, questions would immediately arise about how ministries, counties and state agencies would continue receiving funds.

Although existing appropriations would remain in force for the periods already approved, new spending measures, supplementary budgets and taxation proposals would face legal uncertainty without a sitting Parliament.

This could create challenges for implementation of government programmes and development projects.

President would remain in office

A common misconception is that dissolving Parliament would automatically trigger a presidential election.

It would not.

The President’s mandate comes directly from the General Election and is independent of Parliament’s existence.

Even if Parliament were dissolved today, President William Ruto would remain in office and continue exercising executive authority.

The Cabinet would also remain in place.

What would change is the absence of Parliament’s oversight and legislative functions until a new House or Houses are elected.

Counties would continue operating

County governments would remain intact.

Governors, Members of County Assembly and county executives derive their mandates from separate constitutional provisions.

County assemblies would continue conducting business, and governors would continue running county governments.

However, national legislation affecting counties could face delays because Parliament plays a critical role in approving laws that impact devolved units.

Political fallout could be massive

Beyond the legal implications, dissolution would trigger one of the most significant political events since the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution.

Every MP would immediately lose their seat and be forced into campaign mode.

Political parties would scramble to conduct nominations.

Coalitions would be tested.

The prospect of sudden elections could also reshape political alliances ahead of the 2027 General Election.

For sitting legislators, dissolution would mean an abrupt end to salaries, committee positions and parliamentary privileges.

For voters, it would offer an unexpected opportunity to reassess their representatives.

Why the debate matters

The recent court ruling declaring the Maraga advisory premature has not ended the debate over Parliament’s constitutional obligations. Instead, it has highlighted the importance of following every procedural step before such an extraordinary remedy can be invoked.

The threat of dissolution remains one of the strongest enforcement mechanisms in Kenya’s Constitution, designed to ensure Parliament complies with constitutional mandates.

Whether that power is ever exercised remains uncertain.

But if Parliament were dissolved today, the country would enter uncharted constitutional territory, testing institutions, courts and political actors in ways Kenya has never experienced since the advent of the 2010 Constitution.