The simmering tensions within the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) have once again thrust ODM Secretary General Edwin Sifuna into the eye of a political storm, with detractors openly calling for his removal over alleged disloyalty, tribal rhetoric, and ideological divergence from the party’s evolving post-Raila Odinga trajectory. Yet beneath the political noise and emotive rallies lies a far more sobering reality: procedurally, legally, and electorally, it may already be too late to remove Sifuna from office without exposing ODM to serious legal and political risks ahead of the 2027 general election.
As ODM navigates an uncertain transition period following Raila Odinga’s continental engagements and recalibration of opposition politics, the debate around Sifuna’s fate is less about personality and more about institutional survival. A close reading of the party constitution, Kenya’s Political Parties Act, and electoral jurisprudence reveals that any rushed or irregular attempt to oust Secretary General Edwin Sifuna could backfire spectacularly, potentially invalidating party decisions, nominations, or even weakening ODM’s legal standing, regardless of whether it ultimately aligns with or opposes President William Ruto’s government.
What the ODM Constitution Says About Removing a Secretary General
ODM, like all registered political parties in Kenya, is governed by a constitution that outlines clear roles, tenure, and removal procedures for its top officials. The position of secretary general is not ceremonial. It is a critical administrative and legal office responsible for party records, correspondence with the Registrar of Political Parties, coordination of organs, and compliance with statutory obligations.
Under the ODM constitution, the secretary general is elected by the National Delegates Convention (NDC), the party’s highest decision-making organ. Consequently, removal from office is not a casual affair that can be effected through rallies, press conferences, or informal resolutions by influential figures. Any lawful ouster would require either a disciplinary process anchored in the constitution or a formal decision by the same organ that elected him, following due process – the ideological split means this option will unlikely yield the desired results unless it is buttressed by an extensive and prolonged lobbying process.
That process involves written complaints, a properly constituted disciplinary committee, the right to be heard, timelines for response, and ratification by relevant party organs. Importantly, any such process must be conducted in compliance with the Political Parties Act, which places heavy emphasis on internal democracy and procedural fairness.
At this late stage in the electoral cycle, attempting to initiate and conclude such a process against Secretary General Edwin Sifuna would be both impractical and legally vulnerable.
Why the Electoral Calendar Matters To Political Timelines In Kenya
Kenyan courts have repeatedly ruled that political parties cannot arbitrarily change key officials close to a general election if such changes undermine internal democracy or disrupt statutory compliance. The secretary general is the party’s official signatory to the Office of the Registrar of Political Parties and the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).
Removing Sifuna irregularly or without exhausting internal mechanisms could invite legal challenges that would freeze ODM’s operations at the worst possible moment. Disgruntled members could seek court injunctions barring the party from submitting nomination lists, altering officials, or participating fully in electoral processes until disputes are resolved.
With 2027 approaching and party primaries expected well in advance, ODM cannot afford protracted litigation over the legitimacy of its leadership structures. Any misstep could hand political opponents a legal opening to challenge ODM’s compliance, whether the party chooses to cooperate with President Ruto’s administration or return to a more adversarial posture.
The Dangers of Irregular Removal of Secretary General Edwin Sifuna
The greatest risk facing ODM is not Sifuna’s alleged defiance, but the consequences of bypassing its own rules. Courts in Kenya have consistently nullified party decisions where due process was ignored. An irregular removal of Secretary General Edwin Sifuna could render subsequent party resolutions contestable, including coalition agreements, nomination outcomes, and disciplinary actions against other members.
Such a scenario would weaken ODM’s negotiating power nationally and damage its credibility among urban voters, particularly in Nairobi, where Sifuna enjoys significant grassroots and professional class support. Worse still, it could entrench the narrative that ODM is abandoning institutionalism in favour of ethnic mobilisation and personality politics.
Oburu Odinga’s Kibera Rally and the Call for Party Discipline
It is within this delicate context that Dr Oburu Oginga Odinga’s recent rally in Kibera must be understood. Speaking to ODM supporters, Oburu urged members to respect party structures, avoid expulsions, and embrace dialogue even as the party navigates collaboration with President Ruto’s government.
His message was striking not just for its conciliatory tone, but for its implicit acknowledgement that ODM cannot afford internal purges. Oburu’s insistence that there would be no expulsions underscored an understanding of the legal and political landmines surrounding any attempt to forcibly remove Secretary General Edwin Sifuna.
Yet the rally also exposed deeper tensions. Accusations of tribalism levelled against Sifuna by some Luo loyalists, combined with his absence from key party meetings and high-profile engagements in Kikuyu-dominated regions, have fuelled suspicions about his long-term loyalty to ODM’s shifting alliances.
Post-Raila Politics and the Edwin Sifuna Question
Much of the hostility towards Sifuna is rooted in the uncertainty of the post-Raila Odinga era. As ODM recalibrates its identity, power centres within the party are being renegotiated. Sifuna, with his national profile, legal background, and independent political voice, represents a new generation that does not neatly fit into traditional patronage structures.
For some, his perceived reluctance to aggressively sell ODM’s cooperation with President Ruto’s government is seen as betrayal. For others, it is principled independence. Either way, the attempt to frame the issue as one of loyalty rather than legality risks masking the real danger: destabilising the party at a critical juncture.
Why Sifuna’s Ouster Can Only Be Voluntary
Given the constitutional safeguards, legal risks, and electoral timelines, the most realistic path to removing Secretary General Edwin Sifuna is not expulsion but voluntary exit. Should Sifuna choose to resign, defect, or pursue an alternative political platform, ODM would be spared the procedural quagmire that forced removal would entail.
Short of that, any attempt to push him out risks galvanising sympathy, legal resistance, and internal fragmentation. It could also alienate urban voters who already view ODM as struggling to reconcile its reformist roots with ethnic and elite-driven politics.
A High-Stakes Gamble for ODM’s Future
As the 2027 election looms, ODM faces a choice between institutional discipline and political impatience. The controversy surrounding Secretary General Edwin Sifuna is a test of whether the party can uphold its own constitution in the face of internal pressure and tribal emotion.
For Sifuna’s loudest detractors, the uncomfortable truth is that time, law, and electoral reality are not on their side. For ODM, the greater danger lies not in tolerating dissent, but in undermining the very structures that have sustained it as Kenya’s most enduring opposition movement.
In the end, whether ODM walks with or against President Ruto, its credibility will rest on one question: can it obey its own rules when it matters most?
ALSO READ: Nairobi MCAs Table 20 Charges For Sakaja Impeachment
