The Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) has urged the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) to step back from a leadership dispute involving Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna, arguing that the matter should first be concluded through the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms.
Appearing before the tribunal, ODM maintained that its internal processes are not only active but constitutionally mandated, insisting that external intervention at this stage would undermine party autonomy and internal democracy.
"The complainant (Sifuna) and the first respondent (ODM) shall attempt to resolve the dispute through the first respondent’s IDRM mechanisms. Parties are encouraged to submit to IDRM in good faith,” the tribunal ordered.
At the centre of the dispute is a decision by the party’s National Executive Committee to remove Sifuna from his position as Secretary-General over alleged misconduct. The move triggered a legal challenge by Sifuna, who turned to the tribunal seeking to block the decision, arguing that it was procedurally flawed and violated both party rules and his right to fair administrative action.
ODM, however, countered that Sifuna moved too quickly to court, bypassing established internal structures designed specifically to handle such disputes. The party told the tribunal that its internal dispute resolution mechanism must be allowed to run its course before any external body can assume jurisdiction.
“The party has clear structures for handling disciplinary matters,” ODM argued in its filings, adding that those mechanisms remain active and capable of delivering a resolution consistent with both its constitution and national legal standards.
The tribunal has in previous directions underscored the importance of exhausting internal remedies within political parties before escalating disputes to external forums. It temporarily halted the implementation of Sifuna’s removal, directing both sides to engage ODM’s internal dispute resolution organs in good faith while preserving the status quo.
The case has exposed long-standing tensions within ODM over internal governance and disciplinary authority, with the outcome likely to set a precedent for how far party leadership can go in enforcing decisions against senior officials.
For Sifuna, the case is also a test of procedural fairness within party structures, as he argues that his removal was not only abrupt but also politically motivated. For ODM, it is a question of institutional control and the integrity of its internal disciplinary framework.
The tribunal is expected to determine whether it will defer fully to ODM’s internal process or retain jurisdiction to hear the dispute on its merits, a decision that could shape how political party conflicts are handled in Kenya going forward.
