What was expected to be a routine consultative engagement instead unfolded into an uneasy political moment, marked by empty seats, hushed corridors and unanswered questions.
In Busia County, preparations had been made for a high level Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) meeting meant to strengthen internal cohesion and address grassroots concerns.
Yet as the day progressed, the absence of key county leaders became the story itself.
The boycott targeted a meeting convened by ODM Secretary-General Edwin Sifuna, who was in the county to engage party structures and local leadership.
Several senior ODM figures from Busia stayed away, signaling a deepening rift within the party ranks.
The leaders accused Sifuna and his close allies of actions they claim are fueling divisions rather than fostering unity within the party.
In a joint position conveyed to the media, the dissenting leaders argued that unity cannot be enforced through parallel power centers or public confrontations.
They insisted that genuine cohesion must be built on respect for established party leadership and agreed structures, warning that continued internal wrangles risk weakening ODM’s influence in the region ahead of future political contests.
The Busia leaders further claimed that recent statements and political maneuvers by some national officials were being interpreted at the grassroots as attempts to undermine county leadership.
According to them, this has created confusion among supporters and threatened to erode trust that ODM has built over years as a disciplined and consultative political outfit.
Also Read
- Busia Leaders Snub Sifuna Meeting, Accuse Party HQ of Sabotage
- Power Struggle Exposed? Kakamega Leaders Tell Uhuru to Step Aside
- ODM Under Siege? Deputy Party Leader Accuses President Ruto of Political Meddling
- Drama In ODM As Oketch Sella Fires Back At Gladys Wanga After She Dismissed His Mission
- Gladys Wanga Goes After Raila’s ‘Son’, Distences ODM From His Activities
While Sifuna has repeatedly positioned himself as a champion of internal democracy and open debate, his critics in Busia maintain that debate must be anchored within party organs and not through public exchanges that portray the party as divided.
They argue that disagreements should be resolved internally to preserve ODM’s image as a united political force.
The boycott has now thrust Busia County into the spotlight as a flashpoint in broader conversations about leadership, loyalty and discipline within ODM.
Political analysts note that Busia has historically been an important support base for the party, making any visible fractures there a matter of national significance.
As ODM navigates these turbulent waters, calls for dialogue are growing louder. Whether the party leadership can reconcile competing interests and restore confidence among its grassroots leaders remains an open question one that could shape ODM’s internal dynamics well beyond Busia County
About the Author
