The United Democratic Alliance has summoned Kakamega Senator Boni Khalwale to explain himself over accusations of disloyalty and gross misconduct, after reports emerged that he was supporting a rival candidate in the Malava parliamentary by-election set for late November.
The disciplinary letter, dated October 9 and signed by UDA Disciplinary Committee Chairperson Charles Njenga, directs the senator to respond within fourteen days. According to the committee, the party has evidence showing that Khalwale participated in campaigns for Seth Panyako of the Democratic Action Party of Kenya instead of backing UDA’s nominee, David Ndakwa.
The move has drawn national attention, not only for the seriousness of the charge but for what it reveals about growing fractures within the ruling party. Khalwale, once among President William Ruto’s most trusted lieutenants, now stands accused of undermining the very organisation that propelled him to the Senate.
The letter cites violation of party rules and betrayal of the ideals that bind UDA members. It warns that his conduct, if proven, shows allegiance to a rival political party and amounts to gross indiscipline.
Those close to the senator say he believes the accusations are politically motivated. He has insisted that his actions in Malava were guided by fairness and the will of the people rather than by disloyalty.
Khalwale maintains that the nomination of UDA’s candidate was handled unjustly and influenced by senior figures in government who imposed their preferred aspirant on the constituency. His decision to side with Panyako, he says, was driven by local realities rather than rebellion.
This is not the first time Khalwale has clashed with party leadership. His political career has been defined by defiance, sharp rhetoric, and a willingness to confront even his allies when he deems it necessary.
Those qualities have won him admiration among supporters who view him as fearless, but they have also placed him in conflict with every political camp he has joined. Within UDA, his confrontations with other leaders in Western Kenya have grown frequent, particularly since the build-up to the Malava contest.
The party’s disciplinary process gives him limited room to manoeuvre. If his response is deemed unsatisfactory, the committee could recommend suspension, expulsion, or removal from his position as Senate Majority Whip.
Party insiders say the leadership wants to set an example that loyalty to the movement is non-negotiable. Others, however, warn that pushing him out could have unpredictable consequences, especially in a region where the party’s roots remain shallow.
Khalwale’s influence in Kakamega County and its surroundings cannot be dismissed. He has spent years cultivating a reputation as a local kingmaker, and his voice still carries weight in Western politics.
A public fallout with him could weaken UDA’s presence at a time when the opposition is seeking to regain lost ground. The Malava by-election, therefore, has taken on a significance far beyond one constituency. It is being watched as a test of the ruling party’s unity and of President Ruto’s hold over his Western allies.
The senator’s critics argue that discipline within a political movement is essential for stability. To them, his behaviour is a direct challenge to party authority and a signal to others that defiance might be tolerated if unpunished.
They see his support for a rival candidate as an open act of betrayal that must be met with decisive action. Supporters of the disciplinary process also contend that UDA cannot afford to allow internal dissent to fester, particularly as preparations for the 2027 general election begin.
Those sympathetic to Khalwale take a different view. They describe him as a casualty of internal rivalries, a man caught between loyalty to his party and loyalty to his constituents.
They claim his detractors are using the disciplinary process to edge him out of the political arena and to silence an independent voice.
Some insist that his actions were consistent with his long-held belief that local representation should not be dictated by powerful figures in Nairobi.
The coming weeks will determine the depth of the rift. If the senator chooses to fight back, his confrontation with the party could escalate into an open break.
Rumours have circulated that he is considering forming or joining a new political movement that would give Western leaders more autonomy in national politics.
Such a step would transform the current dispute from a disciplinary matter into a regional realignment.
For UDA, the challenge is delicate. It must balance the need for internal order with the political cost of alienating one of its most visible figures in Western Kenya.
A harsh punishment could portray the party as intolerant of debate, while leniency could embolden others to question the leadership. Either choice carries risk, and both will influence how the party is perceived across the country.
The Malava by-election will serve as the immediate measure of strength. Should UDA win comfortably, the leadership will claim vindication and proof that discipline pays.
But if the party performs poorly, the outcome will be seen as evidence that internal discord has eroded its base. For Khalwale, a strong showing by Panyako would bolster his argument that he acted on behalf of the people, not out of disloyalty.
Behind the contest lies a broader question about Kenya’s evolving political culture. Loyalty to parties has often been transactional, shifting with alliances and personal interests.
Khalwale’s defiance touches the same nerve that has defined many political careers before him—the tension between collective discipline and individual conviction. His case illustrates how fragile party unity can be when regional identities and national ambitions collide.
President Ruto’s administration, meanwhile, views the incident as a potential distraction from its development agenda.
.jpg)
The government has invested heavily in flagship projects and in building the image of a cohesive team. An internal quarrel involving a senior senator threatens to undermine that narrative, especially at a time when the opposition is regrouping.
The handling of this case will therefore be seen as a test of the President’s ability to maintain authority within his own ranks while keeping focus on national priorities.
Whatever the outcome, the dispute has exposed the underlying strain within the ruling coalition. It reveals how quickly alliances built on shared victory can unravel once local interests come into play.
If the UDA leadership and Khalwale fail to reconcile, Western Kenya could once again become a battleground of shifting loyalties, where parties rise and fall with the personalities that lead them.
For now, all eyes remain on the senator’s next move. His written response to the disciplinary letter will mark the first step in determining whether he stays, leaves, or forces the party to rethink its approach to dissent.
In either case, the episode has already reshaped the political conversation in Western Kenya, setting the stage for a contest that is as much about loyalty and identity as it is about votes.
