ODM Secretary General Edwin Sifuna and Deputy Party Leader Godfrey Osotsi did not attend the National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting held in Mombasa on Tuesday morning, triggering fresh debate about internal party tensions and ongoing leadership discussions.
A member of the NEC confirmed that Sifuna sent an apology but did not give detailed reasons for skipping the meeting. His absence drew attention because the session carries major political weight and comes at a time when divisions within the Orange Democratic Movement continue to widen.
Several insiders link his decision to stay away to the growing friction among top officials over the party’s direction and possible leadership changes.
Godfrey Osotsi, who serves as the Vihiga Senator, explained his absence directly. He said he remained in Nairobi to handle Senate duties and could not travel to Mombasa. He maintained that his parliamentary responsibilities required his presence and took priority over the NEC sitting.
Party insiders say the meeting agenda includes sensitive matters that could reshape the party’s leadership structure.
Discussions around Sifuna’s position have intensified in recent days, with some members pushing for a formal review while others warn that such a move could damage party unity and public trust. The timing of the talks has added pressure and raised suspicion among rival factions.
Reports from within ODM show that some officials have floated the name of Busia Governor Paul Otuoma as a possible replacement in the event of a leadership shake-up. However, the suggestion has not received unanimous support.
Different camps inside the party continue to disagree sharply over both the process and the political consequences of any attempted change.
Ahead of the meeting, ODM National Treasurer Timothy Bosire downplayed the disagreements and described them as part of normal democratic practice inside the party. He stressed that internal debate should not surprise members or supporters.
According to him, disagreement does not automatically signal a crisis but reflects competing views within a broad political movement.
Senior officials also briefed NEC members on the legal and constitutional framework that governs removal from office within ODM. They outlined possible scenarios and warned members to follow party rules strictly before taking any drastic step.
The leadership emphasized procedure, documentation, and the right to fair hearing.
Article 74 of the ODM Constitution sets clear conditions under which an office holder stops serving in a party role. These conditions include expiry of term, death, resignation from office, resignation from the party, or bankruptcy.
The constitution also allows removal through a formal NEC resolution or through recommendations from the Disciplinary Committee or a Branch Executive Committee.
The same article requires due process before removal. The rules state that the party must give any affected official a fair chance to respond to accusations or defend their position before a final decision. That requirement limits arbitrary dismissals and forces the party to document reasons and follow procedure.
Supporters aligned with Sifuna have already taken a hard stance. They say they will resist attempts to push them out and remain ready to face disciplinary action if necessary.
This group frames the dispute as a struggle over the party’s ideological direction and its independence ahead of future elections.
Embakasi East MP Babu Owino voiced strong defiance and told rivals that his camp will not back down even under threat of expulsion. He argued that the party must stay loyal to its base and avoid political arrangements that contradict its core promises.
He also said that elected leaders can always return to voters if internal processes remove them from office.
Siaya Governor James Orengo echoed a similar line and rejected any pressure to support political cooperation that some members oppose. He insisted that ODM should chart its own path toward forming the next government and fielding a presidential candidate.
He warned against forced alignments and maintained that members must guide decisions through grassroots support rather than elite bargains.
Outside the Mombasa meeting venue, tension showed on the ground as groups of ODM supporters gathered near the hotel. Some attendees expressed concern that rival camps had mobilized supporters to influence the atmosphere around the meeting. The presence of crowds increased anxiety among delegates, though party officials continued with scheduled sessions.
The current standoff exposes a deeper strategic split inside ODM. One side supports broader political cooperation and pre-election arrangements, including possible talks with rival parties.
Another side rejects that path and pushes for a more independent strategy heading into the next general election cycle. That strategic divide now spills into leadership battles and procedural fights.
Sifuna’s absence, whether tactical or unavoidable, adds another layer to the power contest. When a secretary general misses a high-stakes NEC meeting during a leadership dispute, observers will question motive, timing, and internal coordination. Even if his explanation stands, the political interpretation will not disappear.
What happens next depends on how strictly the NEC applies the party constitution and whether factions accept the outcome. If members follow procedure and allow full defense and voting, the party can contain the fallout. If camps push shortcuts or ambush votes, expect escalation, court challenges, and public splits.
ODM now faces a simple but tough test: enforce its constitution consistently or let factional pressure override the rules. The choice will determine whether this turns into routine internal democracy or a full leadership crisis.
