Busia Woman Representative and Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) acting Secretary General Catherine Omanyo has revealed that absenteeism from key party meetings contributed to the attempted removal of Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna from the party’s secretary general position.
Omanyo said Sifuna frequently missed National Executive Committee (NEC) sittings, sometimes without apology, raising concern among party officials over his commitment to internal party processes and leadership responsibilities.
In some instances, she alleged, the senator would skip crucial meetings without notifying anyone, a pattern ODM leaders viewed as undermining communication and organisational discipline within the party structures.
She further claimed that when NEC agendas did not align with his position, Sifuna often opted to stay away rather than attend and present his objections during deliberations.
According to Omanyo, such conduct was interpreted within ODM as bordering on indiscipline, especially for a senior official expected to coordinate party operations effectively.
She insisted that members who disagree with agenda items should attend meetings and voice their concerns instead of absenting themselves, to ensure accountability and transparency.
Despite earlier insisting he would not relinquish the secretary general position to Oburu Odinga, Sifuna has since been engaged in a legal dispute over the disputed seat.
He was removed from office on February 11, 2026, following a National Executive Committee meeting held in Kilifi that endorsed changes to the party’s top leadership structure.
Party officials have maintained that internal processes were followed, insisting that leadership changes were necessary to strengthen ODM’s organisational efficiency and cohesion going forward.
The dispute continues in court as Sifuna challenges his removal, while ODM leadership maintains that party discipline and participation in meetings remain central to its operations.
The ODM National Executive Committee remains the party’s highest decision-making organ between party conventions, responsible for shaping policy direction, leadership accountability, and enforcement of internal rules and structures.
Observers say the ongoing dispute reflects deeper tensions within ODM over succession politics, internal discipline, and the balance between loyalty to leadership and freedom of dissent among senior officials.
As the matter proceeds in court, both sides are expected to present evidence regarding attendance records, meeting resolutions, and party procedures that led to the disputed leadership change.
Party insiders maintain that the outcome of the case could set a precedent for how ODM handles future internal disputes, particularly concerning attendance, discipline, and enforcement of leadership responsibilities among elected officials.
Legal arguments are expected to intensify soon now.
