Orange Democratic Movement Chairperson Gladys Wanga, Party Leader Oburu Oginga (right) Deputy Leader Simba Arati, (left) and Uasin Gishu County Governor Jonathan Bii (centre), during a press conference at the county headquarters in Eldoret.
This column typically comments on public finance matters, but today, we veer off into politics. The two disciplines are sides of the same governance coin.
Since Raila Odinga’ s demise in October, the once seemingly indomitable political outfit has been tinkering. There have been bickering, public spats among officials and contradictory messaging.
ODM is a huge political movement that has influenced public affairs and democratic practice since its inception in 2005. The management of the party’s affairs generates interest across the country. Well-managed parties are crucial for a healthy and functioning democracy, as they act as the primary link between citizens and the government.
In a parliamentary democracy, parties are key levers of the social contract. Their effective operation facilitates good governance, ensures accountability and promotes national stability.
ODM was conceived as a centre-left movement with social democratic credentials, advocating a mixed economy and an extensive welfare state within a liberal framework.
Odinga’s death left a gaping void, occasioning jostling for control by factions. The lack of a titular leader to call top officials to order has resulted in suspicion, discomfort and public disagreements. At inception, ODM had respected top officials, among them former Cabinet Minister Henry Kosgey and current Kisumu Governor Anyang Nyong’o, as chairman and secretary-general respectively.
Formidable support system
These officials created a formidable support system around Odinga. Prof Nyong’o was crucial in breathing ideological air into the ODM veins and establishing a solid structural anchor. He is a rare intellectual gem, with sound philosophical and ideological tethering and commitment to social democratic ideals. During his time as the secretary-general, the party soared, gaining national stature and competitiveness.
Subsequent secretaries-general have excelled more in linguistic exhibitionism, shouting matches and a penchant for hearing their own voices than demonstrable intellectual acuity or ideological commitment to the ideals of the party.
After Prof Nyong’o’s exit from the fulcrum of the party, there emerged an obvious void, forcing Odinga to take up more responsibilities. It is no wonder, therefore, that while Odinga was busy on his AU campaigns, he preferred Prof Nyong’o to take charge of ODM affairs.
History records that on February 28, 2014, some high-ranking ODM officials – including the serving secretary-general – had schemed a hostile takeover of the party during the National Delegates Convention at Kasarani stadium, Nairobi. It took a quick action by the hawk-eyed “Men in Black” to scuttle the plan.
In a nutshell, Odinga’s death and Nyong’o’s absence from the centre have punctured ODM near-fatally. Not insignificant is the convolution between the leadership of the Luo community and that of ODM.
The struggle for the Luo “kingpin” has everything to do with the belief that once a person rises to the helm of ODM, s/he automatically becomes the leader of the community.
It was purely coincidental that Odinga and his father Jaramogi held the two roles of party leader and “kingpin” concurrently. The Luo is one of the largest communities in Eastern and the Horn of Africa, straddling South Sudan, Ethiopia, the DR Congo, Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya, with a population estimated at 20 million.
A leader of the community combines cultural and political roles. The leader must be a person of unmistakable face recognition and respectability in the six countries. Jaramogi and Odinga had unique traits and track records that made them combine the two roles seamlessly. It is instructive that titular leaders of the Luo community are not typically elected.
As it is, there is yet no obvious leader who enjoys respect across the board. Senator Oburu Oginga comes close due to his astute conciliatory acumen, non-controversial demeanour and appreciation of Luo culture.
Unfortunately, he comes into this role as an octogenarian bereft of vigour. Besides, it is noteworthy that the Luo kingpin need not necessarily be a politician. One could emerge from the public service or industry. The restless individuals should, therefore, hold their horses until the right time comes for the Luo to unveil a leader who will enjoy legitimacy as the face of the community.
Tensions
There are also tensions in the Jaramogi family that threaten to spill over to ODM. One hopes the family will resolve the issues without exposing its soft underbelly for public scrutiny. At the same time, those warming up to fill Odinga’s shoes as substantive party leader should remember that ODM members loved him more than they loved the party. Any presumption that the Luo have more birthrights than other communities in ODM will most probably reduce the party to a Luo affair.
Then there is the elephant in the house: ODM’s presence in the Broad-Based Government. While conceiving this alliance, Odinga and UDA leader President William Ruto, explained that the objective for cooperating was to implement a 10-point agenda. The agenda was largely concerned with correcting past injustices, addressing rights violations, electoral reforms, eliminating discrimination and promoting shared prosperity, among other issues.
Initially, Odinga had indicated that the terms of the arrangement would be reviewed, and depending on the goodwill of the ruling UDA towards the 10-point agenda, ODM would decide if it was going to support President Ruto’s re-election bid. The position seemed to have changed over time as Odinga became unambiguous about supporting the President for his second term. The clearest indication of his position was during the burial of former Assistant Minister Phoebe Asiyo on August 25, 2025.
He said: “Those who are shouting ‘one term’ should hold their horses. When the time comes, we will go to the people to show them what we shall have done for them. Those others can also bring their ideas for the electorate to compare. We are sure we shall win.”
Those arguing that Odinga did not give any commitment to Ruto about 2027 should revisit the clip. Parties in Kenya tend to fold up or become pale shadows of their former selves once their vision bearers die or the purpose for which they were formed is no longer tenable.
That happened to Kanu, Narc, PNU, TNA and others. ODM has, however, remained alive and relevant despite Odinga’s five presidential poll losses, suggesting strong party structures. One hopes the ideals and structures that sustained the party during Odinga’s leadership can outlive the enigma. It must not be lost on ODM members that the accusations and counter accusations flying around are part of the competitive nature of party democracy and should be handled with a pinch of salt.
UDA is keen to ensure ODM actualises the promise Odinga made about supporting the broad-based government arrangement beyond 2027. Dr Oginga appears agreeable to this position. However, some senior party officials do not want anything to do with the President.
While this divergence of opinion is acceptable in a democratic space, it is responsible for the bickering in ODM. At the same time, other parties like Jubilee and Wiper that are toying with gunning for the presidency in 2027 want a piece of ODM. They are behaving like hyenas (pun intended), waiting and hoping for the spoils as ODM crumbles.
The ODM grassroots membership is worried about the rows and mixed signals from top officials. Most ordinary voters think party issues should be resolved in-house to foster unity and goal congruence. Elites may have different narratives, but as the majoritarian principle goes, the majority will have their way as the minority have their say.
Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.
Prof Ongore is a Public Finance and Corporate Governance Scholar based at the Technical University of Kenya. [email protected]
