Edwin Watenya Sifuna on Monday moved to the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) seeking to halt disciplinary proceedings initiated against him by the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), setting the stage for a sharp legal clash over procedure and jurisdiction.
The case, heard before a five-member tribunal chaired by Hon. Gad Gathu Kiragu in Nairobi, brought up two competing applications: Sifuna’s bid for conservatory orders and ODM’s preliminary objection seeking to have the complaint struck out.
Appearing for ODM, Advocate Ken Amondi, alongside Sam Makori, took a firm position that Sifuna’s case should not proceed, arguing that it is essentially a reintroduction of an earlier dispute that had already been before the tribunal.
Amondi submitted that the current application is a reframed version of a previous case that failed to meet procedural thresholds, maintaining that the tribunal should not allow what he characterised as an attempt to revive the same issues through a different legal approach.
He argued that Sifuna had not introduced any new material facts to justify reopening the dispute, insisting that the matter remains premature and improperly before the tribunal.
According to Amondi, the complainant had not fully exhausted the party’s internal dispute resolution mechanisms, a requirement under the law before invoking the tribunal’s jurisdiction.
He further maintained that ODM’s disciplinary process is lawful and ongoing, and that the tribunal should not interfere with internal party affairs at this stage.
Amondi opposed the request to suspend the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) resolution and subsequent disciplinary steps, arguing that granting such orders would disrupt the party’s governance structures and disciplinary mandate.
He urged the tribunal to uphold the preliminary objection and strike out the complaint, warning that allowing the application would set a precedent where litigants repeatedly bring back the same disputes under different formulations.
On the other hand, Senior Counsel Isaac Okero, appearing for Sifuna, argued that the case was properly before the tribunal and met all legal requirements, including attempts at internal dispute resolution.
Okero challenged the legality of the NEC resolution made on February 11, 2026, arguing that it resulted in Sifuna’s removal as Secretary General without notice or a hearing.
He described ODM’s approach as fundamentally flawed, stating that the party was ignoring clear constitutional provisions and due process requirements.
“It is a characteristic… when faced with the adversity of adherence to the rule of law… the reaction is to place one’s head in the sand,” Okero told the tribunal, criticising the party’s handling of the dispute.
He maintained that the resolution was immediate and self-executing, and that any subsequent disciplinary process could not cure what he termed as an initial violation of Sifuna’s rights.
The tribunal is now expected to determine whether to grant conservatory orders halting the disciplinary process and whether ODM’s preliminary objection will succeed in striking out the case.
