Parties registrar ratifies ODM decision to kick out Sifuna

The Registrar of Political Parties (RPP) in Kenya has ratified the Orange Democratic Movement's (ODM) decision to remove Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna as its Secretary General, affirming that the party's internal disciplinary process complied with both the Political Parties Act, 2011, and the ODM constitution. This development underscores the RPP's crucial oversight role in ensuring internal party democracy and adherence to statutory requirements. While the RPP's ratification clears the way for ODM to effect the change, Senator Sifuna's legal team has challenged the decision, citing procedural impropriety and indicating further legal recourse. The case highlights the delicate balance between party autonomy in internal affairs and the constitutional rights of members, with potential implications for the interpretation and enforcement of political party regulations in Kenya.

The political landscape in Kenya is once again abuzz following the recent ratification by the Registrar of Political Parties (RPP) of the Orange Democratic Movement's (ODM) decision to oust Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna from his position as Secretary General. In a letter dated July 9, 2026, the RPP confirmed that ODM's internal disciplinary process adhered to the stringent requirements of the Political Parties Act, 2011, and the party's own constitutional provisions. This ratification marks a significant moment, as it validates the party's exercise of internal discipline and the RPP's role as a regulatory arbiter.

This development is particularly pertinent for legal professionals and political stakeholders, as it illuminates the intricate interplay between party autonomy, statutory compliance, and individual member rights within Kenya's multi-party democratic framework. The RPP's decision, while seemingly conclusive, has been met with a challenge from Senator Sifuna's legal team, who contend that the process was procedurally flawed. This article delves into the legal underpinnings of the RPP's authority, the procedural safeguards enshrined in Kenyan law for internal party disputes, and the broader implications of this ruling for party governance and member accountability.

The regulatory framework governing political parties in Kenya is primarily established by the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, and the Political Parties Act, 2011. The Office of the Registrar of Political Parties (ORPP) is a state office created under Article 260 of the Constitution and Section 33 of the Political Parties Act. Its mandate is extensive, encompassing the registration, regulation, monitoring, investigation, and supervision of political parties to ensure their compliance with the Act and the Constitution. The RPP is also responsible for maintaining a register of political parties and their members, and for verifying and making these lists publicly available.

The Political Parties Act, 2011, serves as the foundational legal reference for the management of political parties, emphasizing the importance of internal democracy and adherence to constitutional principles. Crucially, the Act mandates that the constitution or rules of every political party must provide for internal dispute resolution mechanisms. These mechanisms are intended to be the first port of call for resolving disputes between members or between a member and the party, in line with the doctrine of exhaustion of internal remedies. Should these internal processes fail, or if a party member is aggrieved by a party's decision, recourse is available through the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT), established under Section 39 of the Act. The PPDT has jurisdiction to hear disputes between members of a political party, between political parties, and appeals from decisions of the Registrar of Political Parties.

The RPP's ratification of ODM's decision to remove Senator Sifuna as Secretary General hinges on the finding that the party's internal process complied with both the Political Parties Act and its own constitution. This compliance assessment is a core function of the RPP, which acts as a gatekeeper to ensure that political parties, as public entities, operate democratically and lawfully. The RPP's letter explicitly stated that the decision followed a review of documents submitted by ODM and noted the absence of a response from Sifuna regarding the matter.

However, the path to this ratification has not been without contest. Senator Sifuna had previously lodged a complaint with the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT), challenging the ODM National Executive Committee (NEC) resolution for his removal. His arguments centered on alleged procedural flaws, bias within the party's Internal Dispute Resolution Panel, and violations of Article 74 of the ODM Constitution, the Fair Administrative Action Act, and Article 47 of the Constitution, which guarantees fair administrative action. The PPDT initially declined to issue interim orders to halt the implementation of his removal, effectively clearing the way for the RPP to proceed with its statutory process while the substantive dispute remained pending before the Tribunal. This highlights the PPDT's adherence to the principle that parties must first exhaust their internal dispute resolution mechanisms, provided due process is followed.

The PPDT had, in an earlier ruling, affirmed ODM's constitutional authority to manage its internal disciplinary processes, provided due process was observed. While the Tribunal had previously struck down an initial NEC resolution that sought to remove Sifuna without a fair hearing, it simultaneously granted ODM the liberty to institute and conclude disciplinary proceedings in accordance with its constitution and the law. The RPP's subsequent ratification suggests that, from its perspective, ODM successfully rectified any initial procedural defects and conducted a compliant process.

Senator Sifuna's legal team has, however, deemed the RPP's action as procedurally improper and has indicated an intention to pursue further legal remedies. This suggests that the matter may yet return to the PPDT, or even the High Court, for a judicial review of the RPP's decision or the underlying party process. The jurisdiction of the PPDT includes appeals from decisions of the Registrar of Political Parties, and its decisions can be appealed to the High Court on points of law. This ongoing legal challenge underscores the tension between a political party's right to maintain discipline and a member's constitutional right to fair administrative action and due process. The outcome of any further legal proceedings will be crucial in clarifying the boundaries of party autonomy and the extent of regulatory oversight by the RPP and the PPDT.

The Registrar of Political Parties' ratification of ODM's decision to remove Senator Edwin Sifuna is a significant affirmation of the RPP's role in upholding the integrity of internal party governance in Kenya. It reinforces the statutory requirement for political parties to adhere to their own constitutions and the Political Parties Act, 2011, when undertaking disciplinary actions. For legal practitioners, this case serves as a critical reminder of the importance of meticulous procedural compliance in internal party matters, particularly concerning fair administrative action and due process, as enshrined in Article 47 of the Constitution and the Fair Administrative Action Act.

Practitioners advising political parties must ensure that internal disciplinary mechanisms are robust, transparent, and strictly followed to withstand scrutiny from both the RPP and the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal. Conversely, those representing aggrieved party members must be prepared to navigate the multi-layered dispute resolution framework, from internal party processes to the PPDT and potentially higher courts. The ongoing challenge to the RPP's decision indicates that the final word on this matter may still be pending, and legal professionals should closely monitor further developments, as they will undoubtedly shape the jurisprudence on party discipline and internal democracy in Kenya.