A dispute over the removal of former ODM Secretary-General Edwin Sifuna is set to reach a crucial stage next month after the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal reserved its judgment for September 10.
The ruling is expected to determine whether the Tribunal can proceed to consider the substance of Sifuna's challenge or whether his case was improperly filed and should be dismissed on jurisdictional grounds.
Sifuna moved to the Tribunal after the Registrar of Political Parties ratified his removal from the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) position.
The former secretary-general argues that the party's National Executive Committee (NEC) acted beyond its powers when it removed him from office.
Through Senior Counsel Okero, Sifuna told the Tribunal that the decision violated Article 74(2) of the ODM Constitution.
“The NEC acted outside its mandate under Article 74(2) of the ODM Constitution,” his lawyers submitted.
Sifuna maintains that the process leading to his removal was unlawful and that the party's leadership exceeded its constitutional authority.
But ODM has opposed the complaint, arguing that the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hear it in its current form.
The party, represented by lawyers Sam Makori, Ken Amondi and T.J. Kajwang, raised a preliminary objection, saying Sifuna should not have filed the case as a fresh complaint.
Instead, ODM argues that he should have approached the Tribunal through an appeal under Regulation 7 of the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (Procedure) Regulations, 2017.
The party has also defended the NEC's decision, insisting that it acted within the authority granted to it under Article 74(2) of the ODM Constitution.
ODM further rejected claims that Sifuna's removal was arbitrary, saying the disciplinary process included safeguards to ensure that he was treated fairly.
“The NEC acted well within Article 74(2) of the ODM Constitution, with the Disciplinary Committee safeguarding procedural fairness,” the party submitted.
The Tribunal will now consider the written submissions filed by both sides, after the parties agreed that the complaint should be determined on that basis.
The jurisdictional dispute is likely to be central to the ruling. If the Tribunal finds that Sifuna used the wrong procedure in bringing the case, it could dismiss the complaint without considering the merits of his challenge.
However, if it finds that it has jurisdiction, the Tribunal could proceed to examine whether the NEC acted lawfully in removing him from the influential party position.
The case has also drawn attention to broader questions surrounding internal party democracy, including the powers of political parties to discipline senior officials and the role of the Registrar of Political Parties in ratifying such decisions.
The Tribunal's judgment on September 10 is therefore expected to provide a significant test of ODM's internal processes and Sifuna's challenge to his removal.