Concerns about the future of ODM have been the subject of debate in public, academic and private discourse ever since the demise of its founding leader, Raila Odinga, on October 15.
Key leaders within the party and its coalition partners have been apprehensive about how the leadership of the country’s largest party navigates the turbulence that naturally sets in upon the departure of a strong leader such as Raila. Leadership struggles will consequently become tense and cause collateral casualties.
ODM emerged from the revolt movement that had begun to form within the Narc government after abandonment of the pre-election MoU between LDP and NAK in 2002. Raila and the Kanu rebel brigade, which had opposed President Daniel Moi’s unilateral anointment of Uhuru Kenyatta as Kanu’s presidential candidate, felt betrayed by Mwai Kibaki. The Cabinet was constituted in total disregard of the agreement between the two parties.
Raila and his team received the short end of the stick in the deal.
The ensuing constitutional conference at the Bomas of Kenya provided the first opportunity for the protagonists to flex their muscle. There was a stalemate and a divided Cabinet subjected the resultant draft constitution to a referendum.
The symbol of an orange for those opposed to the draft laws became the harbinger of the subsequent political movement.
He became the key pillar of the campaigns and the movement relied heavily on his charisma. When the movement transformed into a political party, as fate would have it, he became its natural choice of supreme leader.
He stood out in the Pentagon, far above his fellow party luminaries. The others deferred to him and he led them as the typical philosopher king of the classical Greek democratic civilisation.
The ODM party was, therefore, formed and established largely on the personal skills and experiences of Raila in politics spanning decades of struggle.
This type of leadership is known as autocracy. Autocratic leadership is a management style whereby a single leader holds complete power and makes decisions with little to no input from team members.
This approach is characterised by strict control, a clear hierarchy and a focus on the leader's directives that are expected to be followed without question.
While this kind of leadership can lead to quick decisions and high productivity in structured environments, it may also result in low morale, limited innovation and dependency on the leader. Key characteristics include centralised power and strict control whereby the leader exercises tight oversight over processes, policies and outcomes.
The organisation has a clear hierarchy that clearly defines roles and responsibilities in a top-down structure. However, it has limited input from the general membership who are not involved in the decision-making process and are expected to follow instructions. Autocracy has been proved effective in crisis situations where quick and decisive action is needed.
It is best deployed in high-stakes operation environments requiring strict adherence to rules and commands, which are crucial for the safety and preservation of the organisation ¾ but more so for the supreme leader.
It is nonetheless counterproductive as it produces inexperienced teams who lack the courage to make independent decisions.
It is quite clear that ODM was managed under the autocratic style of Raila as the party leader. Upon his demise, the party rank and file find themselves in unfamiliar territory.
The majority of the members and some top leaders were born when Raila was already a phenomenal leader in politics. They have known no other revolutionary leader even as they came of age and joined active politics.
Raila’s political journey began at the feet of his father, as the country was agitating for independence. He thus grew up politically in an environment of resistance and rebellion.
These conditions crystalised his skills and leadership qualities in the totalitarian regime of the socialist East Germany. He went there for further engineering studies during the cold war.
His father had strong links with the East, which practiced socialist and communist ideologies. Communism and scientific socialism espoused centralism and totalitarian political practices.
They created a single leader at the apex with absolute power and supreme authority. With the astute deployment of propaganda, the party central command wove a mystique narrative around the leader. This was meant to ensure unquestionable loyalty from the membership and leadership hierarchy.
They established a well-nourished gangland type of militia to unleash brute force for the ruthless enforcement of the leader’s edicts.
Thus, while Raila created ODM as a democratic political movement, it had the hallmark of a socialist party. Jakom ranked among the legendary party leaders such as Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin of the USSR; Winston Churchill and later Margaret Thatcher of the UK; Napoleon Bonaparte and Charles de Gaulle of France; Walter Ulbricht and Erich Honecker of the German Democratic Republic, known as East Germany; and Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping of China. Closer home it was Mwalimu Julius Nyerere of Tanzania.
The only difference is that while these men and one woman rose to lead their governments, Raila controlled successive Kenya governments from outside the presidency. This was a rare feat and one of a kind historically.
It is against this background that we should understand the confusion that is steadily engulfing the ODM leadership. The departed leader was larger than life and clearly bigger than the party as a formal organisation. The various levels of leadership and decision-making organs existed to carry out his instructions, not to initiate more independent policy processes.
The lower ranks of leadership have demonstrated a lack of unified and coherent decisions and actions since Raila was buried. In a hurried move and without reference to any party organ, Dr Oburu Oginga was appointed acting party leader.
This has since been ratified by the party National Executive Council. Then there have emerged divergent positions regarding ODM’s relationship to the party with others, especially, UDA. At the height of the Gen Z violent protests, President William Ruto reached out to Raila for support. The ODM leader agreed to work with the government under the broad-based government framework.
The Orange party broke ranks with its coalition partners in the Azimio One Kenya to have some of its leading officials join the Cabinet. Two distinct groups emerged to opposed the coalition with UDA under Ruto.
On one hand were Raila’s comrades, including Governors Anyang’ Nyong’o (Kisumu) and James Orengo (Siaya). On the other hand were youthful parliamentarians such as Otiende Amollo, Babu Owino and party secretary-general Edwin Sifuna, who is Nairobi senator.
In the absence of Raila, these groups have been sounding discordant voices regarding the truce and pact between ODM and UDA. There is no unanimity on the last instructions the former Prime Minister issued regarding the future engagements of the party.
Due to its historical autocracy, the party cannot fall back on any institutional decision regarding the actions of the party. Every leader has a version of the same, meaning Raila’s last instructions, and none is similar.
This clearly shows the party organs existed to serve Raila and not vice versa. It further explains why at the top level, the search for Raila’s replacement has preoccupied leaders to the extent of publicly discrediting each other.
It is telling that while Oburu was not a senior member of any top leadership organ, he has nonetheless been confirmed as party leader, albeit in an acting capacity. This elevation is notwithstanding the existence of two deputy party leaders, Simba Arati and Abdulswamad Nassir.
Unfortunately for ODM, the search for a new Raila in the current leadership strata will come to naught. The former premier had built his personal stature over time and under unique political circumstances.
His charisma and family heritage are unique to him and are irreplaceable. The party must out of logical necessity face its waterloo.
It had been able to survive and grow for decades because of Raila’s personalised leadership acumen and his successive failures to ascend to the presidency.
Without Raila and with nothing visionary to fight for, the party has no centre to hold it together any further. Things might fall apart.
Comments 0
Sign in to join the conversation
Sign In Create AccountNo comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!