ODM as an organisation has multiple faces, some public and many others clothed in opaque mystery. What many people may not appreciate is that the mystic ODM was largely responsible for the party’s growth and status.
The legal framework within the party operates under the Political Parties’ Act and with mere motions for the leadership to fulfil the statutory requirements.
The party has been variously and many times described as the largest in the region. However, what is not disclosed is the parameters on which the declaration is made. ODM, the organisation, has been more of movement as its name suggest than an organic political party. That organisational structure fit well into the leadership style of its founding father, Raila Odinga.
The enigma established an organisation that fused the elements of both political party and political movement into one. This was useful for him to balance many interests and sustain himself atop the party leadership hierarchy.
Political parties are organised, enduring groups seeking to win elections, gain power and control government policy. On the other hand, political movements are often informal, issue-focused and use unconventional, grassroots methods to push for social or political change from outside the government.
The boundary between movements and parties as two forms of political organisation has always been blurred. The evolution of social movements into fully fledged parties has re-gained saliency through the success of new players.
They entered party politics as movements claiming to embody new forms of political organisation. Simultaneously, parties try to reinvigorate themselves by establishing links to movements or by forming strategic alliances with them to reach new pools of supporters or reconnect with society. Movements use non-institutional or non-traditional modes of action for violent social change.
Movements are seen as the creators of a new social, civil code and new knowledge. Movements take into account new requirements that remain unanswered by parties and articulate them outside the electoral space of the public sphere.
Movements can influence the party system by transforming themselves into a political party of a new type - the party-movement. Thanks to the constant success in mobilising the mass community, the new social movements challenge established parties in terms of their traditional role of mediators between citizens and the political sphere.
The social movements threaten parties with programme, electoral and organisational challenges. Parties attract movements as needed: mobilisation movement strategies; expert opinion of movements in a specific area; and representation in movements for its members to build wide social networks and communication channels.
An assessment of contemporary successful political parties left and right shows that, apparently the promise of political and social change today requires more movement-fuelling than ever. Understood as adaptive organisations, parties reflect how societies demand democratic participation, co-determination and political leadership.
Hence, a perspective on the organisational change of political parties might shed light on how parties react to changing social surroundings - and how expectations and hopes for democratic participation, representation and political leadership have evolved. Raila understood this dynamic and created ODM in the mould of party movement. Therefore, circumstances and convenience determined when he used the ODM as a movement or as a political party.
Party movements are organisations that have attributes of both political parties and social movements. Like parties, they desire a voice in the decisions of legislative bodies. Like social movements, they challenge existing power and advocate change, often using non-institutionalised means for expressing their message.
They appear in the space left open by the failure of existing political parties and social movements to adequately represent their interests and achieve their goals. They may become independent parties or work within existing parties.
Party movements can be found in most political systems. Their impact is felt whenever they are able to introduce new issues to the political agenda, force traditional political parties to take account of their grievances, or change the contours of the party system.
Raila as party leader was deftly able to use ODM within Parliament, civil disobedience and mass action in the streets to achieve his mission.
Myths are symbolic, traditional stories, often featuring supernatural elements, designed to explain cultural practices, beliefs, or natural phenomena. Reality consists of objective, observable facts and occurrences independent of belief.
While myths carry symbolic truths about life, they are usually not literally or scientifically true. Myth is exaggerated and is usually meant as a symbolic idea so it connects to wider audience in varying depths. The current leadership challenges facing ODM are more a result of the myths than the reality around the party. Over time, Raila was able to weave a larger-than-life image of the party solely on account of his charisma.
In his absence, the myths can no longer sustain the party in the real political environment that is Kenya. It has come to pass that the hitherto strongest party in the region cannot manage transition and survive succession. ODM had previously made it clear that it was in the league of CCM of Tanzania and ANC of South Africa.
These two parties are much older than ODM but have managed their successions and leadership transition with an amazingly relative ease. The ODM party’s myth of invincibility is a bubble that has burst.
The party lived a lie of numbers. Its leaders mistook the presidential vote tally in favour of Raila for their membership numbers. Granted that it had millions of Kenyans in its roll. But the Raila presidential vote tally cannot be equated to the party membership register. There are many people who have consistently voted for Jakom in his perennial quest for the presidency without any regards to the party, ODM.
The majority of party members are aspirants who have to purchase life membership to be granted clearance to participate in party nominations for elective positions. The rest comprise of the masses who as ordinary members pay for the annual subscription when it is convenient. They shared space with the followers of Raila who care least about the ODM party.
For them, it was Raila and Raila; his portrait was enough to get them to the ballot booth on election day. A study is currently underway to determine who amongst the cadres of ODM has the majority. What is not in doubt is that Raila’s numbers are way above ODM party’s membership roll. That is the reality.
At its inception, the party was touted to have a dynamic and strong leadership structure with decision-making organs that are democratic and sensitive to the people.
The party’s advantage was that Raila was blessed with abundance of leadership knowledge and political skills. This enabled him to navigate the party through some of the most difficult turbulence. The clarion call by top leaders that Baba was always right was not an exaggeration after all.
The ODM decision-making organs comprise the Central Management Committee, Executive Committee, National Governing Council and the National Delegates Convention.
All danced to the tune of the then party leader. Being autocratic, Raila ensured that his desires and agenda were conveniently sieved through the rigours of the party organs. He also had the necessary resources to keep his base loyal.
Beyond the national leadership organs, the party had no functional structures at the county, constituency and ward levels. This made nonsense of the claim that ODM had grassroots leadership network.
Most of the agents at the polling stations were volunteers for the presidential candidate, Raila, and not necessarily registered party members. Related to this is the fallacy that ODM is intrinsically national and organic. Raila deliberately created blocs within the party, each with its own kingpin. The kingpins reported directly to Jakom on regional concerns.
Therefore, the loyalty of the Coast region to Raila was grounded on issues separate and different from those of Western. The Luo Nyanza was controlled largely by myths, kinship and historicity. ODM has been a conglomeration of interests within regional and ethnic enclaves.
This explains why in the absence of Raila, the leaders in the various organs appear confused about the vision of the party as espoused by the party leader.
They are equally disunited in designing a strategy to address the challenges of the nation. Mundane matters such as preparation for the 2027 general election have become subject of discussion at sporadic public rallies, funerals and wedding ceremonies.
The chickens have come home to roost. The ODM party leadership must discard myths around the party and confront the reality of Kenya’s political environment, lest the ship continue to sink.
Comments 0
Sign in to join the conversation
Sign In Create AccountNo comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!