OPINION: Is ODM losing the orange flame?

The Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), once a commanding force in Kenya’s political landscape, now stands at a delicate and defining crossroads.

For years, the party embodied resistance, reform, and the aspirations of millions. It was more than a political vehicle, it was a movement driven by identity, conviction, and the enduring influence of its long-time leader, H.E. Raila Amolo Odinga.

Today, however, that defining fire appears to flicker, as internal divisions and competing visions threaten to reshape its future.

The passing of H.E. Raila Odinga marked a profound turning point. His leadership had long served as the binding force within ODM, holding together diverse interests, regional dynamics, and political ambitions.

In his absence, those differences once carefully managed have surfaced more visibly. What the party faces now is not simply a leadership transition, but a deeper struggle over its identity and direction.

At the heart of this evolving contest are two dominant tendencies within the party, each offering a different reading of ODM’s current position and future path. One school of thought, associated with Dr. Oburu Odinga, leans toward continuity and strategic cooperation.

Supporters of this position interpret Raila’s final political engagements, particularly the 10-point agenda with the Kenya Kwanza administration as a deliberate shift toward constructive engagement.

In their view, ODM’s presence within or alongside government structures is not abandonment of principle, but a pragmatic approach to influence governance and secure development outcomes.

On the other side is a faction led by Secretary General Edwin Sifuna, backed by a number of influential leaders and long-standing party loyalists. This group advances a more critical stance, arguing that ODM’s engagement with the government was conditional, anchored on accountability and tangible delivery.

From their perspective, those conditions have not been fully met. As such, they call for a return to the party’s traditional posture as a watchdog; one that speaks firmly on behalf of citizens and maintains a clear distance from the establishment.

Their argument reflects a broader concern that proximity to power risks diluting ODM’s ideological clarity and grassroots credibility.

These competing visions have increasingly played out in public, exposing internal tensions that were once managed behind closed doors. Disputes over party leadership, including the contentious removal and reinstatement of key officials, have reinforced the perception of a party grappling with its own coherence.

For a movement that once thrived on discipline and unified messaging, such developments have inevitably raised questions about its internal stability.

The emergence of initiatives like the “Linda Mwananchi” movement further illustrates the depth of this internal unease. While presented by its proponents as an effort to reconnect with the people and restore the party’s founding spirit, it also signals a shift toward parallel mobilization.

This suggests that internal reconciliation is becoming more complex, as different factions seek to redefine the party’s identity from within and, increasingly, from outside its traditional structures.

In the wider context of Kenyan politics, ODM’s current situation reflects a broader institutional challenge; the transition from a personality-driven movement to a durable political organization.

Many parties built around influential figures struggle to maintain cohesion once that central figure is no longer present. ODM now faces that test. The question is whether it can evolve into a more institutionalized entity, guided by shared principles rather than individual influence.

Public perception, however, often moves faster than internal reform. To many observers, ODM today appears less like the cohesive force it once was and more like a divided house. Critics argue that internal rivalries risk overshadowing the issues that once defined the party’s relevance; governance, accountability, and social justice.

This perception has contributed to a narrative of decline, with some suggesting that the party is gradually losing both its political edge and its emotional connection with supporters.

Yet, it would be too simplistic to conclude that ODM’s story is one of irreversible decline. Political parties are dynamic; they face moments of crisis, but also opportunities for renewal.

The current challenges, while significant, could serve as a catalyst for introspection and reorganization. They present an opportunity for the party to clarify its ideological stance, strengthen its internal structures, and re-engage meaningfully with its grassroots base.

The path forward will require deliberate and disciplined effort. Rebuilding trust within the party, establishing clear and credible leadership processes, and articulating a unifying vision will be essential. More importantly, it will demand leadership that places collective purpose above individual ambition, a principle that once defined ODM at its strongest.

Ultimately, the question confronting ODM is not only about leadership, but about purpose. What does the party stand for in a changing political landscape? Can it reconcile its internal differences while remaining true to its founding ideals? And can it adapt to new political realities without losing the very identity that made it a national force?

Whether ODM is truly losing its orange flame or merely passing through a phase of transition remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that the choices it makes now will shape not only its own future, but also its role in Kenya’s broader democratic journey. .

For a party that once inspired hope and commanded national attention, the challenge is no longer just to endure but to rediscover the fire that once defined it.

The author is the MCA for Iftin ward and Deputy Speaker Garissa County Aasembly. A columnist and A playwright.