The case began when former Sports CS Rashid Echesa was linked to allegations that foreign investors had been promised access to a lucrative military procurement deal. As the officer responsible for screening and clearing visitors to the Deputy President’s office, Kenei was considered a key witness who could help investigators establish who entered the office and when.

On February 18, 2020, Kenei was summoned by investigators to record a statement regarding visitors to the Deputy President’s office during the period under investigation.

He was expected to provide crucial details about who met whom and how the alleged scheme unfolded. However, before he could appear before investigators, tragedy struck.

The following day, February 19, 2020, Kenei was found dead at his residence in Nairobi. His death instantly transformed a fraud investigation into a national mystery.

Kenei’s death changed the course of the case. What had begun as an inquiry into a fake tender scheme soon expanded to include questions surrounding the sudden death of a key witness.

Years later, his death remains one of Kenya’s most widely discussed unresolved cases. Many continue to question whether the officer possessed information that powerful individuals wanted concealed.

The mystery of “The Last Witness” continues to fuel public debate about accountability and the safety of witnesses in high-profile cases.

With this kind of trust in him, he should go for the top seat. That’s the only route to winning himself organic solid supporters like Raila.

Whether he wins or loses, THEY WILL STILL RALLY BEHIND HIM and take political directions from him 2027 and beyond.

Sifuna should know this is his God chosen season to shine in the political Arena. Asiposimama urais Nyota yake itakua imepungua mwangaza.

Let him run for the top seat aaunguke , but win himself Massive solid supporter across the country. After all, his supporters will still be there for him, waseme kura imeibiwa and on top have their 100 trust in him.

Had Raila made a mistake not to run for the top seat in 2007, his political star could have ndwindled. But since he stood his feet amidst all intimidation, he received Massive supporters across Kenya who stood by him through thick and thin.

Even when he lost elections, we could still stand with him tunasema ameibiwa and take his political commands. I know Sifuna was among Baba’s top students, akiweke kiburi kando, HE will be the Raila of our time.

The political landscape of Kenya has once again been stirred by significant internal changes within one of its major political entities, the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM). Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna, a prominent and often outspoken figure, has been removed as ODM SG, a development that marks a pivotal moment for the party and could reshape its trajectory ahead of the 2027 general election. This move follows months of escalating tensions, internal disputes, and legal battles, culminating in the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) ratifying his removal. The saga underscores the intricate dynamics of party democracy, the challenges of maintaining ideological cohesion, and the enduring influence of internal power struggles in Kenyan politics.

The Initial Attempt: February 2026 NEC Meeting and Tribunal Intervention

The journey towards Edwin Sifuna’s eventual removal as Secretary General began in earnest in February 2026. On February 11, 2026, the ODM National Executive Committee convened a meeting in Mombasa, chaired by party leader Oburu Odinga. During this crucial session, the NEC resolved to relieve Senator Sifuna of his duties as Secretary General with immediate effect. The party cited concerns over indiscipline and leadership conduct within its senior ranks as the primary reasons for this drastic action. Deputy Secretary General Catherine Omanyo was subsequently appointed to serve in an acting capacity.

However, the decision was not without immediate challenge. Sifuna swiftly moved to the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) on February 12, 2026, seeking to halt his removal. The PPDT, under Acting Chairperson Gad Gathu, certified his application as urgent and issued interim conservatory orders, effectively staying the implementation of the NEC’s resolution. These orders also restrained ODM from publishing the contested resolution in the Kenya Gazette, a critical step that would have formalized his ouster. This initial intervention by the tribunal provided Sifuna with a temporary reprieve, setting the stage for a protracted legal and political battle.

The dispute hinged on whether ODM had followed due process. Sifuna argued that he had not been informed of any allegations against him nor invited to respond to complaints of indiscipline, insubordination, or incompetence, rendering the NEC’s action unprocedural and illegal. This raised questions about the party’s adherence to its own constitution and the principles of natural justice.

On March 26, 2026, the PPDT delivered a significant ruling, dismissing Sifuna’s application and directing all parties to first exhaust ODM’s Internal Dispute Resolution Mechanism (IDRM). The tribunal emphasized the constitutional authority of political parties to manage their internal disciplinary processes, provided due process is followed. This ruling reaffirmed the doctrine of exhaustion, requiring members to utilize internal party channels before seeking external adjudication. Despite this, the dispute returned to the tribunal as Sifuna sought further orders to halt the internal process. On April 9, 2026, the tribunal clarified that ODM was at liberty to proceed with, hear, and determine the disciplinary case against Sifuna through its internal structures, but any resulting decisions could not be communicated or implemented until a related application challenging the IDRM process was concluded. All interim orders previously obtained by Sifuna were vacated, allowing the internal disciplinary process to advance.

The June 2026 Developments: Tribunal Ruling and Ratification of Removal

The internal wrangles reached a critical juncture in June 2026. On June 18, 2026, the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal delivered a crucial ruling that effectively cleared the path for ODM to proceed with disciplinary action against Senator Sifuna. The PPDT dismissed Sifuna’s application and vacated all interim orders that had previously stalled the disciplinary proceedings. This ruling strongly reinforced the “doctrine of exhaustion”, which mandates that parties must fully utilise internal dispute resolution channels before seeking intervention from external adjudicative bodies. The tribunal emphasised the importance of respecting the IDRM process within political parties, provided it is constitutionally grounded and properly exercised.

Following this decisive tribunal ruling, the ODM National Executive Committee wasted no time in acting. On Monday, June 22, 2026, the NEC convened a meeting at Chungwa House, chaired by ODM National Chairperson Homa Bay Governor Gladys Wanga, with party leader Oburu Odinga also present. The committee received and considered a report from the party’s Internal Disputes Resolution Committee (IDRC), which had been constituted to hear and determine the complaint against Senator Sifuna.

After reviewing the findings and recommendations, the NEC unanimously adopted the committee’s report and endorsed the removal of Senator Edwin Watenya Sifuna from office. Acting Secretary General Catherine Omanyo officially announced the decision, stating that “Effectively, Senator Sifuna ceases to be the Secretary-General of the ODM party”. The party justified its position by citing the PPDT’s remarks on the importance of internal party discipline and accountability, stating that the tribunal was reluctant to interfere with a political party’s disciplinary mechanisms. This marked the official and final removal of Edwin Sifuna as ODM SG from his leadership position within the party.

Key dates in the process:

• February 11, 2026: ODM NEC resolves to remove Sifuna.
• February 12, 2026: Sifuna obtains interim orders from PPDT.
• March 26, 2026: PPDT dismisses Sifuna’s application, directs internal resolution.
• April 9, 2026: PPDT clarifies ODM can proceed internally but not implement decision.
• June 18, 2026: PPDT vacates interim orders, allows ODM to proceed with disciplinary action.
• June 22, 2026: ODM NEC officially ratifies Sifuna’s removal as Secretary General.

Implications for ODM and Kenyan Politics

The removal of Edwin Sifuna as ODM SG carries significant implications for both the Orange Democratic Movement and the broader Kenyan political landscape.

• Internal Cohesion and Discipline: The party leadership, particularly figures aligned with Oburu Odinga, has emphasized that Sifuna’s removal was a measure to enforce discipline and recalibrate leadership. This move sends a strong message that the party is keen to assert its authority and ensure that officials align with the party’s strategic direction. However, it also exposes deep-seated divisions, with some factions, including Sifuna’s allies, arguing that the process was unconstitutional and procedurally flawed. This internal discord could either strengthen the party if dissenting voices are effectively managed, or it could lead to further fragmentation, especially as the party navigates its identity post-Raila Odinga.
• Leadership Succession and 2027 Elections: The leadership changes come at a critical time as ODM repositions itself ahead of the 2027 General Election. Oburu Odinga was officially confirmed as the party leader in March 2026, solidifying his authority. The removal of a vocal figure like Sifuna, who had openly opposed any plans to support President William Ruto’s re-election, highlights the ideological and strategic rift within ODM regarding potential alliances and its role as an opposition party. The party is tasked with spearheading new coalition negotiations and strengthening grassroots structures. The vacuum left by Sifuna’s departure could open opportunities for new leaders to emerge or consolidate power, but it also risks alienating a section of the party’s base that resonated with Sifuna’s outspoken stance.
• Party Democracy and Tribunal’s Role: The protracted legal back-and-forth with the Political Parties Disputes Tribunal underscores the crucial role of judicial bodies in upholding party constitutions and ensuring fair administrative action. While the tribunal initially provided Sifuna with a reprieve based on procedural fairness, its subsequent rulings consistently affirmed the principle of exhausting internal mechanisms, granting political parties the autonomy to manage their affairs once due process is observed. This establishes a precedent for how internal party disputes may be handled in the future, emphasising the need for parties to adhere strictly to their own rules.

 The Evolving Landscape of ODM Leadership

The removal of Edwin Sifuna as ODM SG marks a significant chapter in the ongoing evolution of the Orange Democratic Movement. From the initial NEC resolution in February 2026 to the decisive PPDT ruling in June 2026 and the subsequent ratification of his ouster, the process has been characterized by legal challenges and internal power dynamics. While the party leadership asserts that the move is aimed at enforcing discipline and aligning its strategic direction, the episode has undeniably highlighted simmering tensions and ideological divisions within ODM, particularly concerning its stance on cooperation with the current government and its leadership in the post-Raila Odinga era. As ODM prepares for the 2027 General Election, the party faces the dual challenge of consolidating its internal structures and redefining its role in Kenya’s shifting political landscape, all while navigating the implications of this high-profile leadership change. The coming months will reveal how these internal realignments impact ODM’s unity, electoral strategy, and its overall influence in national politics.

Speaking from the White House, Trump claimed the United States has already proven its military power and said Washington is ready to escalate if diplomacy fails. He argued that Iran must agree to what he described as a “real peace,” or face consequences far beyond what it has seen before.

The remarks come as nuclear talks remain unresolved, with both sides reportedly trading proposals but still unable to reach a final deal. Iran has not formally responded, though its leaders have repeatedly warned they would retaliate against any military attack.

The threat has already shaken global markets, pushing oil prices higher as fears grow over a wider regional conflict. While European allies are urging restraint, Trump is making it clear that, in his view, peace is the only way to avoid a far more destructive confrontation.

nuclear program. More talks were on tap Monday.

An emergency session on the fighting in Lebanon was added to the agenda for the Swiss talks, a diplomat told CBS News, as the conflict between Israel and Iran-backed Hezbollah endangers the U.S.-Iran ceasefire.

More than a dozen people were killed in Lebanon by Israeli strikes overnight Saturday, hours after three diplomats briefed on the matter told CBS News that Israel and Hezbollah had reached a ceasefire agreement to end the fighting.

The Strait of Hormuz will be closed again, Iran said Saturday, after accusing the U.S. and Israel of violating the memorandum of understanding by Israeli troops not withdrawing from southern Lebanon.

Negotiators from the U.S. and Iran were about to engage in a second day of talks Monday to solidify a permanent end to the war between the countries after a first day of mediation began with a rocky start.

Mediators Qatar and Pakistan hailed what they called “encouraging progress” made during the talks as Iran and the United States agreed to create a “de-confliction cell” to address the fighting in Lebanon. A senior U.S. diplomat claimed progress on multiple fronts, including the establishment of “mechanisms” to ensure the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for global energy shipments, remains open and that a ceasefire in southern Lebanon holds.

The first session of talks between the U.S. and Iran has concluded, Qatar and Pakistan announced in a joint statement.

The statement said “encouraging progress was made” and that all sides have agreed to the creation of a ” High-Level Committee” that will continue the technical talks with the goal of reaching a final deal within the 60-day deadline.

“In addition, a communication line between the parties has been formed for the period mentioned in paragraph 5 of the MoU to avoid incidents and miscommunication with the aim of safe passage for commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement said.

At the centre of the controversy is renowned lawyer Ahmednasir Abdullahi, popularly known as the “Grand Mullah”, whose involvement in a protracted pipeline dispute has raised fresh questions about the cost of legal representation, public procurement, and the burden placed on taxpayers when state corporations become entangled in endless court battles.

A Dispute That Refused to Die

The dispute traces its roots to a contractual disagreement involving a Lebanese contractor and a major state-owned corporation responsible for Kenya’s petroleum infrastructure.

What initially appeared to be an ordinary commercial disagreement over payments, contract execution, and project obligations gradually evolved into one of the country’s most expensive legal contests. As arbitration proceedings, appeals, and court applications multiplied, so too did the legal fees associated with the case.

Sources familiar with the matter say that the litigation stretched over several years, with multiple appearances before tribunals, the High Court, the Court of Appeal, and other legal forums.

What began as a contractual disagreement eventually transformed into a complex legal war involving billions of shillings in claims, counterclaims, penalties, interest, and legal expenses.

The Rise of a Legal Goldmine

Critics argue that lengthy disputes involving state agencies often become lucrative opportunities for law firms that secure representation contracts.

In this case, the legal battle reportedly generated enormous fees as the dispute moved from one stage of litigation to another.

Each application, appeal, arbitration proceeding, and enforcement action required legal teams, consultants, experts, and administrative support, creating a financial ecosystem sustained by the continuation of the dispute.

Observers have questioned whether enough effort was made to pursue an early settlement that could have saved public resources.

Instead, the matter evolved into a seemingly endless cycle of litigation, with taxpayers ultimately carrying the financial burden.

The Cost to the Public

While private companies are free to engage in costly legal battles, state corporations operate using public resources.

Every shilling spent on legal fees is money that could otherwise be invested in infrastructure development, maintenance projects, fuel storage facilities, or service delivery improvements.

Financial experts note that prolonged commercial disputes involving government-linked entities often create hidden liabilities that do not become apparent until judgements, arbitration awards, or settlement agreements are eventually enforced.

By the time such disputes conclude, accumulated interest and legal costs can significantly exceed the original value of the underlying contract.

This phenomenon has become increasingly common in Kenya, where delayed dispute resolution has transformed relatively modest contractual disagreements into multi-billion-shilling liabilities.

Questions Over Accountability

The pipeline dispute has also reignited debate about accountability within state corporations.

Governance experts argue that public institutions should have clear mechanisms for assessing litigation risks and determining whether continued legal action serves the public interest.

Where disputes become excessively costly, boards and senior management are expected to periodically review the viability of settlement options.

Critics contend that in many cases, decision-makers face little personal consequence when litigation expenses spiral out of control, even when taxpayers ultimately bear the losses.

This lack of accountability, they argue, creates incentives for disputes to drag on for years.

A Broader Pattern

The controversy surrounding the pipeline dispute reflects a broader challenge facing Kenya’s public sector.

State corporations have increasingly found themselves embroiled in expensive contractual disputes involving local and foreign contractors, leading to arbitration awards and court judgements worth billions of shillings.

In several cases, the final amounts paid have far exceeded the original contract values due to accrued interest and legal costs.

Analysts say the situation highlights the need for stronger contract management, improved dispute-resolution mechanisms, and greater transparency in the engagement of external legal counsel.

Without such reforms, similar disputes could continue draining public resources for years to come.

The Debate Over Legal Fees

Supporters of high-profile legal practitioners argue that complex commercial disputes require specialized expertise and that successful representation often justifies substantial legal fees.

Critics, however, maintain that public entities must balance the need for quality legal representation with the obligation to safeguard taxpayer money.

The central question remains whether the enormous legal expenditure generated by lengthy disputes delivers value for the public or merely enriches the professionals involved.

As scrutiny intensifies, the pipeline dispute has become more than a commercial disagreement. It now serves as a case study in how legal battles involving public institutions can evolve into massive financial obligations with long-term consequences for taxpayers.

Lessons for Kenya

The pipeline saga underscores the importance of transparency, accountability, and timely dispute resolution within public institutions.

Experts argue that stronger oversight mechanisms, stricter procurement procedures, and early intervention strategies could help prevent future disputes from escalating into multi-billion-shilling liabilities.

For many Kenyans, the controversy is not simply about lawyers, contractors, or court cases. It is about whether public resources are being managed responsibly and whether state corporations are sufficiently protected from costly legal entanglements.

As questions continue to emerge, the dispute remains a powerful reminder that when public institutions enter prolonged legal battles, the ultimate bill is often paid by ordinary taxpayers.

“Hawakupangia hizi vifo na hii economy ya Kenya vile iko sasa, poverty iko juu sana. Watu hawana pesa,” Sonko said.

“Kama kuna families hazitajiweza kununua sanduku tutapeana. Kama ni transport of bodies any part of the country tutapeana. Tutasimama na hizi familia ambazo zimefinyiwa na the most vulnerable ones,” he said.

Gang Grew to 18 Members

“Our gang started as ten people, then we increased to eighteen. Out of those eighteen, only four of us are left; the rest were all killed, shot dead,” he said.

How The Operations Were Planned

Gaucho said the gang largely avoided night-time robberies, preferring to carry out operations during the day.

According to him, members would gather information about cash movements, businesses, and institutions before striking.

“We were not doing robberies at night; we used to do them during the day,” he recalled.

He alleged that some operations involved insiders who provided information about safes, cash collections, and security routines.

Gaucho further claimed they monitored cash collection schedules and targeted locations after studying movement patterns.

Speaking during preparations for the rally on Friday, May 29, 2026, Omanyo emphasised that the gathering is not limited to a specific group, noting that supporters of the party come from diverse professions and backgrounds.

She invited all Kenyans, particularly those who continue to support the vision of former Prime Minister Raila Odinga, to attend the event and engage with the party leadership.

“Whoever has not yet gotten this information, I am inviting all Kenyans, especially those who loved the vision of Baba and still do, and want the legacy to remain alive,” she said.

In a statement released via X on the night of Friday, May 29, 2026, after the tour, Orengo accused unnamed state operatives and political rivals of orchestrating violence aimed at disrupting his rallies across Mbita, Rusinga Island and Sindo.

The veteran politician claimed his convoy came under repeated attack moments after arriving in Homa Bay County, beginning at Mbita where he said a group of organised goons smashed his vehicle’s windscreen and damaged several other vehicles in his entourage.

According to Orengo, supporters who had turned up to receive him fought back and enabled the rallies in Mbita Town and Rusinga Island to proceed successfully despite the chaos.

“Ati mlete Ebola Kenya? You have lost your mind… unataka kuua Wakenya kwa sababu ya pesa?” he said.