Editor’s Note: From Siaya, Biko Odhiambo delivers a fiery case against ODM zoning, arguing it has stifled competition and that only its fall can reopen the democratic space in the party’s strongholds.
At political rallies across Nyanza, Western and the Coast, a ritual long defined the moment of decision.
The crowd would swell; music would crackle through tired speakers, and then, at the peak of anticipation, the late Raila Odinga would raise a hand, often not his own, but that of a chosen candidate.
In that instant, the contest was settled. Ballots became ceremonial. Rivals became spectators. Victory, in many cases, had already been declared.
That was zoning.
For years, the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) defended the system as a tool of order, an internal compass designed to prevent chaotic primaries, manage regional balances, and keep the party intact.
But beneath that logic lay a quieter truth. ODM zoning often functioned as a gatekeeper: firm, efficient, and largely immune to challenge.
Now, that gate is under pressure.
President William Ruto and his United Democratic Alliance (UDA) have drawn a clear line: no zoning, no negotiated tickets, and no direct nominations.
This means UDA is keen to field candidates in Luo Nyanza and other ODM strongholds.
Only open, competitive primaries. The result is a rare and public collision, one that has exposed not just inter-party rivalry but fault lines deep within ODM’s own heartlands.
The choreography of control
Zoning has always been less about paperwork and more about choreography.
In ODM strongholds, where winning the party ticket often guarantees electoral victory, the stakes are immense.
To avoid tearing itself apart, the party has frequently stepped in early, quietly allocating constituencies, smoothing tensions, and, where necessary, nudging aspirants aside.
The language is polite: consensus, balance, and unity.
The reality can be less so.
Closed-door meetings decide what open contests never get the chance to test.
Ambitious newcomers—popular on the ground but disconnected from party hierarchies—often find the path blocked before it begins.
Primaries, when held, can feel like echoes of decisions already made.
The image is unmistakable: a sea of supporters, a raised arm, and a political fate sealed in seconds.
When endorsement becomes destiny
In ODM zones, endorsement has rarely been just a signal. It has been a verdict.
When Raila Odinga backs a candidate, the message travels fast through ward officials, local power brokers, and youth networks. It settles the race before it gathers speed.
Opponents, however capable, are left campaigning against momentum they cannot match.
This has created a peculiar paradox. ODM strongholds are among the most politically energised regions in Kenya—high turnout, deep loyalty, intense mobilisation.
Yet internally, competition has sometimes been narrowing, compressed into elite negotiations rather than broad-based contests.
The real contest, critics argue, has often taken place not in the polling station, but in proximity to power.
Gladys Wanga and William Ruto at a past function. Wanga wants ODM zoning upheld in primaries. Photo/courtesy
The ground begins to shift
UDA, which is keen to have a coalition with ODM ahead of 2027, has unsettled this order by calling for open competition.
Across Nyanza, Western, and the Coast, the political ground is moving.
Candidates once assured of smooth passage now face the uncertainty of the ballot.
The old certainties—endorsement, negotiation, and quiet deals—no longer guarantee safety.
The imagery has changed.
Where once aspirants waited beside party leaders for affirmation, they now scatter into markets, trading centres, and dusty village squares.
They shake hands, make promises, and test their appeal. Campaigns that might once have been symbolic have become real and, at times, fiercely contested.
For established figures, the adjustment is stark. For outsiders, it is an opening.
Democracy or discipline?
At its core, the zoning debate is a clash between two political instincts.
ODM argues for discipline. In regions where politics can fracture along local lines, controlled nominations prevent implosion.
They keep the party cohesive, avoid bitter primaries, and maximise electoral strength.
Critics see something else: insulation.
Without genuine competition, accountability weakens. Leaders shielded from tough nominations face less pressure to perform.
Voters, meanwhile, are left choosing from a shortlist already filtered long before election day.
UDA’s position, ‘open primaries’, is framed as a democratic reset. Power, it argues, should flow upward from voters, not downward from party elites.
But that approach carries risks too. Competitive nominations can be chaotic, expensive, and divisive. They can leave bruised losers and fractured alliances, weakening parties at the worst possible moment.
There is no clean choice, only competing trade-offs.
The stakes beneath the noise
Behind the rhetoric lies strategy.
Control of nominations is control of the party’s future: its parliamentary numbers, its regional influence, its bargaining power in coalitions. Zoning offers predictability; open contests introduce volatility.
ODM’s resistance is not just philosophical; it is structural. To abandon zoning is to loosen a system that has long anchored its internal order.
UDA’s insistence, meanwhile, fits its broader political identity, bottom-up, populist, and disruptive, while also offering a pathway into regions historically beyond its reach.
What appears as a procedural disagreement is, in truth, a battle over the architecture of power.
A changing political imagination
Something else is shifting, less visible, but just as important.
Across the coast, in the bustling towns of Western and along the lakeside counties of Nyanza, voters are posing new questions. The rise of social media has intensified scrutiny.
Aspirants speak more openly about fairness. Outcomes once accepted without challenge are now debated in real time.
The old image of ODM zoning—a single raised hand deciding a political future—no longer stands alone.
It now competes with another: candidates jostling in open arenas, their fortunes uncertain, their legitimacy tested, not bestowed upon them.
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the position of GOTTA.news. We welcome writers to give their views on various social issues. Send your opinion to info@gotta.news.
