The Political Parties Disputes Tribunal (PPDT) has delivered a decisive ruling on two significant matters brought before it, reinforcing the importance of adhering to internal party processes before seeking external legal redress.
In one of the highlighted cases, the Tribunal addressed a complaint filed by Edwin Sifuna against the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), ultimately striking it out on procedural grounds.
Sifuna vs ODM Case Struck Out
The Tribunal dismissed the complaint after determining that the petitioner had failed to first invoke the party’s Internal Dispute Resolution Mechanism (IDRM).
According to the ruling, this step is not optional but a mandatory legal requirement before escalating disputes to the Tribunal.
The PPDT emphasized that it does not have the authority to waive this requirement, reiterating that parties must fully exhaust internal remedies before seeking its intervention.
Tribunal Reaffirms Legal Principle on Jurisdiction
In its decision, the Tribunal underscored a critical legal principle: jurisdiction is contingent upon prior compliance with internal dispute resolution processes. Without proof that a complainant has pursued and exhausted such mechanisms, the PPDT cannot assume authority over the matter.
This ruling serves as a reminder to political actors and parties that internal frameworks are not merely procedural formalities but essential steps in dispute resolution.
The issue stems from Sifuna’s ousting as the party’s Secretary General, matter that has torn the formerly Raila Odinga-led party into two factions, one allied with Sifuna and the other with party leader Oburu Odinga.
With ODM gearing up for its NDC the battle within the party is gearing up to be a fierce one.
About the Author
