A fresh push for electoral zoning within the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) is stirring political debate across its traditional strongholds, with Awendo Member of Parliament Walter Owino emerging as one of the key proponents of the strategy.
Owino has defended zoning as a necessary political tool to consolidate the party’s grassroots support base, arguing that rival formations have already employed similar tactics at the national level.
“If UDA has already zoned the presidency from ODM, what’s wrong with ODM zoning her strongholds?” posed Owino, in a statement that has since sparked widespread discussion within party ranks and among the electorate.
Background to the Zoning Debate
Zoning, a political strategy that involves ring-fencing certain electoral positions for specific candidates or regions to avoid internal competition, has periodically surfaced within ODM, particularly in its perceived strongholds across Nyanza Region.
The concept gained prominence during previous election cycles when party leadership sought to minimize bruising nominations that often resulted in defections, voter apathy, and weakened party unity during general elections. In several instances, consensus candidates or direct tickets were issued to avoid divisive primaries.
However, the approach has remained controversial, with critics arguing that it undermines internal democracy and denies voters the opportunity to freely choose their leaders.
Owino’s Argument: Strategic Survival
According to Owino, the renewed push for zoning is informed by shifting political realities, particularly the consolidation of power by the United Democratic Alliance (UDA), which he claims has effectively “zoned” the presidency by locking out ODM from national power structures.
He argues that ODM must respond by safeguarding its dominance in its traditional bases to remain politically competitive ahead of the 2027 General Election.
Political observers interpret Owino’s stance as part of a broader effort to strengthen ODM’s electoral machinery at the grassroots while minimizing internal fractures that could be exploited by rival parties.
Rising Backlash from Aspirants and Voters
Despite the strategic rationale, the zoning proposal has encountered resistance from a section of ODM aspirants operating within what has been described as a broad-based political environment.
Several aspirants have voiced concerns that zoning could lock out qualified candidates and entrench political patronage, ultimately alienating voters.
Critics within the electorate have also warned that imposing candidates could trigger voter apathy—a phenomenon that has previously affected turnout in ODM strongholds when nominations were perceived to be unfair.
“You cannot preach democracy nationally while curtailing it at the grassroots,” said one local political activist in Migori, reflecting a growing sentiment among sections of the electorate.
Historical Context and Lessons
ODM’s past experiences with zoning and direct nominations have produced mixed outcomes. While in some cases the strategy helped maintain party cohesion, in others it led to independent candidacies, protests, and even electoral losses.
The party’s strongholds, especially in counties like Migori County, Kisumu County, and Siaya County, have often witnessed intense intra-party competition, underscoring the delicate balance between unity and democratic choice.
What Lies Ahead
As the 2027 elections draw closer, ODM faces a critical decision: whether to adopt zoning as a strategic necessity or uphold competitive primaries as a democratic principle.
For leaders like Owino, zoning represents a pragmatic approach to political survival in an increasingly competitive landscape. For opponents, however, it remains a risky gamble that could erode public trust and weaken the party’s democratic credentials.
The ongoing debate is expected to shape not only ODM’s internal dynamics but also the broader political landscape in its strongholds as parties reposition themselves for the next electoral cycle.
About the Author
