Sifuna’s greatest mistake would be settling for the deputy presidency. For us, the destination is State House, and we will keep calling until he answers. This dream has grown beyond one man’s ambitions; it now lives in the hearts of those who believe in him. For Ruto must be removed & held accountable.
We are Sifuna. He is Edwin.
A question is taking shape in Kenya’s opposition politics: will Edwin Sifuna seek the presidency, and how should other opposition leaders respond if he does? For his supporters, this is more than a question about a party ticket. They see in the Nairobi senator a voice willing to confront the government in public and to speak plainly about the pressures facing ordinary Kenyans. They demand that any decision about the opposition’s candidate should take that support seriously.
That demand belongs in a democracy. Candidates may negotiate alliances, parties may conduct nominations and leaders may compare their strengths. Yet none of those processes can simply declare that the preferences of active supporters do not matter. The people who attend meetings, argue in public and put their reputations behind a candidate deserve a transparent explanation of how a choice will be made. The strongest opposition arrangement would earn their trust through an open process, not assume it in advance.
Sifuna’s appeal, as his supporters describe it, lies in his willingness to challenge those in power and defend the right of citizens to ask difficult questions. But admiration is not a substitute for a programme. If he chooses to run, Kenyans should press him for specific commitments on the cost of living, jobs, public debt, corruption, devolution and the conduct of state institutions. A movement becomes more durable when it can explain what it would do with power, how it would pay for its promises and how it would accept scrutiny of its own leaders.
The United Opposition faces a real test here. It can disagree over a candidate without turning disagreement into proof of betrayal. Its leaders should say what criteria they will use to choose a nominee, how they will hear supporters, and whether the eventual candidate will be accountable to a shared policy agenda. Sifuna’s supporters are entitled to advocate firmly for him. Other aspirants and their supporters are equally entitled to make their case. The process should be credible enough that citizens can judge its outcome for themselves.
Allegations of attempts to intimidate Sifuna or inflame divisions also deserve serious examination. His supporters have described a campaign of harassment and manufactured controversy. Those claims should be investigated through identifiable incidents, documents and responses from the people accused. In particular, the assertion that the government spent KES 1 billion on such efforts has not been substantiated by evidence available for this article. It should not be published as an established expenditure without records that show who authorised it, where the money went and what it purchased.
That distinction matters because unfounded certainty can damage the very public debate a movement hopes to strengthen. If public resources were used to target a political opponent, Kenyans should demand records and accountability. If accusations are circulating without proof, journalists and supporters should say so clearly. A credible challenge to state power gains force from verifiable facts and from a willingness to correct errors.
The phrase ‘We are Sifuna and he is Edwin’ expresses the bond his supporters feel with him. It is a statement of identification and hope, not a measure of how every Kenyan intends to vote. It can be a powerful starting point for civic engagement if it leads to listening as well as speaking: to workers facing high prices, young people searching for jobs, businesses struggling to grow and communities that want dependable services.
Whether Sifuna runs and whether he wins are decisions slogans or negotiations alone cannot settle. He must decide whether to offer himself as a candidate; parties and alliances must show voters how they make their choices; and Kenyans must be free to judge every contender. His supporters have made one point unmistakable: they want their voice counted in that process. The answer they deserve is an honest contest of ideas, a transparent path to the ballot and a politics strong enough to withstand scrutiny.
Read Also: William Ruto’s Failures Have Written Edwin Sifuna’s Agenda