Fresh claims have emerged surrounding political negotiations ahead of the Ol Kalou parliamentary by-election, with sources alleging that senior leaders within the Democracy for Citizens Party (DCP) held high-level discussions over the management of constituency resources in the event of a party victory.
According to the claims, Senator John Methu sought assurances from DCP Party Leader Rigathi Gachagua during a meeting in Wamunyoro on Sunday that he would play a significant role in the affairs of the constituency should DCP candidate Kamau Ngotho win Thursday’s by-election.
Those making the allegations claim the discussions centred on the management of the Ol Kalou NG-CDF, which they say has substantial unspent funds from the previous financial year, in addition to a fresh allocation expected in the 2026/2027 financial year.
The sources further allege that Senator Methu sought guarantees that he would have influence over projects funded through the constituency kitty, arguing that he had invested heavily in the campaign and expected an opportunity to recover his political expenditure through legitimate business opportunities linked to NG-CDF projects.
The claims also suggest that part of the alleged arrangement involved recommending a trusted relative to chair the constituency NG-CDF committee once the new Member of Parliament is sworn in. According to the sources, the intention was to enable Methu to play an influential advisory role while helping the incoming MP settle into office.
The allegations have sparked debate among political observers and residents, with critics questioning whether such arrangements, if they exist, would undermine the independence of the constituency office and the principles of accountability in the management of public resources.
Supporters of the DCP candidate have dismissed the claims as politically motivated, arguing that opponents are attempting to influence public opinion ahead of the vote.
Neither Gachagua, Senator Methu nor Kamau Ngotho had publicly responded to the allegations at the time of publication. If confirmed, the claims would likely fuel renewed scrutiny over political influence in the administration of constituency development funds and intensify debate over transparency in public office.
