Vihiga, Kisumu, and Siaya Leaders Clash Over Historic Boundary Dispute
Leaders from Vihiga, Kisumu, and Siaya counties faced off before the Senate on Wednesday over a long-standing boundary dispute that has divided the Banyore community across the three neighboring counties. The confrontation occurred during a hearing by the Senate’s Devolution and Intergovernmental Relations Committee, following a petition by 17 residents seeking parliamentary intervention to unify their community under a single administrative unit.
The petitioners argued that historical boundary delimitation split the Luhya community into three counties, leaving major institutions outside their reach and exposing residents to administrative confusion. Vihiga Governor Wilber Ottichilo explained that the disputed locations were carved out of Vihiga in the 1960s and several past attempts to resolve the matter had failed. Members of the Abaluhya community living in Kisumu and Siaya have endured frustration and discrimination, he said, urging the committee to act urgently to restore harmony in the region.
However, Kisumu Deputy Governor Mathew Owili challenged Ottichilo’s claims, asserting that the areas, including Maseno, have historically belonged to Kisumu and citing studies and maps to support the county’s position. Owili accused politicians of inflaming the dispute for political gain, emphasizing that Kisumu is a cosmopolitan county that treats all residents equally. Siaya Lands Executive Adrian Ouma also downplayed the conflict, noting that Luhya and Luo communities in the border areas have coexisted peacefully and that shared amenities function without complaints.
Vihiga Senator George Khaniri, however, pressed the committee to address perceived administrative discrimination against the Luhya community. He suggested that a permanent solution would require the actualization of Article 188 of the Constitution, which mandates Parliament to establish a commission to resolve county boundary disputes. With historical grievances and competing claims on the table, the Senate faces a delicate task in balancing legal mandates, community rights, and inter-county relations. Observers say a resolution will require both legal clarity and political goodwill to ensure long-term harmony among the affected communities.