In a strongly worded statement, Odhiambo said the events that unfolded in the Senate on March 25, 2026, were not only embarrassing but also amounted to inappropriate treatment of a child who had visited Parliament under the School Voluntary Service Scheme.
According to Odhiambo, the student had gone to Parliament to learn and gain exposure to legislative processes but instead encountered remarks she described as degrading and inappropriate from nominated Senator Karen Nyamu.
“What happened in the Senate Chamber on 25th March 2026 was not just an embarrassment but a gross violation of the dignity of a child,” Odhiambo stated.
She added that Parliament, and particularly the Senate, should remain a safe and respectful environment for children and young people participating in educational programmes.
“The Senate must be a SAFE space that affirms the dignity and future of our children,” she said.
Odhiambo referenced Article 53(1)(d) of the Constitution, which guarantees every child protection from abuse and inhuman treatment.
She also cited Article 53(2), which states that the best interests of the child are of paramount importance in every matter concerning children.
In addition, she pointed to Section 22(1) of the Children Act 2022, which prohibits subjecting a child to psychological abuse, including acts that may cause humiliation or embarrassment.
The former LSK president argued that the response by the Senate was insufficient and called for stronger accountability measures beyond what she described as a “theatrical apology.”
Odhiambo maintained that Senator Nyamu appeared to justify her conduct even while issuing the apology, raising concerns about whether genuine accountability had been achieved.
“I call upon the Senate to go beyond accepting the theatrical apology and take concrete accountability measures,” she said.
“An apology that is read and accepted in minutes is NOT justice. If we are serious about protecting the girl child, then our institutions must reflect that seriousness,” she added.
The incident has sparked debate online and among legal and governance circles, with concerns raised about the treatment of minors within public institutions.