Safaricom Stake Sale Quashed as Kalonzo Declares Victory for Kenyans

By Michael Nyamai -

Nairobi, Kenya, September 16, 2026 -Wiper Patriotic Front and Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition Party leader Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka has declared that Kenyans have reclaimed a strategic national asset after the High Court nullified the Government’s sale of a 15 per cent stake in Safaricom PLC.

Wiper Patriotic Front and Azimio la Umoja One Kenya Coalition Party leader Stephen Kalonzo Musyoka, alongside DP Party leader JB Muturi, DAP-K leader Eugene Wamalwa and other opposition leaders, addresses the media at the SKM Command Centre in Nairobi. //Photo courtesy.

Kalonzo, who served as lead counsel in the constitutional petition challenging the transaction, spoke in Nairobi alongside Democratic Party leader JB Muturi, DAP-K leader Eugene Wamalwa and other opposition leaders following the landmark judgment delivered by the High Court on Tuesday.

“The people have won. Safaricom is coming home,” Kalonzo declared.

The three-judge bench of the Constitutional and Human Rights Division declared the transaction unconstitutional, null and void and ordered the 15 per cent stake restored to the Government of Kenya on behalf of Kenyans.

Kalonzo said the ruling was more than a legal victory, arguing that it reaffirmed the sovereignty of the Kenyan people, the supremacy of the Constitution and the requirement for public assets to be managed transparently and in the public interest.

“This is not merely a legal victory. It is a declaration that Kenya’s sovereignty is not for sale,” he said.

The former Vice-President maintained that Safaricom was not an ordinary commercial company but a strategic national institution with millions of Kenyans depending on its services.

“Safaricom is not just another company. It is a national institution, conceived in Kenya, built by Kenyans, and sustained every single day by the more than 30 million of our people who depend on it,” Kalonzo said.

He argued that the company’s role in telecommunications, financial transactions and the handling of citizens’ data made it a strategic national asset that could not be transferred without stringent constitutional and national-interest safeguards.

Kalonzo further accused the Government of failing to meet constitutional requirements during the transaction, citing what he described as inadequate public participation, non-disclosure of transaction documents and changes concerning the proposed buyer.

He claimed that the Government and Parliament had initially approved Vodacom as the buyer before Vodafone was substituted, arguing that Kenyans were not informed of the change. He also alleged that transaction documents that should have been made public were concealed and that advisors were improperly procured.

The Wiper leader also questioned the valuation of the shares, saying the Government sold 6.01 billion Safaricom shares, representing 15 per cent of the company, at KSh34 per share for KSh204.3 billion.

He said Treasury additionally received KSh40.2 billion as an advance against future dividends on the 20 per cent stake retained by the Government, bringing the total amount taken off the books to KSh244.5 billion.

“You cannot price what you refuse to value,” Kalonzo said, questioning the Government’s failure to disclose the valuation methodology used to determine the price of the stake.

He further argued that the transaction violated principles of intergenerational and intragenerational equity, saying public resources should be managed with consideration for both present and future generations.

Kalonzo also raised concerns over the strategic implications of transferring control of Safaricom to a foreign entity, particularly in relation to national security and data protection.

He described M-Pesa as a critical part of Kenya’s financial system and argued that the data of millions of Kenyans required the highest level of protection.

The statement also alleges that the transaction was not subjected to the Competition Act and that there was no evidence of approval by the Competition Authority of Kenya.

Kalonzo further criticised the Government for proceeding with the transaction after the Court of Appeal lifted conservatory orders that had temporarily halted the sale, maintaining that the appellate court had not determined the substantive legality of the transaction.

“The Court of Appeal never declared this transaction lawful. It never ruled on public participation or fair valuation,” he said.

The opposition leaders urged Kenyans to remain vigilant in protecting strategic public assets as the Government prepares to challenge the High Court ruling.

Kalonzo warned prospective parties against dealing with the disputed shares while the court process remains active, saying any attempt to trade, transfer or encumber the shares contrary to the judgment would face legal consequences.

“Whoever buys a public asset from a government acting outside the Constitution buys a quarrel, not a company,” he said.

Kalonzo described the ruling as a victory for the petitioners, legal teams, civil society organisations and ordinary Kenyans who followed the case, while cautioning that the court decision may not mark the end of the dispute.

“A court can quash a sale but it cannot quash the appetite that produced it,” he said, urging Kenyans to remain vigilant in protecting the country's public assets and constitutional institutions.