By Afrireport 
The fate of a high profile transaction involving one of Kenya’s most valuable companies is set to take a critical turn this week as the courts step in to weigh competing legal and public interest claims.
With intense scrutiny already surrounding the proposed deal, attention has now shifted to the judiciary for clarity on the way forward.
The High Court is scheduled to issue directions on Wednesday in a petition challenging the proposed sale of the government’s 15 per cent stake in Safaricom PLC to Vodacom Group.
The petition was filed by political activist Tony Gachoka and Fredrick Ogola, who are seeking to block the transaction on constitutional and statutory grounds.
In their court filings, the petitioners argue that Safaricom is a strategic national asset whose ownership structure carries significant implications for Kenya’s economy, national security and public interest.
They contend that the proposed sale, if allowed to proceed, would amount to an unlawful disposal of public property without strict adherence to constitutional safeguards and existing legislation governing State assets.
The case places renewed focus on Article 227 of the Constitution, which outlines principles of public procurement and asset disposal, as well as laws that require transparency, accountability and public participation in decisions involving major public resources.
According to the petitioners, the government has failed to adequately demonstrate that these requirements were met before moving to sell its stake.
Also Read
- "State House Is Not a Party Office,” Salasya Fires Warning
- Ruto Announces Tax Cut for Earnners Below Ksh50,000
- Government Plans to Tap NSSF Pension Reserves for High Return Projects
- Ruto to Meet Over 12,000 Aspirants in Early Signal of 2027 Battle
- Kindiki Announces Major Expansion of NYOTA Programme for Youths
They further argue that transferring the shares to Vodacom Group, which already has significant influence over Safaricom, could further dilute public control over a company that plays a critical role in Kenya’s telecommunications infrastructure, financial services ecosystem and data economy.
Safaricom’s M-Pesa platform, in particular, is cited as a system of national importance that warrants heightened protection.
The petition also raises questions about valuation, timing and motive, claiming that the sale may not deliver optimal value to taxpayers and could set a dangerous precedent for the disposal of other strategic State holdings.
The applicants want the court to suspend or nullify the transaction until a full hearing is conducted and all legal thresholds are satisfied.
On the other side, the government is expected to argue that the sale is part of a broader strategy to raise revenue, reduce public debt and streamline its portfolio of investments.
Officials have previously maintained that such transactions are lawful and necessary for economic stability, though detailed responses to the petition are yet to be tested in court.
Wednesday’s directions are expected to outline timelines for submissions, responses and possibly interim orders.
While they will not determine the substance of the case, the directions could signal how urgently the court views the matter and whether the deal faces immediate legal obstacles.
As the legal battle unfolds, the case is likely to reignite public debate over privatisation, State ownership and the balance between fiscal policy and constitutional accountability in Kenya.
