UNDERSTANDING THE PROPOSED GOVERNMENT SALE OF SAFARICOM SHARES

 

The Government’s proposed sale of part of its shareholding in Safaricom PLC has attracted public attention because Safaricom is not just another company. It is a major player in Kenya’s economy and in the daily lives of millions of wananchi through communication, mobile money, and digital services.

According to the 2026 Budget Policy Statement (BPS), the proposal is for the Government to sell 15 percent of its stake in Safaricom to Vodacom Group, at about KSh 34 per share, while retaining a 20 percent stake after the transaction. Further, the BPS states that the proceeds are intended to support priority national infrastructure and broader economic development objectives.

In simple terms, this is a proposal for partial divestiture, not a complete exit. The Government would still remain a significant shareholder, but with a smaller stake than it currently has today. The Budget Policy Statement estimates that the sale could raise about KSh 204 billion, with an additional upfront payment linked to future dividends bringing the total to about KSh 244 billion. From a policy perspective, the idea is to unlock resources from an existing public investment and redirect them to other national development priorities, specifically national infrastructure.

For mwananchi, the key question is not only whether shares are being sold, but what the country gains in return and whether it is a fair exchange.

Supporters of the proposal see an opportunity to mobilize funds without increasing tax rates or borrowing. They also argue that Government can still retain a strategic interest even after reducing its current shareholding. This is the broad reasoning reflected in official policy documents and in the parliamentary consideration of the transaction.

At the same time, valid public concerns have been raised around issues such as data protection, job security, and the long-term place of local dealers, agents, and business partners in Safaricom’s broader ecosystem. These are important and valid concerns because Safaricom’s reach extends far beyond its shareholders to workers, small businesses, and consumers across the country.

During the parliamentary review, lawmakers proposed conditions including regulatory approvals, channeling proceeds into the National Infrastructure Fund, safeguarding existing jobs from acquisition-related redundancies, and preserving the current business model for dealers and agents.

Ultimately, this proposal should be understood as a public finance and investment decision for consideration. The real question may be whether the transaction is considered transparent, whether public interests are protected, and whether the funds raised are used in a way that delivers visible value to Kenyans. For mwananchi, this is may be the bottom line.