Court declines bid to temporarily block proposed Safaricom stake sale

The High Court has declined to grant interim orders sought by petitioners seeking to block the proposed sale of a stake in telecommunications giant Safaricom, opting instead to hear the matter fully before making a determination.

Justice Lawrence Mugambi, sitting at the High Court on Wednesday, said he would not issue conservatory orders at this stage, noting that the respondents had already appeared before the court and deserved an opportunity to place their responses on record.

“I will not issue orders until I have heard the case because they have appeared in court. The best I can do is give them enough time. We see what they put on record and consider whether the orders are merited or not,” Justice Mugambi said.

The judge added that he was not inclined to rush the process, explaining that had he been minded to grant interim relief, he would have done so at the earliest opportunity.

“But I won’t rush. If I intended to give the orders, I would have given them the first day,” he stated.

The petitioners, Tony Gachoka and Fredrick Ogola, moved to court seeking conservatory orders to block the proposed Safaricom stake sale, arguing that the transaction raised constitutional and public interest concerns that warranted urgent judicial intervention.

The petitioners have named the Cabinet Secretaries for the National Treasury and Information, Communications and the Digital Economy as respondents, alongside the Communications Authority of Kenya, the Competition Authority of Kenya, the Attorney General, Safaricom PLC, and Vodacom Group.

However, the court took the view that the matter required a more structured hearing, with all parties accorded sufficient time to ventilate their positions before any interim or substantive orders could be issued.

During the Wednesday session, the court was also informed of the existence of two related petitions filed before the High Court, both seeking similar orders in relation to the proposed Safaricom stake sale.

 The disclosure prompted the court to raise concerns about the risk of parallel proceedings producing conflicting outcomes.

Justice Mugambi observed that it would be prudent for the court to consider consolidating the related petitions to ensure coherence and consistency in judicial decision-making.

He noted that consolidation would help avoid a scenario where different courts issue divergent views or conflicting orders on the same subject matter.

The court was informed that directions on how the matter will proceed are expected to be issued on February 23, 2026, a date the court agreed to.

Among the orders requested, the petitioners sought conservatory orders restraining the State from executing or implementing any transaction related to the government’s 15 per cent shareholding in Safaricom, pending the court’s hearing and determination of the case.

According to court filings, the petitioners fault the National Treasury’s indication that it intends to sell the government’s shares to Vodacom at Sh34 per share, which they describe as grossly undervalued when compared to estimates placing the shares’ intrinsic value between Sh70 and Sh80 per share.

“The intended sale has been undertaken without meaningful public participation, contrary to the Constitution,” the petition states, noting that the process appears “rushed, opaque, non-competitive and procedurally dubious, thereby affecting the Kenyan public.”

The petition further raises concerns over the alleged absence of competitive pricing and transparency in the proposed sale.

The government has previously stated that the proposed transaction is part of a broader strategy to raise capital, deepen strategic partnerships, and optimise the State’s portfolio in commercial entities.