Wednesday, 14 October 2026
Kenyan Digest

Court of Appeal Rejects Government Bid to Suspend Safaricom Share Sale Ruling

2 min read
Published
Court of Appeal Rejects Government Bid to Suspend Safaricom Share Sale Ruling

The Court of Appeal has refused to stay the High Court judgment that nullified the KSh204.3 billion sale of the State’s 15 percent stake in Safaricom to Vodacom, leaving the order restoring the 6,009,814,200 ordinary shares to government ownership in force.

A three-judge bench comprising Justices Luka Kiprotich Kimaru, Johnson Okello and Kathurima M’Inoti ruled that the applications by the government and Vodacom failed to meet the required legal threshold for a stay.

The High Court judgment of September 15, 2026, delivered by Justices Francis Gikonyo, Roselyn Aburili and Teresia Wanjiku Ouya (also reported as Tabitha Wanyama), declared the divestiture unconstitutional, invalid and void, and quashed Sessional Paper No 3 of 2025 together with related approvals and agreements.

The disputed transaction involved the transfer of 6,009,814,200 ordinary Safaricom shares, representing 15 percent of the State’s holding, to Vodafone Kenya Limited, a subsidiary of the Vodacom Group. The sale was completed on July 6, 2026, with the State receiving about KSh204.3 billion and an additional KSh40.168 billion paid in lieu of future dividends.

Attorney General Dorcas Oduor and Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi argued that implementing the High Court orders before an appeal could render the appeal ineffective and jeopardise the reversal of a completed transaction that had generated foreign-currency inflows of roughly US$1.557 billion.

The government warned that overturning the sale could disrupt fiscal planning, investor confidence and Kenya’s foreign-exchange position, and that reversing the transfer would involve settled entries at the Central Depository and Settlement Corporation and cross-border regulatory approvals.

Petitioners led by Tony Gachoka opposed the applications, contending that the sale lacked proper public participation, adequate valuation and compliance with constitutional requirements.

With the Court of Appeal’s refusal, the High Court’s orders remain binding, meaning the 15 percent stake is to be restored to the State on behalf of the people.