A Kenyan High Court has dealt a fresh blow to the government's plan to sell a 15% stake in Safaricom to Vodacom Group, declining to lift orders that have halted the multi-billion-dollar transaction and refusing to remove Vodafone from the legal proceedings.
The ruling was delivered on Monday by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Francis Gikonyo, Roselyne Aburili and Tabitha Ouya.
The ruling keeps the status quo order in place as the court works through consolidated constitutional petitions challenging the legality of what the government has described as Kenya's largest-ever privatisation.
The bench also dismissed an application by Vodafone and its subsidiary, Vodacom, to be removed as respondents in the case, meaning both entities remain party to the proceedings.
Speaking during an 11 May earnings call, Joosub told analysts the company expected a court update yesterday and was prepared to move quickly to conclude the transaction once the judicial block was lifted. That timeline now appears uncertain.
The transaction, announced in December 2025 and valued at approximately $2.1 billion, would see Vodacom increase its shareholding in Safaricom from 40% to 55%, giving the South African telecommunications group majority control of the company.
As part of the transaction, the Kenyan government plans to reduce its stake from 35% to 20% through the sale of roughly six billion shares.
In addition to the share sale proceeds, the government is expected to receive an upfront payment of approximately $311 million from Vodacom in lieu of future dividends linked to its remaining stake.
The Kenyan Parliament approved the transaction in March 2026, describing it as the largest divestiture in the country's post-independence history, while Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa's competition authority cleared it on competition grounds in February.
Despite those milestones, petitioners led by Senior Counsel Kalonzo Musyoka, acting on behalf of Tony Gachoka and Prof Fredrick Ogola, successfully argued that the deal raises significant constitutional questions around national security, data sovereignty, public participation and the prudent use of public resources.
The High Court has previously affirmed the constitutional nature of the challenge, rejecting the government's and Safaricom's argument that the dispute is purely commercial.
The case was referred to Chief Justice Martha Koome after the original presiding judge stepped aside, citing time constraints. Koome subsequently appointed the current three-judge bench to hear the consolidated petitions.
Share
