EMBU, Kenya- Kiharu Member of Parliament Ndindi Nyoro has mounted a fresh challenge against the government’s planned sale of Safaricom shares, vowing to fiercely oppose the move and accusing the executive of conducting opaque negotiations that undermine the public interest.
Speaking during a Young Aspirants Politicians Forum in Embu Town, Nyoro said the proposed transaction represents a worrying pattern of secrecy in the disposal of strategic national assets.
He insisted that any sale involving Safaricom, one of Kenya’s most valuable companies, must be conducted openly and competitively.
Nyoro questioned why senior government officials appeared to be speaking on behalf of potential buyers instead of organizing a transparent, international bidding process that would maximize returns for Kenyan taxpayers.
“It is wrong for government officials to act as advocates for buyers rather than custodians of public assets,” Nyoro said.
He argued that an open and competitive process could raise as much as Sh350 billion for the national treasury.
The MP warned that he was prepared to publicly release the contact details of directors from Vodafone and Vodacom if transparency is not forthcoming.
He said this would allow Kenyans to directly question the companies about their role and interest in the Safaricom share discussions.
Nyoro framed the threat as a last-resort measure aimed at forcing openness, insisting that decisions of such magnitude should not be made behind closed doors.
“This country does not belong to a few people negotiating in secrecy,” he said.
“Kenyans deserve to know who is buying, how they are buying, and whether value for money is being protected.”
The legislator further linked the Safaricom issue to what he described as a broader trend of questionable asset sales, citing similar concerns around the proposed sale of shares in the Kenya Pipeline Company.
Ndindi Nyoro says the Kenya Pipeline shares sold to a Kenyan posing as an Ugandan. “What is the process for. I already have the outcome.” #KenyaPipelineIPO
He alleged that some deals are structured to benefit individuals rather than the public, eroding trust in government decision-making.
