NAIROBI, Kenya- Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi has defended the government’s sale of its 15 per cent stake in Safaricom Plc, insisting the transaction was carried out in full compliance with court orders and after careful consideration of the public interest and the country’s fiscal needs.
Responding to criticism by Wiper Party leader Kalonzo Musyoka, Mbadi said the government respected the judicial process throughout the transaction and would continue to abide by any future directions issued by the courts.
“The government complied with the High Court’s conservatory orders on the Safaricom divestiture and will continue to abide by all court directions and final determinations,” Mbadi said.
He said the decision to proceed with the transaction followed the Court of Appeal’s ruling on June 26, which lifted conservatory orders that had temporarily halted the sale.
The appellate court found that public interest favoured allowing the transaction to proceed pending the determination of the constitutional petition.
Mbadi added that the government weighed several factors before completing the sale, including the public interest, fiscal implications, market certainty and the financial cost of delaying the transaction and its associated financing.
His remarks came after Kalonzo accused the government of rushing the disposal of the stake while a constitutional petition challenging the sale remains pending before the High Court.
The former Vice President argued that although the Court of Appeal lifted the conservatory orders, it did not determine the legality of the transaction, and questioned why the government did not wait for the High Court’s final judgment.
The government recently completed the sale of its 15 per cent shareholding in Safaricom to Vodacom Group, reducing its stake in Kenya’s largest telecommunications company from 35 per cent to 20 per cent.
The transaction, estimated at more than Sh200 billion, forms part of the government’s broader financing strategy.
The High Court is still expected to determine the substantive constitutional petition challenging the legality of the transaction, including issues relating to public participation, valuation of the shares and compliance with the Constitution.