Safaricom house,Waiyaki way,Nairobi….Photo /courtesy
By Peter Mwibanda
NAIROBI, Kenya
Kenya is edging toward one of its most consequential policy choices since independence: the sale of public assets amid fiscal stress, weak trust in government and limited citizen involvement.
The William Ruto administration’s plan to offload state holdings, including reducing government ownership in Safaricom, is framed as economic realism.
Critics, however, see a dangerous surrender of strategic assets whose long-term value dwarfs short-term cash gains.
Safaricom is not an ordinary company. It is the backbone of Kenya’s digital economy.
Through M-Pesa, it processes trillions of shillings annually, supports government payments, anchors financial inclusion and controls critical communications and data infrastructure.
In most advanced economies, such platforms are treated as strategic national assets, guarded through policy and regulation.
Kenya’s move to dilute public ownership without a clear digital sovereignty framework raises serious governance and security concerns.
There is also the risk of undervaluation. Governments selling assets under pressure rarely secure fair prices.
With high debt servicing costs and volatile global markets, Kenya risks trading decades of steady dividends for a one-off payment that weakens future budgets.
Safaricom has been among the state’s most reliable non-tax revenue sources; divestment converts sustainability into liquidity.
Equally troubling is the lack of public participation. The Constitution demands citizen involvement in major policy decisions, yet asset sales have emerged through executive declarations, with scant disclosure on valuation or safeguards.
Mismanagement of state enterprises argues for reform, not disposal. Selling strategic assets is not reform; it is liquidation.
Governments are trustees of national wealth, responsible to future generations.
Kenya must choose whether it will protect and reform its assets—or sell its sovereignty to survive another budget cycle.
