Gachoka Seeks to Block Two Lawyers in Shifting Safaricom Shares Sale Case

Activist Tony Gachoka has moved to court seeking orders to bar two advocates from participating in the ongoing legal dispute over the proposed sale of a 15 per cent stake in Safaricom Plc, escalating a case that has already stalled one of Kenya’s most closely watched corporate transactions.

Gachoka, who is among the petitioners challenging the planned divestiture, argues that the continued involvement of the two lawyers compromises the fairness of the proceedings and raises concerns over conflict of interest. He wants the court to disqualify them from representing any party in the matter.

The case stems from the government’s plan to reduce its shareholding in Safaricom, a move valued in billions of shillings and expected to significantly alter the ownership structure of Kenya’s largest telecommunications company. The proposed transaction has triggered debate over transparency, valuation, and public accountability.

In his application, Gachoka contends that Safaricom is not an ordinary commercial entity but a strategic national asset, given its dominance in mobile communications and its central role in Kenya’s digital financial ecosystem, including mobile money services. He argues that any disposal of government shares must meet strict constitutional and legal standards.

The activist further claims that allowing the two advocates to remain on record risks undermining the integrity of the case. He is seeking orders from the High Court to have them barred from further participation, arguing that their continued presence could prejudice the hearing of the constitutional issues raised in the petition.

The Safaricom share sale has also drawn interest from key stakeholders, including the telecommunications giant itself and Vodacom Group, which has been mentioned in relation to the broader ownership structure of the company. Vodacom has previously sought to be removed from the proceedings, arguing that it is not directly involved in the government’s decision to dispose of its shares.

The High Court has issued interim orders maintaining the status quo, effectively freezing any progress on the transaction until the case is heard and determined. The court is expected to rule on several pending applications, including those relating to party participation and the legality of the proposed sale process.

At the centre of the dispute is the government’s intention to reduce its stake in Safaricom from about 35 per cent to roughly 20 per cent. Critics argue that the move could weaken public influence in a company widely regarded as a pillar of Kenya’s economy and digital infrastructure.

Supporters of the petition insist that the process must be subjected to full transparency, proper valuation, and parliamentary scrutiny to safeguard public interest and ensure value for taxpayers.

The case is expected to set a significant precedent on how Kenya handles the disposal of strategic state-linked assets, particularly in sectors considered vital to national security and economic stability.