The Treasury’s plan to sell a 15% stake in Safaricom to Vodacom South Africa has run into a storm of professional opposition. The Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Kenya (ICPAK) has raised a red flag over the proposed sale price of KES 34 per share, warning that the state may be underselling its crown jewel to plug a budget hole.

In a submission to Parliament, ICPAK argued that the valuation methodology used by the Treasury is "outdated" and overly reliant on historical trading data. While KES 34 represents a premium on the current market price, accountants point out that it is significantly lower than the stock's all-time high of KES 44.75. "We are selling a strategic asset based on a depressed market, not its intrinsic value," warned ICPAK Chairperson Prof. Elizabeth Kalunda.

The Control Question

The deal, valued at approximately KES 204 billion, would see the government’s stake drop to 20%, while Vodacom and its partners would control a commanding 55%. This shift has sparked fears about national sovereignty over critical telecommunications infrastructure. Safaricom is not just a telco; through M-Pesa, it is the nervous system of Kenya’s economy.

"Giving a foreign entity majority control over our financial and communication data is a national security risk," argued Babu Owino, Embakasi East MP, who has been a vocal critic of the sale. "We are mortgaging our future for a one-off payment."

• Treasury’s Defense: Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi has defended the deal, stating the proceeds are earmarked for infrastructure projects and will reduce the need for external borrowing. He argues that the "strategic partner" model will unlock new value for Safaricom in the long run.
• Market Impact: The Nairobi Securities Exchange (NSE) has reacted nervously, with local investors worried about the dilution of local ownership. The "block sale" to Vodacom avoids flooding the open market, but it locks out Kenyan pension funds and retail investors from acquiring the stake.

A Fiscal Desperation?

Analysts view the hurried sale as a symptom of the government’s cash crunch. With debt repayment deadlines looming, liquidating blue-chip assets is a quick fix. However, ICPAK’s intervention forces Parliament to reconsider whether the price tag justifies the long-term loss of dividends and control.

As the Parliamentary Finance Committee deliberates, the deal hangs in the balance. Is KES 34 a fair price for the most profitable company in East Africa, or is it a fire sale of the family silver?