Category: Business Daily

Duncan Onyango did not just grow up near a bank. He grew up inside one. His father was a Citibank man – old Nairobi Citibank, the original branch on Wabera Street, back when the lender was still establishing itself on the continent. Duncan remembers Christmas parties in the banking hall, he and his siblings running between tellers, the decorations, the noise of it.

Later, the parties moved to the CEO’s home in Muthaiga. But the earliest memory is the hall. All that marble and money and quiet institutional power, and a small boy loose inside it, soaking in something he wouldn’t be able to put a finger on for years.

What he absorbed was actually hunger. “There’s this thing within you,” he says, “which is just not satisfied.” He carried that thing to London, where he built a robust career in finance. He was good at it. Promotions came. He asked to take on more responsibilities, getting another in-tray. He travelled more, burnt enough midnight oil to ignite a cargo ship, and all this drifted him further from the people waiting at home.

Naturally, his first marriage crumbled like a pack of cards. “I was more wedded to my job than I was to my wife,” he admits, without self-pity, but without flinching either. Because he has had time to sit with the truth of it.

It is only in later years, he will tell you, that the hunger has calmed enough for him to actually see what is in front of him. Today, he runs Trade Catalyst Africa, the trade infrastructure arm of TradeMark Africa, where the work is continental in ambition – closing a financing gap he puts north of $150 billion a year, not through grants or government goodwill, but by making the economics so compelling that institutional capital comes of its own accord. “We don’t want to go around begging for money,” he tells me. “We want to create an asset class.”

What did your father do, and did you ever want to be like him?

[Chuckles] I’m probably the only one who followed a career closely aligned to my dad’s. He was a banker. A city banker. We basically grew up in Citibank, back then it was on Wabera Street, their very first branch before they moved to that tall tower. They were probably among the first people to really establish Citibank as a business and a brand in Africa.

I remember Christmas time vividly. We would have parties right there in the banking hall, running around, enjoying the decorations. Later the parties moved to the CEO’s home in Muthaiga. That’s what my dad did until he retired. Then he passed away almost 26 years ago, a couple of days after the millennium.

Pole, was he unwell?

I’m led to believe he was. He had retired to the village. But I also think when he moved there it must have been lonely, because we had lived in Nairobi almost all our lives.

At some point Nairobi becomes your village – that’s where your friends are, your connections, your networks. He settled into village life and, yeah, he didn’t live very long after that.

Are you connected to the village in any way?

I am, to a certain extent. But what I’ve done is shift my village. Where my parents come from, we are literally strangers. We only visited occasionally and I never felt at home. So I bought land not too far away and I’m doing a bit of farming. I’ve created my own village near people I went to school with. The people are familiar, so I feel more welcome.

London still remains home in many ways because my family and children all live there. I moved around 1986. I have three children, all in London. Two have flown out of the nest. My daughter got married a year ago and blessed me with a grandson.

After so many years in London, what finally pulled you back home?

When you’ve been away a long time, there comes a point when you think very deeply about returning. Usually it’s circumstances that determine whether you actually do. In my case, my wife and I separated. That made me ask myself a lot of questions. We had simply grown apart, and we grew apart because of my career.

I was more wedded to my job than I was to my wife. I was traveling constantly and, as you become more upwardly mobile, your life takes a very different trajectory from your spouse’s. You’re away more, meeting new people, exposed to different worlds, and eventually you become strangers.

After that I took voluntary redundancy and started freelancing. Then, the way life works, one consultancy opportunity brought me back to Kenya. Being back brought me closer to my siblings and my mother. That’s really how it began, around 2006 or 2007.

Knowing what you know now, would you still give your career so much and save the marriage?

You know, I’ve asked myself that question several times. [Pause] I’ve asked myself that many times. Later I remarried. She’s Kenyan and we have a son together now in school in the UK.

After everything that happened, I told myself there were things I would do differently. I remember when things got serious with the woman who was then my girlfriend, I sat her down and said: “I know myself. I get deeply wedded to my work. This is who I am. I will spend a lot of time working, but that doesn’t mean work is replacing my relationship with you.”

I didn’t do that in my first marriage because we were young. You meet, fall in love, and move through life without really knowing what you don’t know. The second time I committed to being more open and to communicate, especially as things changed. Those are the things I failed at before.

You mentioned that you were away from your children’s lives for a while, how did you eventually reconcile that?

Again, with this one I was lucky because my next career allowed me to travel more and spend more time in London. Even if I was only stopping over for a few hours in transit, I would make time to see the children – a restaurant, a meal, reconnecting. The children would also come to Nairobi during the summer holidays.

If you saw us together, you probably wouldn’t think ours was a broken family. One of the dangers when long relationships break down is that parents use children against each other.

That didn’t happen with us because our separation wasn’t caused by betrayal, we had simply grown apart. We made very intentional decisions about access. We wanted the children to know they still had both a father and a mother. And because of that, when I became more present again, reconnecting was much easier.

It sounds like a blended family is working for you…

It kind of worked out. I introduced my girlfriend to their lives early. Whenever the children came to visit, they met her, and I was always open about the new relationship. Later, when we married and had our son, I brought the families together, so the children grew up knowing each other as siblings.

Looking back, it all seems coherent, almost planned. But honestly, I don’t think it was. Circumstances simply forced us to do things a certain way, and fortunately it worked.

What have you ever struggled with so much?

That’s a difficult question. [Pause] I think the best way to answer that is through ambition. Not because I struggled with ambition, but because I was very ambitious. I was always chasing the next thing.

Early in my career I quickly realised that to progress, you need not just ability but also influence and visibility. So I was always eager to take on the next project, sometimes more than I probably should have. It propelled my career because people noticed. But it also meant I was constantly exhausted.

Success is tiring…

[Laughs] Yeah, it was. You’re always on show, always wanting to prove yourself, and burnout is never far away. There was always this hunger in me, this feeling of never quite being satisfied. You keep trying to fill it through promotions, bigger responsibilities, recognition. You just keep chasing.

It’s only as I’ve grown older that I’ve learned to manage that and become more content with what’s in front of me. But it took a long time. As you grow older you also grow wiser. You accumulate perspective and foresight, and eventually you become more relaxed in how you approach life.

How did that form your view on wealth and money and everything related to that?

I don’t know whether growing up in a bank shaped me, because we were very young then. But when you grow up around banking and successful people, it leaves an impression. As I grew older, I found myself exposed to wealth – seeing peers doing very well. You start wondering how people get there.

So I learned early about the importance of money and the comfort it can bring. But I also learned, sometimes painfully, that you can make expensive mistakes trying to keep up appearances.

I remember wanting to be like the Joneses – taking children to expensive schools then struggling to pay fees. Those experiences taught me you have to cut your coat according to your cloth. Manage money in a way that creates wealth instead of living an opulent life you can’t afford.

What does your wife find really annoying about you?

[Laughs] I think there must be a lot. [Chuckles] I have moments when I just want to withdraw from people and be alone. Sometimes I can sit quietly in the garden doing absolutely nothing and enjoy it completely.

I’m actually very social and engaged when I need to be. I draw energy from people, but I also have this other side where I retreat into myself. And when I’m in that mood, I become very quiet.

That can be difficult because my wife is extremely social. She might invite a house full of people over at the exact moment I want silence and solitude, and I’m left wondering why the house is suddenly full. But we navigate our way through it. It takes effort, but eventually it works.

In what environments do you find yourself to be vulnerable?

As a CEO, the environment where vulnerability shows up most is probably the boardroom. Preparing for board meetings can be intense. You’re dealing with people who understand the issues deeply and can challenge you from angles you may not have considered. Over time I’ve learned the best way to navigate that is not to resist vulnerability but to accept it.

Vulnerability can be a strength. It allows people to trust you because they know you’re not pretending to have all answers. Once you stop fearing what you don’t know, those environments become much easier to handle.

Motorists will have the option of declining to pay instant traffic fines and instead challenge the penalties in court under revised guidelines issued by the National Transport and Safety Authority (NTSA), marking a major shift in the rollout of the controversial automated traffic enforcement system.

The revised framework follows criticism from civil society groups, lawyers and motorists who argued that the digital penalties regime violated constitutional protections on fair hearing, criminal justice and data privacy.

Under the new framework, motorists accused of minor traffic offences will no longer be compelled to immediately settle penalties generated by the automated system. Instead, they may either admit liability and pay the prescribed fine or dispute the offence before a court of law.

The changes were announced by NTSA Director-General Nashon Kondiwa, who said the transport regulator had reviewed the implementation framework with stakeholders including the police, the Judiciary, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and other enforcement agencies.

Camera clamp

The instant fines system relies heavily on smart traffic cameras and digital monitoring infrastructure to automatically detect traffic violations such as speeding, failure to wear seat belts and disobeying police instructions.

Once an offence is detected, the system generates a notification to motorists through SMS, email or digital traffic enforcement platforms. The notice contains details of the offence, including the date, time and location, the prescribed penalty and payment timelines.

‘Upon receiving a notice, motorists have two options: they may admit liability and pay the prescribed fine within the stipulated period, or they may dispute the allegation in court,’ said Mr Kondiwa.

He added that motorists who opt to settle the fine would avoid appearing in court, although courts would retain powers to reduce or refund penalties depending on mitigating circumstances.

The regulator also warned that motorists who fail to respond, pay fines or appear in court when required could face harsher penalties imposed through the judicial process.

Court battle

The revised framework follows a temporary suspension of the system by the High Court after a petition filed by civil society organisation Sheria Mtaani and advocate Shadrack Wambui.

The petitioners argued that the automated penalties scheme fundamentally alters how traffic offences are detected, prosecuted and punished in Kenya.

‘The impugned notice purports to introduce a nationwide enforcement regime that fundamentally alters the manner in which criminal liability for traffic offences is determined, enforced and penalised in Kenya,’ the petition states.

The court barred NTSA and other state agencies from issuing or enforcing instant penalties generated through algorithmic or automated decision-making systems pending the hearing of the case.

Another Nairobi motorist, Kennedy Maingi Mutwiri, also moved to court seeking to stop the implementation of the system, arguing that it punishes motorists without giving them an opportunity to defend themselves before a court of law.

Revenue drive

The automated fines regime forms part of a broader Sh42 billion smart driving licence and traffic management project being implemented through a public-private partnership (PPP).

The project is backed by KCB Group and Pesa Print, a local technology firm partly owned by businessman David Njane together with politically connected investors Jabir Abdul Nassir Abdalla Al-Kindy and Faryd Abdulrazak Sheikh.

The consortium plans to recoup its investment over a 21-year concession period through revenues generated from instant traffic fines, smart driving licence fees and other user charges.

NTSA documents show that motorists will pay Sh3,000 for the new smart driving licences, while traffic offenders will face penalties ranging from Sh500 for failure to wear seat belts to Sh10,000 for offences such as speeding and driving vehicles without valid inspection certificates.

The project also includes the installation of more than 1,000 smart traffic cameras across major highways and accident-prone roads.

About 700 fixed cameras will be mounted along strategic highways and urban centres, while 300 mobile units will target speeding hotspots and high-risk corridors.

The government argues that the system will improve road safety and help reduce accidents caused by speeding and reckless driving.

Kenya has increasingly turned to PPP arrangements to finance major infrastructure projects amid mounting fiscal pressure and shrinking public revenues.

Treasury data shows the government collected an average of Sh1.7 billion annually from traffic fines between July 2020 and June 2024. However, officials expect collections to rise sharply once the automated fines system is fully implemented.

The smart licence project was initially launched in 2017 under a Sh2.03 billion contract awarded to a consortium led by the then National Bank of Kenya. The arrangement was later converted into a PPP model after the government accumulated pending bills owed to Pesa Print.

Auditor-General Nancy Gathungu has previously flagged delays in the implementation of the project, noting that it is several years behind schedule.

Absa Bank Kenya reported a 13.8 percent decline in net profit in the first quarter ended March as falling interest rates and reduced lending to customers resulted in reduced interest income.

The bank’s net income in the review period stood at Sh5.3 billion, down from Sh6.1 billion the year before.

Total interest income fell 10.1 percent to Sh13.5 billion. The lender also slashed interest paid on deposits by 17 percent to Sh3.1 billion, helping to mitigate the impact of lower interest income on its lending margins.

‘While market conditions remained dynamic, we delivered a profit after tax of Sh5.3 billion and a return on equity of 20.3 percent,’ Absa said in a statement.

‘Revenue [Total operating income] closed at Sh14.7 billion, reflecting the impact of the lower-rate environment, partly offset by improved cost-of-funds management.’

Absa becomes the second major listed lender to report lower earnings after Standard Chartered Bank Kenya’s net income declined 26.3 percent in the same period to Sh3.5 billion on lower interest income.

StanChart’s net interest income fell by 24.4 percent to Sh6.2 billion as revenues from lending fell faster than interest expenses, cutting its lending margins.

Read: StanChart bucks trend with 26pc profit fall in first quarter

Other rival banks including Equity Group, NCBA Group and Co-operative Bank of Kenya have recorded higher earnings on a mix of deeper cuts in interest expenses and higher income from lending and transactions.

Absa’s non-interest income shrank by Sh233.9 million to Sh4.2 billion while operating expenses increased by Sh169.8 million to Sh7.1 billion, contributing to the weaker earnings. The bank paid out Sh717 million to 82 of its employees who took voluntary early retirement in January this year, pushing up its staff costs for the first quarter.

The lender cut its loan loss provision by only Sh8 million to Sh1.4 billion despite the stock of bad loans falling by Sh5.9 billion to Sh38.1 billion, indicating increased cautionary outlook on credit performance in the near future.

Absa cut its loan book by Sh4.5 billion to Sh303.8 billion and increased its investments in the safer government debt securities by Sh22.5 billion to Sh128.4 billion.

‘Looking ahead, the bard remains confident in Absa Bank Kenya’s ability to navigate the evolving market dynamics

while continuing to deliver sustainable value,’ the lender said.

‘Our focus remains on disciplined execution, customer-centric innovation, prudent risk management, and long-term shareholder returns.’

The US and Israel war on Iran has resulted in a sharp jump in the price of commodities led by oil, leading to rising inflation that is set to reduce households’ disposable incomes and hurt profitability of businesses.

The fallout from a surge in inflation will be larger if the war persists for longer. Most sectors of the economy have been impacted by the commodities price rally including agriculture, transport, manufacturing, trade and energy.

The Kenyan government’s intention to comply with its international climate commitments, including the Global Methane Pledge, has inevitably put the pastoralists in the spotlight.

Greenhouse gas emissions from the Global South are a very small contribution to human-made climate change. Yet emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas that represents 25 percent of total global warming, are attributed a much higher weight in low-income countries, precisely because of the relative economic importance of grazing livestock. Pastoralism is hence targeted as a primary objective for emission reductions-but is such attribution fair?

Pastoralism in Kenya exists primarily within arid and semi-arid lands, which make up nearly 80 percent of Kenya. Within these landscapes, communities such as the Maasai, Samburu, Turkana, Borana, Rendille, and others have practised mobile livestock production for generations.

These systems are built on seasonal movement, communal rangeland governance, indigenous ecological knowledge, and livestock breeds adapted to harsh and variable environments. In radical contrast with industrialised livestock systems, they operate with minimal external inputs and depend largely on natural grazing systems.

The naturalness of such practices is the key to their success: livestock integrates into savanna ecosystems the same way as wild migratory herbivores do, following green pastures across seasons.

Such integration into natural ecosystems is, unfortunately, one of the reasons for pastoralism being attributed a high climate burden. In the Global North, where industrial agriculture facilitates the provision of grain and concentrates, methane emissions per animal are much lower.

But attributing a Samburu cow with high emissions is not fair. That cow spent its life on natural pastures where all kinds of antelopes had grazed for thousands and millions of years, migrating in search of greener pasture as the wild herbivores used to do.

The methane that cows emit is no different from that emitted by wild migrating herbivores, as recent research shows. The problem humanity has with changing the climate is due to the amount of gases that we are artificially adding.

But there is a natural amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that protects life, warming the planet by 33°C. Our Samburu cow feeding on natural rangelands is not putting any single additional methane molecule into the system.

In many other African countries, livestock also has a very important social role as a reserve of capital, but unfortunately this is the other reason for the large climatic blame to Kenyan pastoralism. The global scientific community measures emission intensity on a per product base.

Imagine the case of a Samburu father who, to pay for his daughter’s school fees, sells his 8-year-old cow. Every kilogram of meat is attributed with all the gas that the cow produced while grazing natural rangelands during all that time. Yet a calf from the industrial facility mentioned above in the Global North will be slaughtered in few months, every kilogram of meat being attributed with methane emissions during a much more reduced timespan.

But attributing the Samburu cow with such high emissions is not fair. That cow spent its life on natural pastures where all kinds of antelopes had grazed for thousands and millions of years, migrating on the search for greener pasture as the wild herbivores used to do.

The methane that cow emitted is not different from the one wild migrating herbivores emit, as recent research shows. The problem humanity has with changing the climate is due to the amount of gases that we are artificially adding. But there is a natural amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that protects life, by warming the planet by 33°C.

Our Samburu cow feeding on natural rangelands is not putting any single additional methane molecule to the system. Ironically, the industrial livestock systems of the Global North that are being showcased as a paradigm of climate efficiency rely on the production of grain, concentrates and fertilized fodder which needs fossil fuel energy.

The use of oil and natural gas to move tractors and produce mineral fertilizer means that industrial food production systems are adding net greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

Thereby they dope local rangelands with way more animals than what is natural, just like a runner on steroids, increasing methane emissions well above natural levels. Just as any other fossil-fuel-based activity, they contribute to the very dangerous 2°C artificial warming above natural greenhouse effect levels that humanity is fearing.

The Kenyan Government and society can make an opportunity out of this challenge. Instead of assuming a narrative that ignores local realities, it can organize African countries with large pastoralist herds to make the case in the international climate negotiations.

Abandoning pastoralism will not only be ineffective, due to wild animals or wildfires taking over the same emissions. It will be counterproductive, because of the need to compensate with increased industrial production for the food and services no longer delivered by pastoralism.

In term of climate adaptation, mobile pastoralism has repeatedly proven to be a very effective livelihood, with a cultural and social structure designed to make the best of climate variability.

The cultural significance for Kenyans is patent in the country’s flag and coat of arms, in spite of the deterioration that fragmentation, scarcity of services and other problems have brought. We have to revert it. We cannot miss this chance, for the best time to act was yesterday, but the second best is now.

Kenya has been ranked the world’s eleventh best country to outsource business processes to, beating advanced economies like the United Kingdom and the United States, due to its affordable labour costs and English proficiency of workers.

Business process outsourcing (BPO) is the practice of hiring a third-party company to handle back-office functions like customer care, telemarketing, data entry, content moderation, and IT support, among others.

A global ranking of 193 countries by American outsourcing consultancy Ataraxis places Kenya 11th globally, and third in Africa, behind South Africa and Nigeria, highlighting its competitiveness in the international industry.

Kenya’s competitiveness is primarily due to labour affordability and an English-proficient workforce, bolstered by good digital infrastructure, ready availability of talent, and business stability, according to Ataraxis.

Nairobi’s performance in the BPO market beats that of the US and UK, which are homes to some of the world’s largest outsourcing firms, including Samasource and Teleperformance, which already have major operations in Kenya.

‘The advantage that Kenya has is that labour costs are very competitive, almost close to the global minimum, without sacrificing on English proficiency,’ said George Atuahene, Ataraxis CEO.

‘While infrastructure and talent scale are still developing compared to more mature hubs, its rapid digital transformation makes it an ideal spot for companies looking for high-quality, cost-effective technical and support talent.’

Globally, the Philippines tops the world BPO market, due to its developed digital infrastructure, added to English fluency and a readily available and affordable workforce.

Other top performers ranking above Kenya are Malaysia, India, Chile, Peru, Indonesia, Argentina, and Romania, which have business-level English proficiency and a huge and affordable labour force.

The UK and US rank 29th and 86th, respectively, globally, largely due to expensive labour costs, which are among the highest in the world. The US, for instance, performs exceptionally in English fluency, digital infrastructure, and availability of labour, but its costs are the fifth highest in the world, after Monaco, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, and Switzerland.

‘The United States has a perfect score in digital infrastructure and a very high score in business stability, making it one the world’s most reliable locations for critical business operations,’ said Mr Atuahene.

‘Without the labour cost variable, the United States would rank among the strongest global talent markets. A US-company can often hire several offshore staff for the cost of one domestic employee.’

Currently, most of the roles outsourced to Kenya are in data entry and analysis, AI-training, content moderation, telemarketing and digital marketing, graphic design, and copywriting.

However, experts project that Kenya’s edge and market share in the industry will improve after the US considers new rules to ensure customer care outsourcing by US firms goes to English-proficient countries or stays within the country.

In a move to promote consumer welfare, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said it is considering limiting the use of foreign call centres in the country, and requiring foreign-based customer service workers to be proficient in American-standard English. FCC estimates that 70 percent of US companies outsource at least one department, including customer service and call centre operations to foreign countries, with India currently leading.

Brendan Carr, FCC chair, said ‘too many Americans have struggled to resolve an issue with a representative due to cultural and language barriers,’ necessitating the restriction of call centres to English-proficient countries.

‘I think this will really tip the scales in favour of countries like Kenya, where labour is already cheap, and the workforce is generally fluent in English, as opposed to other countries where labour is cheap, but workers struggle to speak good English,’ reckons Mr Atuahene.

Kenya’s cheaply available labour has, however, been a cause of concern for many activists, who argue that it has led to the exploitation of Kenyans to do mentally draining tasks for poor pay.

The Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) collections have deteriorated following wider missed targets amid pressure to cut taxes on key income heads like pay-as-you-earn (PAYE), which could worsen revenue performance.

Ordinary revenues collected through nine months of the fiscal year to March 2026 missed the mark by Sh161.9 billion, extending the deficit in tax collection from Sh110.6 billion at the end of December 2025.

The missed revenue targets come amid the government’s grant of tax concessions to contain the vagaries of the US-Israel war on Iran, including the halving of value-added tax (VAT) on petroleum products.

The National Treasury still faces public pressure to offer further tax incentives, including reducing payroll taxes for low-income earners.

The KRA will likely record wider missed targets if the tax concessions are adopted without a reduced revenue outlook for the taxman.

‘Ordinary revenue collection was Sh1.81 trillion against a target of Sh1.98 trillion by the end of March 2026,’ the National Treasury said in its latest quarterly economic and budget review report.

‘All ordinary revenue categories recorded below target performance during the period under review, except import duty, which surpassed its target by Sh8.6 billion, and other revenue categories, which surpassed their target by Sh4.1 billion.’

Corporation tax recorded the largest miss among major tax heads at Sh60.3 billion, ahead of PAYE at Sh50.1 billion.

The VAT collections were off the mark by Sh42.8 billion, while misses on excise duty and investment revenue were posted at Sh19.2 billion and Sh43 million, respectively.

The taxman has persistently missed its collection targets amid difficulties, including a softer economy and revenue base expansion bottlenecks.

This has forced the Treasury to plug the created deficit from domestic revenue underperformance through additional internal borrowing.

Read: KRA blocks manual VAT export entries, tightens refund claims

Ordinary revenue collected through the nine months was, however, higher than the same time last year when receipts totalled to just Sh1.58 trillion.

KRA faces a sterner test to meet revenue targets as the government is forced to give up some taxes to contain the effects of the new raging Middle East War.

The halving of VAT is estimated to cost the exchequer a revenue loss of about Sh12.9 billion over a three-month period to mid-June 2026.

The National Treasury has further warned that Sh35 billion could be lost annually if it offers income tax cuts.

The exchequer had proposed to raise the limit of untaxed income from Sh24,000 to Sh30,000 while the rate of tax for incomes between Sh30,001 and Sh50,000 would be set at 25 percent.

The consideration was made before the start of the new Middle East war at the end of February.

The National Treasury has mulled pulling the plug on the concession but says that it could see the proposal through even as the move presents a blow to State coffers.

‘When I talked on this matter previously, I said there are implications because it’s going to leave us with a budget hole. We must now make a decision and that’s now for me upwards,’ said John Mbadi, the National Treasury Cabinet Secretary.

‘The decision is mine to take, and I will take that decision.’

Lobbyists including the Kenya Bankers Association (KBA) have proposed a five-percent uniform cut in Paye for all salaried workers.

The relief is estimated to release Sh28.1 billion into the economy every year and generate close to Sh42 billion in immediate gross domestic product (GDP) output.

KRA has a target to raise Sh2.784 trillion in ordinary revenues in the fiscal year closing on June 30 from Sh2.42 trillion previously.

The target moves higher for the financial year starting July 1 to Sh2.985 trillion.

A long-running dispute between agribusiness firm Kakuzi Plc and the Capital Markets Authority (CMA) has escalated to the Court of Appeal, pitting the company’s board of directors against the market regulator in a case that could have far-reaching implications for listed firms.

The matter was heard this week as parties await directions from the higher court. Kakuzi moved to the appellate court after the High Court declined to stop CMA’s inquiry into Kakuzi’s affairs. The company is now seeking orders to preserve the status quo pending determination of its appeal.

The parties had in April explored an amicable settlement, raising hopes of ending a legal battle that has dragged on for years.

At the heart of the conflict is CMA’s investigation into alleged conflicts of interest and financial impropriety involving management and operational service agreements between Kakuzi and several related companies within the Camellia Plc.

Kakuzi directors insist that they have provided all information requested by the regulator and question why the inquiry continues despite extensive disclosures. CMA, on the other hand, maintains that it is lawfully exercising its statutory mandate to investigate matters arising from a complaint lodged against the company.

The outcome of the case is being closely watched in corporate circles because the arrangements under scrutiny are common among multinational groups operating through listed companies. Any adverse findings could have implications for governance practices across firms listed on the Nairobi Securities Exchange.

Read: Kakuzi directors escalate fight with markets regulator over probe plans

Origin of the inquiry

The investigation traces its roots to a summons issued by CMA on June 14, 2021, seeking information relating to Kakuzi’s governance assessment and audit for the 2019 financial year.

The regulator said the inquiry was triggered by a complaint and sought information regarding governance structures, related-party transactions and management arrangements.

Particular attention was directed at Management and Operational Services Agreements signed on December 11, 2017 between Kakuzi and Robertson Bois Dickson Anderson Limited, as well as agreements involving Eastern Produce Regional Services Limited.

The companies, together with Kakuzi, are subsidiaries of Camellia Plc, a British investment group with interests in agriculture and food production.

The regulator also sought to examine Kakuzi’s dealings with related entities, including Eastern Produce Kenya Limited, EPK Empowerment Company (Kenya) Limited, Lintak Enterprises (K) Limited, Linton Park (Kenya) Limited and Siret Tea Limited.

As the inquiry progressed, CMA summoned Kakuzi directors for interviews scheduled between September 12 and 16, 2022.

Through their lawyers, the directors objected, arguing that they had not been informed of the specific allegations against them. They maintained that the summons failed to disclose the nature of the alleged conflict of interest or particulars of the alleged financial impropriety.

Invoking Article 47 of the Constitution and provisions of the Fair Administrative Action Act, the directors demanded disclosure of the allegations before the interviews could proceed.

CMA responded on September 7, 2022, insisting that the summons sufficiently disclosed the matters under investigation. Further exchanges followed, with the directors seeking collective rather than individual interviews and requesting fresh interview dates.

Eventually, the entire board appeared before CMA investigators on November 9, 2022.

Corporate governance report sparks disagreement

A major point of contention emerged after CMA completed its assessment of Kakuzi’s corporate governance self-assessment report for the year ended December 31, 2021.

The regulator awarded the company an overall weighted governance score of 72 percent and stated that Kakuzi had demonstrated commitment to good governance and sustainability. CMA commended the company for strengthening governance structures while recommending areas for improvement.

To Kakuzi, that assessment effectively addressed the concerns underlying the inquiry.

The directors argued that the same issues being investigated had already been examined by the regulator.

They contended that continuing with the inquiry after issuing a favourable governance assessment amounted to revisiting matters already determined.

Their lawyers wrote to CMA in November 2022 asserting that the investigation could not lawfully continue because the issues had effectively been addressed through the governance review.

The directors have consistently maintained that they have answered all questions raised by the regulator. They have repeatedly challenged CMA to identify the alleged irregular payments, specify any financial loss suffered, and explain why information already supplied is considered insufficient.

CMA rejected that position.

In a letter dated December 2, 2022, the regulator stated that the governance assessment and the inquiry were separate processes serving different purposes.

According to CMA, although the two processes touched on similar subject matter, they addressed distinct issues. The regulator further maintained that section 11(3)(h) of the Capital Markets Act grants it authority to investigate the affairs of entities approved to issue securities to the public.

Read: Court allows CMA to probe eight directors of Kakuzi

CMA insisted that its investigations were ongoing and that the summons issued to Kakuzi’s directors were lawful and necessary to facilitate those investigations.

Tribunal and High Court reject challenge

The dispute remained unresolved for an extended period, partly because the Capital Markets Tribunal had not been constituted.

Once operational, the tribunal heard the matter and on September 19, 2024 dismissed the directors’ appeal.

The tribunal found that CMA’s investigations were still ongoing and that no final decision had been made against the directors.

‘We agree with the respondent’s submissions that the investigations being done were inquisitorial in nature, and it is only after notice that adverse action is likely to be taken that the appellants’ position to be furnished with reasons and particulars would hold. The appellants moved this tribunal prematurely,’ the tribunal ruled.

Undeterred, the directors moved to the High Court.

However, on September 30, 2025, the court upheld the tribunal’s decision, finding that the directors had failed to demonstrate any violation of their constitutional rights that would justify judicial intervention.

The court held that CMA was merely conducting an inquiry and that the company and its directors would be informed of any developments arising from the process. If wrongdoing was eventually established, the regulator would communicate its decision formally.

‘The appellants’ actions also seem to be premature. As such, the contention is for rejection,’ the court ruled.

Appeal focuses on fair hearing rights

The dispute has now reached the Court of Appeal, where eight directors are challenging both the tribunal and High Court decisions.

Their principal complaint is that CMA has refused to disclose the particulars of the alleged financial impropriety and the nature of complaints made by third parties.

The directors argue that the Constitution guarantees them a fair hearing, which includes access to the allegations, evidence and materials relied upon by the regulator.

They fault the courts for concluding that no constitutional violations had occurred and maintain that they were entitled to know precisely what accusations they were being required to answer.

According to Kakuzi, the regulator has never adequately explained what was improper about payments made under the service agreements or why responses already submitted were deemed insufficient.

The company also defends the service arrangements under investigation.

Chief executive officer Christopher Flowers told the courts that Eastern Produce Regional Services provides substantial management, finance, information technology and marketing services to Kakuzi at reasonable cost. The arrangement, he said, allows specialised services to be shared across Camellia group companies, generating operational efficiencies.

Mr Flowers also confirmed that he serves as a director of several companies in Kenya, Malawi and Tanzania. However, he denied any conflict of interest, stating that the companies do not compete each other and that he holds no shareholding interests in them.

As the appeal proceeds, the central question remains unresolved: whether CMA is entitled to continue its investigations without providing the detailed particulars sought by Kakuzi’s directors, or whether constitutional fair-hearing guarantees require fuller disclosure before the inquiry can advance further.

The answer could define the balance between regulatory oversight and procedural fairness for listed companies for years to come

Former Consolidated Bank of Kenya CEO Samuel Muturi has lost his bid for reappointment after Treasury Cabinet Secretary John Mbadi blocked the bank board from giving him a fresh three-year term, sparking a legal battle.

Mr Muturi had sued the bank, alongside Mr Mbadi and acting CEO Dominic Murage, seeking either a fresh term based on the board’s favourable recommendation or damages and reliefs of at least Sh76.35 million.

However, the Employment and Labour Relations Court dismissed Mr Muturi’s petition, finding that his three-year contract, which lapsed in October 2025, did not confer an automatic right to renewal despite a positive performance record and recommendation by the bank’s board.

In the judgment, the court held that the renewal of a CEO’s contract in a State corporation is not solely a board decision but is subject to concurrence by the parent ministry-in this case, the Treasury.

The court also upheld the appointment of Dr Murage as the acting CEO following the expiry of Mr Muturi’s term, terming it a lawful and necessary step to ensure continuity of the bank’s operations.

‘The court holds that the petition lacks merit and is dismissed. The contract ended by effluxion of time, and the Cabinet Secretary was not bound by the recommendations of the board on the extension of the contract,’ reads the judgment delivered on May 15.

Before tapping Mr Muturi’s replacement on October 8, the Treasury Cabinet Secretary fired three directors on October 3 after they insisted on Mr Muturi’s second term and rejected the push for the recruitment of a new CEO. Mr Mbadi advised the remaining two of the seven directors to hire Dr Murage, a lecturer at the University of Nairobi, as acting CEO.

Dr Murage’s appointment came days after he stepped down in the race for the Mbeere North parliamentary seat in a by-election in favour of the candidate of President William Ruto’s United Democratic Alliance (UDA). The appointment of Dr Murage came as his brother, Charles Njagagua, was removed as chairman of Consolidated Bank.

Mr Mbadi appointed Dr Murage pending certification by the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK), sparking a row with the regulator. The CBK argued that the lender had breached its rules that demand executives pass a fit and proper test before their appointment.

In the May 15 judgement, the court also declined to award Mr Muturi damages equivalent to three years’ salary, with the judge noting that non-renewal of a fixed-term contract does not amount to unfair termination and does not require justification unless expressly provided in law or contract.

‘The remedy sought is not legally tenable. The remuneration of an employee is contractual and in the instant case, the contract was for three years. There is no employer obligation beyond the contract,’ said the judge.

Mr Muturi had argued that he met all the requirements for reappointment, including applying for renewal six months before the expiry of his term and attaining favourable performance ratings from both the State Corporations Advisory Committee and the bank’s board.

The board had subsequently recommended his reappointment for a further three-year term, citing improved financial performance at the lender during his tenure.

However, Mr Mbadi declined to approve the renewal and instead directed the bank to begin the process of recruiting a new CEO, even as Dr Murage was picked as the acting CEO. Dr Murage, a financial scholar and lecturer, was seconded from the University of Nairobi.

Read: Mbadi wins in row over Consolidated Bank’s CEO ouster

In a meeting held in September, four of the six directors opted to challenge the Cabinet Secretary’s decision and insisted on Mr Muturi.

However, the former chairman, Mr Njagagua, and Jane Njogu (Treasury’s representative on the bank’s board) sided with Mr Mbadi.

In a letter dated September 17, the Cabinet Secretary acknowledged receiving a letter signed by four directors requesting extension of the CEO’s contract but insisted on ending Mr Muturi’s term.

On October 3, Mr Mbadi revoked the appointment of three of the four directors who had signed the letter, save for Florence Oluoch, who had been appointed in November last year. President Ruto revoked Mr Njagagua’s chairmanship on the same day, leaving the bank without a substantive board.

In rejecting Mr Muturi’s petition to be given a fresh term, the court found that a fixed-term contract lapses automatically upon expiry and does not create a legitimate expectation of renewal.

The judge further ruled that a positive performance appraisal and board recommendation, while relevant, do not amount to an enforceable legal right to contract renewal without approval from the relevant authorities.

Mr Muturi had also challenged the Treasury’s role, arguing that the power to appoint or reappoint a CEO rests exclusively with the board under governance guidelines. The Treasury holds a 93.4 percent stake in the lender and the remainder is in the hands of other State institutions.

However, the respondents (Dr Murage, Mr Mbadi and the bank) maintained that under the State Corporations Act and applicable governance framework, the Cabinet Secretary’s concurrence is mandatory, given the government’s ownership and oversight role in the bank.

The court agreed with the position, effectively affirming the Treasury’s influence over leadership decisions in State-owned entities.

Consolidated Bank posted a net profit of Sh198.18 million at the end of last year, emerging from a net loss of Sh155.22 million in the previous year. The latest profit is the first one in 11 years, with the previous net profit coming in 2014 at Sh44.42 million.

The Finance Bill 2026 has now moved beyond the public participation stage, which officially closed on May 25. The Bill is currently under parliamentary scrutiny, with legislators reviewing submissions received from wananchi and stakeholders.

While the window for public input has ended, this phase remains critical: Parliament must weigh the diverse perspectives presented, separate fact from misinformation, and ensure that the final provisions align with Kenya’s economic priorities and social realities.

Misinterpretations of the Bill’s clauses have already fueled anxiety among Kenyans, underscoring the importance of Parliament’s responsibility to deliberate transparently and base decisions on accurate information.

One common misconception is that the bill automatically makes life more expensive for everyone. In reality, the Finance Bill contains a mix of proposals, some that adjust tax rates, others that restructure compliance timelines, and still others that redefine exemptions.

The impact of these changes will vary across sectors and individuals. For example, proposals touching on mobile phones, digital financial services, rental income, and second-hand clothing have been widely discussed, but the details are often misrepresented.

Kenyans should note that while these areas are indeed affected, the bill does not simply impose blanket increases; rather, it introduces specific adjustments that need to be understood in context.

Another area of misinformation relates to electric vehicles and batteries. Some reports have suggested that the bill removes all incentives for green mobility. In fact, the proposal shifts these items from zero-rated to VAT-exempt status.

While this change has technical implications for pricing, it does not mean that Kenya has abandoned its environmental commitments. Similarly, introduction of new rules for cryptocurrency and virtual assets has been misinterpreted as a ban.

The bill does not outlaw digital assets; instead, it seeks to regulate them through taxation and reporting requirements, a move aimed at bringing clarity to a growing sector.

There has also been confusion around compliance timelines. The proposal to move the income tax filing deadline from June 30 to April 30 has been described by some as a punitive measure.

In truth, the adjustment is intended to streamline revenue collection and align Kenya’s tax calendar more closely with international standards. Whether this change is practical or not is a matter for debate, but it is not accurate to portray it as a sudden or arbitrary burden.

Mitumba trade has generated significant public concern, with claims that the bill seeks to eliminate second-hand clothing altogether. This is not the case. The proposal introduces VAT at importation and a presumptive tax on customs value, measures that affect pricing but do not amount to a ban.

Traders and consumers should, therefore, focus on understanding how these changes will be implemented, rather than assuming the sector will be shut.

What is clear is that misinformation thrives when citizens rely on hearsay rather than engaging directly with the text of the bill. The Finance Bill 2026 is a complex document, and its implications cannot be reduced to simple slogans.

This is why public participation is so important. Citizens must read, question, and scrutinise the proposals for themselves, uncovering the fine print that may otherwise pass unnoticed. By doing so, they can separate fact from speculation and contribute meaningfully to the debate.

Ultimately, the Finance Bill 2026 should be seen as an opportunity for dialogue between government and citizens. It is not a finished product but a draft open to refinement.

The responsibility lies with every Kenyan to engage constructively, to seek clarity where confusion exists, and to ensure that the final law reflects both fiscal responsibility and social realities. Dispelling misinformation is the first step toward that goal, and it is only through informed scrutiny that citizens can be content with the bill and confident in its outcomes.

“We’re all just muddling through, after all. We’re all just doing the best we can. We’re all struggling with our struggles. Nobody has the answers. And everybody, deep down, is a little bit lost,” said Katherine Center.

How does your organisation really work? In delighting the customer, does the operational and financial data just flow in, magically showing stunning performance on a colourful Power BI dashboard? Perfectly planned, is everyone in sync, engaged, fired up, certain they are doing the right thing, working in faultless harmony?

The reality of the corporate world is that most companies survive not through flawless, visionary execution, but by muddling through. Daily operations are more trial and error, reacting to crises, and managing internal friction, rather than operating with perfect, long-term strategic clarity.

Awareness and early detection

No, not every company is meant to live forever. Inevitably, creative destruction, survival of the fittest, happens. But often an early corporate death can be stopped by a health check asking different questions, and rethinking fundamental assumptions.

Helps to be aware, looking out for the warning signs. Behind the hype, all the polished public relations and mission statements, there is a messy reality that shows up in several ways.

In the beginning, one starts with relentless hustle and an insightful core idea. But as the months and years go by, as companies scale, they often fail to upgrade their thinking and systems.

What worked once, the founder’s hands-on approach can become a roadblock, forcing staff to just ‘figure it out’ as they go. ‘Disjointed incrementalism, the fancy term for flying by the seat of your pants, becomes standard operating procedure.

Being simple in design is difficult; being complex and confusing is easy. Often, companies try to manage complexity by adding layers of bureaucracy, meetings, and processes. The result is ‘approval theatre’ where the system stresses control over traction, and true progress gets bogged down.

Slow downhill descent

In the business history of Kenya and East Africa, rarely does a major company collapse in a single, dramatic moment. Instead, they manage failure quietly, slowly downsizing, restructuring, or pivoting, suggesting that each is a carefully thought-out, deliberate move.

Muddling through is a remarkably resilient approach, but with time, it drains staff energy and makes the business highly vulnerable to sudden shifts in the market.

No company announces its decline outright. There is never a corporate communication that says: “We miscalculated, the model doesn’t work, and we’re running out of options.” Instead, failing organisations communicate in subtler ways.

Like the decline and fall of the Roman empire-that happened over centuries-deterioration shows up quietly in odd decisions, behaviour shifts, and the quiet contradictions between ‘what they say and what they do’.

Helps to start to recognise the signs. Not the dramatic collapses, but the slow erosion that trickles down. When a business is failing, senior management will generally insist everything is fine.

Fear of being wrong, being afraid of risking stepping out of line, deleting institutional memory, and slowness in responding are all warning signals. Nothing wrong with having a long-term vision. But when the stress is on some heavenly future, rather than down to earth tangible results, that is a red flag.

Bold move or buying time?

One indicator may be that they start changing the rules. “One of the earliest signs of trouble is constant restructuring disguised as ‘evolution’. Pricing models change. Compensation shifts.

Core features are removed, paywalled, or quietly deprioritised. What was once positioned as the heart of the product is suddenly optional, deprecated, or reframed as a ‘test’. Users and workers are asked to adapt-again- often with little notice and even less explanation.

These changes are rarely presented as corrections. They’re labelled bold moves, strategic realignments, or exciting new directions. When a company keeps rewriting the rules instead of improving the system, it’s usually not innovating. It’s buying time and shifting the cost of that uncertainty onto the people who rely on it, advises Christine Lorelie.

“Healthy businesses talk about outcomes. Failing ones talk about potential. When performance starts slipping, the language shifts. Conversations move away from measurable results and toward mission statements, values, community, and long-term impact. These things are important, but they’re also conveniently abstract. Vision becomes something to hide behind when the numbers no longer speak for themselves,” says Lorelie.

‘Muddling through’ was formalised as a term and theory by the economist and political scientist Charles Lindblom in a seminal 1959 paper, The Science of Muddling Through.

Lindblom observed that in practice, incremental decision-making was the rule in the US government bureaucracy. Instead of making massive, perfectly planned reforms, public policy makers and organisations make small, step-by-step policy adjustments in response to immediate problems. What really happens is the act of solving problems pragmatically as they come, rather than executing a flawless long-term strategy.

Muddling through is a popular item on the management menu, but a constant daily diet isn’t healthy. What’s the treatment? Astute advice comes from Melinda French Gates: “The most important thing you can do is keep learning and stay open to change.”