Category: Business Daily

James Mworia took up the role of founding CEO of the newly created National Infrastructure Fund (NIF) on Monday, marking his exit from Centum Investment Company after nearly 17 years.

Through the fund, he aims to mobilise at least Sh400 billion annually to relieve the pressure of development spending on commercially viable infrastructure from the Exchequer.

Business Daily sat down with him to discuss his agenda for infrastructure development in the country.

You are banking on the growing domestic capital pools and, more so, the Sh3.1 trillion assets under management held by pension funds to crowd in on infrastructure projects. Fund managers will, however, tell you that they are worried about asset-liability mismatch when it comes to investing in infrastructure as an asset class. How do you address this hurdle?

One of the solutions I have in mind to address the asset-liability mismatch risks is that we create a National Infrastructure Development Fund, which can borrow from the Regulation of Development Real Estate Investment Trusts.

This will then allow investors to come into a liquid instrument and automatically address the asset-liability mismatch concerns. It will also address the challenge of political perception risk because if investors come directly into National Infrastructure Fund-financed projects, some will argue that it borders on privatisation via the backdoor, but with a vehicle that is listed, all investors can come in transparently.

Can we infer then that NIF will be a Fund of Funds such that we have subsidiary funds within for co-investment purposes?

It is important to have funds because for those who have fundraised, they appreciate that it is very tedious to fundraise on a project-by-project basis and from a pension fund-to-pension fund basis where you are moving from one fund manager to another. If we create a fund, we can then have investment criteria that the projects need to meet for the fund to then invest in at a prescribed commitment level.

There’s a finite number of assets that can be privatised, whether partially or wholly, and that means the National Infrastructure Fund needs to have a robust liquidity-generating mechanism beyond privatisation proceeds. How do you plan to realise this?

The National Infrastructure Fund Act allows us to make investments in government securities. The yield we are expecting to get there is about 12.5 percent in annual return, and so we should be making just about Sh42 billion income per year.

We are working with Sh40 billion as a benchmark. The idea is to ensure that we preserve the seed capital because, as you pointed out, there are limited assets that can be privatised.

How do you see the National Infrastructure Fund fitting within the country’s larger public finance framework as far as Kenya’s annual budget is concerned?

If we do our job well, then we should easily take out just about Sh400 billion from the national budget because then we will reduce reliance on the Exchequer for commercially viable infrastructure projects.

Right now, what’s happening is that any infrastructure project taken to the National Treasury and is considered to be commercially viable is then routed to my team at the National Infrastructure Fund.

In fact, a few projects were directed to us over the weekend of September 5 and 6, just before I was appointed CEO.

The National Infrastructure Fund targets a crowd-in factor of 1:10, meaning for every one shilling from privatisation, the fund should be mobilising another Sh10 from private sector players. That is, by all means, very ambitious. How much have you crowded- in so far, and how do you intend to realise this crowd-in factor?

I don’t think it is ambitious. Pension funds are currently at Sh3.2 trillion in assets under management and mobilising an average of Sh350 billion in fresh capital from Kenyans every year. So, over the next five years, we will have mobilised another Sh1.5 trillion into pension fund assets, and that is ignoring the returns.

The Retirement Benefits Authority allows up to 10 percent allocation to Infrastructure Funds, and yet right now we are at 0.02 percent. I also saw the submissions of the Capital Markets Authority to the National Assembly on the Investment Policy Statement, and one of the proposals was that they will develop regulations to allow the development of Infrastructure Funds under Collective Investment Schemes. So, if anything, what we may end up being short of is not the capital but viable projects.

When I read that Investment Policy Statement tabled in the National Assembly, I found the document wanting as far as spelling out risk mitigation mechanisms goes. What safeguards do you have in place for such a colossal fund?

We are required to prepare a Risk Management Framework to be approved by the Fund’s Governing Council, but we first had to work on the Investment Policy Statement and get it approved before we can work on the Risk Management Framework. Parliament approved, with comments, the Investment Policy Statement at the end of August, and we are currently finalising it for gazettement. We have also prepared the Risk Management Framework, which is now with the Governing Council for approval.

Lastly, is the National Infrastructure Fund, in any way, looking to crowd-in capital from Development Finance Institutions (DFIs)?

We are having conversations with some DFIs to set up a Project Preparatory Fund so that by the time projects are coming to market, they are more or less getting to financial close because pension fund money is not appropriate for use at those very early stages.

So, by that time, it will be a project that has line of sight on debt, clarity on income, technical questions have been answered, and board approvals have been done. There are different views about how large this Project Preparatory Fund could be, but it might be just about $100 million (Sh12.94 billion).

My take on Magadi soda. When we are through with politicking and election-cycle optics, we will still be facing big choices that will shape our mineral sector for years to come.

How do we split royalties with developers? What should be the local community share? How much value addition and local processing should we be demanding from developers? How should we manage and implement the rule requiring mining companies to relinquish unused or excess prospecting land back to the State so that the resource base can be opened to multiple players?

These questions will continue to rankle and divide us regardless of who the tenant at State House is.

Kenya has for now made a tactical retreat from its attempt to kick out Tata Chemicals. The parties are back at the negotiating table. But this is precisely where the stakes become dangerous.

When negotiations involve billions of shillings in royalty and rent arrears, land surrender, and reconciliation of production and export records, there is enormous room for suspicion. And when such negotiations are conducted behind closed doors, away from public scrutiny, allegations of rent-seeking-and of attempts by political and business elites to shake down foreign investors-are inevitable.

In hindsight, Kenya’s trajectory echoes the late President John Magufuli’s 2017 Permanent Sovereignty Act and Indonesia’s nickel export ban-both cases where governments insisted on in-country processing and tighter export controls.

Did those moves pay off? Partially. Both countries secured higher domestic value capture and stronger industrial linkages. The trade-off was a hit to investor perception.

Faced with this reality, Kenya now has two paths: double down on coercive tactics-arbitrary licence terminations, forced land surrender-or pursue a negotiated transition that locks in fresh investment for beneficiation while giving incumbents a credible compliance route, for instance through phased value-addition targets, tax incentives and infrastructure support.

Last week’s events were happening against the background of a much bigger subtext. Close observers of recent developments in the mining sector must have noticed the eerie resemblance between the stand President William Ruto has taken and this week’s pronouncements by the visiting US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, Frank Garcia.

At the AmCham Kenya Business Summit on Wednesday, Mr Garcia explicitly endorsed local processing of Kenyan minerals, framing “extract and ship” as an illegitimate partnership.

He said: “American companies are not here to extract and ship. We want processing done right here on the ground in Kenya… You keep the value here, create Kenyan jobs, and build a true regional processing hub.”

This is significant because it publicly locks the US into Ruto’s value-addition narrative at the same moment Nairobi is enforcing that doctrine on Tata Chemicals.

Make no mistake: Mr Garcia was not speaking from a “high-minded standpoint.” Even as he was validating Ruto’s domestic crackdown on “extraction without value addition,” it was clear to observers that there was a connection between this rhetoric and the fact that American companies are presently engaged in a do-or-die battle for the biggest thing in the mineral sector today; namely, Mrima Hills.

The battle for Mrima is not just an African mining concession; it has quietly become a focal point of global critical-minerals geopolitics.

The shortlist reads like a roll-call of the new great-game players: Chinese State-backed heavyweights such as Shenghe Resources and China National Nuclear Corporation on one side, and Western-aligned consortia backed by American, British and Australian private equity on the other.

But the real fulcrum here is what might be termed ‘the American variable’. Long before bidders were named, the geopolitical stakes had already surfaced at the G7 summit in Évian-les-Bains, where President Ruto made a pointed declaration: Kenya was finalising a landmark critical-minerals pact with the US, explicitly tying rare-earth extraction to in-country processing.

The signal to Washington was unmistakable-Nairobi was ready to plug into the West’s reconfigured supply chains and help erode China’s roughly 90 percent dominance of downstream rare-earth refining.

The plot thickens further. International outlets, including the Financial Times, have reported quiet, high-level manoeuvring by venture-capital firms linked to political dynasties in Washington.

Vehicles associated with Donald Trump Jr, such as 1789 Capital and its backing of rare-earth start-ups, illustrate just how tightly commercial bets are now woven into political access and federal support in the US.

The risk for Kenya is that sovereign choices end up being squeezed by proxy contests where external pressure distorts domestic priorities.

Absa Bank Kenya has appointed its long-serving chief financial officer (CFO) Yusuf Omari as its new chief executive, replacing Abdi Mohamed who left abruptly in June to join the smaller I and M Bank Limited in the same role.

Mr Omari was appointed CFO of Absa -then trading as Barclays Kenya- on July 23, 2009 and has on multiple occasions held the top job in an acting capacity as former leaders left to join other institutions.

He had held the top job on an interim basis since July 1 in the wake of Mr Mohamed’s exit. Mr Omari also led Absa temporarily from November 1, 2022 -following the departure of Jeremy Awori- until April 30, 2023. Mr Abdi took the job on May 1, 2023.

Mr Awori left to lead Togo-based Ecobank Transnational Incorporated (ETI).

The board of Absa said it was confident in Mr Omari’s ability to lead the bank, which has been growing its presence in the retail market, among other strategic objectives.

‘Yusuf’s appointment reflects his proven ability to lead, deliver sustainable growth and create long-term value,’ Absa’s chairman Mohammed Nyaoga said in a statement.

‘His extensive experience across the bank, deep understanding of the Kenyan market, and strong track record of working with customers, colleagues, regulators and other stakeholders position him strongly to lead Absa Bank Kenya into its next chapter.’

Absa, alongside Standard Chartered Bank Kenya, previously dominated Kenya’s banking sector by most measures including assets and earnings.

The local units of multinational banks remain among the largest lenders in the country but they have been eclipsed by homegrown rivals led by KCB Group, Equity Group and Co-operative Bank of Kenya.

The homegrown banks used the twin strategies of retaining most of their earnings and aggressive expansion -including in the regional markets- to ascend to the top of the banking league tables.

Absa and StanChart, whose parents have subsidiaries in other markets, have focused on profitable growth in Kenya and distributing more of their earnings to shareholders.

Absa’s parent firm Absa Group has made it a priority for the Kenyan business to raise more income from non-lending activities in order to reduce the impact of falling interest rates on the group’s earnings. Mr Omari said he would build on the bank’s existing strengths.

‘I am deeply honoured by the confidence that the board and Absa Group have placed in me through this appointment. Absa Bank Kenya has a strong foundation, an exceptional team and an important role to play in supporting Kenya’s economic growth and development,’ Mr Omari said in a statement.

‘My focus will be on building on this foundation, deepening our relationships with customers, accelerating sustainable growth, strengthening our competitiveness and investing in our people and capabilities. Together, we will continue to make Absa Bank Kenya a bank of choice for our customers and a trusted partner in Kenya’s economic development.’

Mr Omari holds a degree in Economics and a Master of Business Administration. He is also a Fellow of the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Kenya (FCPA) and a graduate of the Advanced Management Programme delivered by Strathmore and IESE Business School.

Absa reported a 9.8 percent fall in net profit to Sh10.5 billion in the half year to June due to lower income from lending and transactions. The bank raised its interim dividend per share to Sh0.5 from the previous Sh0.2.

The Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) has begun reviewing an application to register Mounjaro, a booming once-weekly injectable diabetes drug, for use in Kenya.

The application was submitted by Aspen Pharmacare, a South African pharmaceutical company that has an agreement with Eli Lilly, the US manufacturer of Mounjaro, to distribute and promote the drug across sub-Saharan Africa.

PPB Chief Executive Ahmed Mohamed confirmed that the application was submitted and is currently at the screening stage, the first step in the regulatory review process.

‘Yes, the PPB received an application to register Mounjaro in Kenya on May 7, 2026, and it’s at the screening level,’ he told the Business Daily.

The regulator’s review will determine whether the product meets Kenya’s requirements for quality, safety and efficacy before any approval is granted.

Until the registration process is completed, the PPB said the application does not amount to an approval for routine marketing of Mounjaro in Kenya.

Mounjaro contains tirzepatide, a prescription injectable medication used to manage Type 2 diabetes and promote chronic weight loss. If approved in Kenya, it will be prescribed alongside a healthy diet and regular exercise to treat adults, adolescents, and children aged 10 years and above, with poorly controlled Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Tirzepatide works on two hormone pathways, GIP and GLP-1, which help regulate blood sugar and appetite. This dual action has helped make tirzepatide one of the newer treatments attracting attention in the diabetes and obesity medicine market.

The Kenyan market has seen growing demand for newer diabetes treatments, particularly GLP-1 medicines that can reduce appetite and body weight.

The country already has a range of approved semaglutide medicines, including Ozempic and Wegovy and newer semaglutide products approved by the PPB. Separately, Getz Pharma has introduced Zepad, a tirzepatide-based medicine that contains the same active ingredient as Mounjaro.

The growing interest in these medicines has also increased attention on access, affordability and the need to ensure that patients obtain genuine products through regulated supply chains.

Dr Ahmed said that the growing number of applications for newer diabetes and obesity medicines reflects the expansion of treatment options but also presents additional challenges for regulators.

‘The increasing number of applications means expanding therapeutic options and building confidence in the regulatory authority,’ he said.

He added that this trend also brings additional regulatory demands, including the need for more inspections due to concerns over counterfeit medicines and illegal imports, as well as the risks associated with off-label use.

The Kenyan application forms part of Aspen’s broader plan to expand Mounjaro across sub-Saharan Africa, alongside Nigeria, which are among the first target markets outside South Africa.

‘We have submitted applications in Kenya and Nigeria,’ Aspen CEO Stephen Saad told investors, adding that the two markets have the potential to contribute to the company’s earnings in the financial year ending June 2027.

The company expects Mounjaro sales in Africa to exceed $124 million (Sh15.9 billion) in the financial year ending June 2027, buoyed by surging demand in South Africa and planned launches in Nigeria and Kenya.

Launched late in 2024, the drug increased its market share to a dominant 53 percent from 15 percent a year earlier.

For wealthy couples, divorce isn’t just about who gets the house, the car or the bank account. Some property might be in a trust, and other assets could be sitting outside Kenya altogether. So, by the time a marriage ends, figuring out who’s actually entitled to what can take a lot more digging than just checking whose name is on the title deed.

Under Kenya’s Matrimonial Property Act, 2014, courts ask whether an asset, or the benefit of it, was acquired during the marriage, and whether it was meant for the family’s use.

“They also consider the financial and non-financial contributions made by either spouse towards acquiring, maintaining or improving the property,” says Leah Ng’ang’a, a family law advocate and managing partner at Ng’ang’a and Associates.

“The court may also look beyond the company’s name to establish who actually owns or controls the property,” she says. “Where there is evidence that a company structure has been used to keep matrimonial property out of reach, the court can, in appropriate circumstances, lift the corporate veil.”

That matters most in the big-money divorces, where wealth is scattered across several entities instead of sitting directly with the couple.

“Trust property belongs to the trust or its beneficiaries, not the person who created the trust. Courts therefore do not simply treat trust property as belonging to the person who settled it,” Ng’ang’a says.

But there’s a catch: whoever sets up the trust has to actually own the asset first. And if that person is married, they need their spouse’s consent to move it into the trust, which protects whatever claim the other spouse might have.

“If a spouse transfers assets into a trust or offshore company shortly before or during divorce proceedings, the other spouse can challenge the transaction if they believe it was intended to defeat their claim to matrimonial property,” she says. “The court can examine why the transfer was made, when it happened, who benefited from it, and whether it was done in good faith.”

A transaction that guts the marital estate, or looks like it was designed to hide wealth, is going to draw a closer look.

“There is nothing inherently improper about estate planning or protecting assets through legitimate structures,” she adds. It comes down to timing, intention and the circumstances around the arrangement.

Read: How mortgages complicate divorce. Who takes the house and who pays?

A genuine estate-planning move is usually transparent and done in good faith, often years before any marital trouble starts. “A transfer made shortly before or during divorce, particularly where it appears designed to remove substantial wealth from the marital estate, is likely to receive much closer attention.”

A Kenyan court’s reach mainly stops at assets within Kenya, though it can make orders touching on foreign assets if they’re part of the matrimonial estate. The real trouble starts when someone has to actually enforce that order abroad. A Kenyan order doesn’t carry automatic weight in another country.

“Depending on the country involved and the applicable laws or reciprocal arrangements, the spouse seeking enforcement may have to begin separate proceedings there to have the Kenyan order recognised and enforced.”

This means that disputes over overseas property and investments can get complicated, and expensive, fast.

For wealthy couples, Ng’ang’a points out, splitting things up isn’t as easy as selling everything off and dividing the cash.

“A luxury property, family business or investment portfolio may require professional valuation. Real estate appraisers, business valuers and financial analysts may be involved where spouses cannot agree on what an asset is worth.”

The court looks at what the asset is, how it’s been used, what each spouse put into it and the circumstances of the marriage, bringing in outside experts to value things when needed.

One thing people sometimes miss is that couples who are still married can’t just ask a court to divide their property because they disagree over it.

“They can seek declarations on the shares to which each spouse is entitled, but the actual division of the matrimonial property follows divorce.”

They can, though, sort it out themselves through a settlement deed, whether married or already divorced.

Financial and non-financial contributions

The law counts both financial and non-financial contributions, which matters a lot in marriages where one spouse earns the income while the other runs the household, raises the children, or holds up the family business.

“The spouse who spends years managing the home and raising children may not have made direct payments towards the acquisition of a property, but that contribution can still be considered,” Ng’ang’a says. “The reasoning is that such work can enable the other spouse to concentrate on employment, business or other wealth-generating activities.”

Financial contributions are easy enough to prove: receipts, bank transfers, deposits. Non-financial ones are trickier, and there’s no fixed formula or percentage in the law for weighing them.

“Its assessment is therefore left to the discretion of the judicial officer, depending in part on how effectively that contribution is presented in court.”

As Kenyan families get wealthier and more globally connected, this side of matrimonial disputes is only getting harder.

“Trusts, holding companies, and offshore structures can make it harder to trace where wealth sits, establish who controls it and determine what should properly form part of a matrimonial estate,” Ng’ang’a says. The law, she adds, still struggles to keep up when assets are buried across several structures.

Even so, Kenyan courts can look past the paperwork if there’s evidence a spouse used a company structure to hide property from the other.

I have spent enough time in marketing to have sat on both sides of the table as an agency partner developing ideas, and as a client evaluating, defending and funding them. That experience has taught me that neither side has a monopoly on good ideas, or on bad decisions.

At a recent marketing forum convened by Cannes Lions jurors, an old argument resurfaced. Agencies say clients kill creativity by demanding endless revisions and denying ideas the time they need to mature. Clients counter that agencies too often misread the brief, arriving with exciting concepts that fail to solve the business problem.

Both sides have a point. But the problem usually begins earlier than either admits. Many briefs are overloaded; a single campaign expected to build awareness, generate leads, increase sales, improve reputation and trend online, all at once. Agencies then compound the problem by presenting three creative directions, even when only one has been properly interrogated.

Three routes look like choice. In practice, they dilute the agency’s thinking. Instead of investing deeply in the strongest response, teams produce three half-built ideas and hand the job of creative judgment back to the client.

Call it conviction over choice: the agencies that win consistently are not the ones offering the most options, but the ones with the nerve to back a single idea supported by customer insight, strategic reasoning and a clear line to commercial objectives.

It is tempting to romanticise an earlier era of Kenyan advertising. Niko na Safaricom, Equity Bank’s Mimi ni Member, Blue Band’s ‘Energy to Grow,’ Tusker’s ‘Baada ya Kazi,’ and the still-talked-about Mpango wa Kando public-awareness campaign all became part of popular culture.

Those campaigns had the benefit of strong insight, memorable storytelling, sustained media investment and time to build recognition.

Marketers today are trying to recreate that cultural impact in a much harder environment: tighter budgets, fragmented audiences, and customers drowning in information. The same idea is expected to work on television, radio, print, outdoor and a six-inch phone screen and every campaign is expected to ‘go viral,’ as though virality were a strategy rather than the unpredictable outcome of a good one.

Digital media did not kill creativity. It changed the conditions creativity has to work under. A modern campaign cannot simply be resized across channels. It needs one organising idea, expressed differently depending on how people actually behave on each platform. What stops traffic on a billboard will not necessarily work as a social video, a search ad or a newspaper execution. Integration should mean consistency of thought not duplication of format.

AI raises a version of the same challenge. It can accelerate research, generate alternatives and compress production timelines. What it cannot do is substitute for human insight, cultural fluency or strategic judgment. Used without those foundations, it produces work that is polished but forgettable content that looks right and says almost nothing.

The marketer’s job has also expanded well beyond campaigns. Marketing departments are now held accountable for growth, acquisition, retention and revenue, and the question from the CFO is no longer whether the campaign was liked, but what it delivered.

That makes return on ad spend a legitimate measure but a dangerous one if it becomes the only measure.

Les Binet and Peter Field’s long-running IPA research is instructive here: brands that lean too heavily on short-term activation tend to win the quarter and lose the market, while those that hold a disciplined balance between brand-building and activation compound advantage over years, not weeks.

Performance marketing captures demand that already exists; brand building creates the demand that will exist. Marketers who can only do one are only doing half the job.

The future will not belong to the most creative agency or the most commercially aggressive client. It will belong to the teams that combine customer insight, creative courage, channel fluency and financial discipline in the same room, at the same time.

Clients can help by writing clearer briefs, protecting promising ideas from death by committee, and being honest with agencies about commercial context. Agencies can help by understanding the business behind the campaign and defending fewer, better ideas instead of hedging with three. And AI should be treated as an amplifier of thinking, never a replacement for it.

Creativity in Kenyan marketing is not dead. It is simply being asked to work harder and marketers on both sides of the table need to get better at leading it.

Uber says it sees ‘strong potential’ in Kenya despite high operating and rising fuel costs in its only remaining East African market after exiting Uganda and Tanzania.

The American ride-hailing giant says Kenya remains a key market as it reviews its operations across Africa. Uber pulled out of Nigeria and Uganda last week after exiting Tanzania in January 2026.

‘Kenya remains an important market for Uber, and we continue to see strong potential for the business here,’ Uber told the Business Daily via email.

Uber entered Kenya in 2015 and is one of the leading ride-hailing platforms in the country, competing with Estonian firm Bolt, Russia’s inDrive, Rwanda’s Yego and local players Little and Faras.

But the company has faced pressure from drivers who have gone on strike and staged protests in recent years over rising operating costs, low fares and high commissions – fees Uber deducts from drivers’ earnings for every completed trip.

In 2014, the company raised its minimum fares by 10 percent in Kenya following driver strikes and protests over unsustainable earnings amid high fuel and vehicle maintenance costs.

‘We recognise that (Kenyan) drivers are facing pressures from rising fuel, maintenance, insurance and other operating costs,’ Uber said.

‘Our focus is on supporting sustainable earning opportunities and helping drivers manage their costs, while ensuring that mobility remains affordable and demand remains strong.’

Drivers in Nigeria and Uganda also raised similar concerns. In Tanzania, Uber was involved in a long-running dispute with the transport regulator, LATRA, over commission caps.

In 2022, LATRA introduced fixed guide fares per kilometre and per minute, set a minimum fare and lowered the commission ceiling from 33 percent to 15 percent.

Uber halted operations that April, terming the model unsustainable. It resumed in early 2023 after the regulator allowed commissions of up to 25 percent and restored a booking fee.

Commenting publicly for the first time on the Tanzania exit, Uber’s general manager for East Africa, Imran Manji, said regulating fares and commissions had become an ‘obstacle’ to the firm’s expansion.

‘Unfortunately, sometimes in this region we tend to put in place obstacles… if you, as a regulator, put in place price floors and price caps on the private sector, you’re killing innovation,’ Mr Manji told a forum in Nairobi.

‘Around the world, Uber is live in 10,000 cities, and only three countries cap commissions: Portugal at 25 percent, Tanzania at 25 percent and Kenya at 18 percent. We are an outlier in the wrong direction.’

He said Tanzania’s restrictions prevented the company from introducing premium ride tiers such as Comfort or Safari, which are available in markets such as Kenya.

‘You cannot even launch electric bikes because you cannot price lower, even though they are cheaper to run than petrol bikes … ultimately, it led us to exit Tanzania,’ said Mr Manji.

Kenya, however, also faces regulatory uncertainty over commissions and minimum fares. Last week, the High Court blocked enforcement of the 18 percent commission cap that Uber and its competitors charge drivers and vehicle owners.

The move marked a win for operators, who have long opposed the limit. The State introduced the cap in 2022 as part of efforts to protect drivers from high fees, down from previous rates of up to 30 percent.

The National Transport and Safety Authority currently caps ride-hailing platform commissions at 18 percent per trip, including digital service tax.

The High Court, however, found the restriction unconstitutional, saying the State had not demonstrated its necessity or proportionality through the required regulatory process. It also said the price-setting provisions lacked statutory foundation and economic justification and constituted ‘an unconstitutional deprivation of property and contractual autonomy’.

‘We will continue to engage constructively with the relevant authorities and stakeholders,’ Uber said in response to the ruling.

Centum Investment Company exited Sidian Bank after 25 years of ownership with cumulative proceeds from the sale of its stake falling Sh301 million short of the investment firm’s original cost of Sh4.77 billion.

The firm sold its final 14.63 percent stake in Sidian in March and has now disclosed that this deal was valued at Sh1.2 billion, bringing the total proceeds from a series of disposals since 2024 to Sh4.469 billion.

This means that, measured against the historical cost of the investment, Centum recovered about 93.7 percent of the money it originally put into the lender, before taking into account any dividends it may have received during the period.

The investment firm received limited dividends from Sidian over the years, with the bank having to retain capital to support its operations and undertake several rights issues to strengthen its balance sheet.

Sidian was also among the few Centum investments whose historical cost was higher than its market value. The bank was hit hard by lending rate control and the Covid-19 pandemic but its profitability has surged after Centum’s exit.

The exit comes after several changes in Sidian’s ownership structure and capital base, including rights issues aimed at strengthening the lender.

The proceeds from the final Sidian disposal helped Centum declare a special dividend of Sh0.36 per share, totalling Sh240 million, in addition to an ordinary dividend of Sh0.42 per share worth Sh281 million.

Centum has in recent years accelerated the disposal of mature investments to unlock capital for new opportunities. Other strategic exits include Nabo Capital, Almasi Beverages and Nairobi Bottlers, while the firm has increased its exposure to real estate through subsidiary Centum Re.

The firm first invested in Sidian in 2001, when the lender was operating as K-Rep Bank. In November 2014, Centum acquired 66 percent shareholding in the bank, lifting its stake to 67.54 percent. This was followed by other transactions that took its stake to 83.43 percent.

The firm initially signed an agreement with Access Bank but the deal fell through, with the investment firm resorting to piecemeal selling of shares to multiple investors.

Buyers of Centum shares, which were mostly held through an investment vehicle called Bakki Holdco Limited, include Pioneer General Insurance Limited, Wizpro Enterprises Limited and Afram Limited.

The ownership structure of the bank has changed on multiple occasions over the past two years due to the exit of Centum and several rights issues aimed at strengthening the lender’s capital base.

The Sh1.2 billion transaction saw Centum sell its 14.63 percent stake in Bakki to an undisclosed buyer. The latest shareholding structure of Bakki as per the Business Registration Services is yet to reflect this transaction. It still lists Centum as one of the shareholders in Bakki, alongside Kenbe Investments.

Bakki holds 27.27 percent stake in Sidian, followed by Wizpro Enterprises Limited (24.95 percent), Afram Limited (24.36 percent), Pioneer General Insurance (16.89 percent), Telesec Africa Limited (3.47 percent) and Pioneer Life Investments (3.06 percent).

Centum’s other strategic exits in the recent past include Nabo Capital, Almasi Beverages and Nairobi Bottlers, increasing exposure in real estate through its subsidiary, Centum Re.

The firm is entering a new leadership phase following the exit of James Mworia, who had served as the CEO for nearly 18 years. Mr Mworia departed this week and took up the role of founding CEO of National Infrastructure Fund (NIF).

Centum board credited Mr Mworia for growing the firm’s assets from Sh4 billion in December 2008, when the company was operating on a Sh200 million overdraft, to an asset base of about Sh46 billion currently.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is moving into children’s schoolwork faster than many education systems can adapt, shifting the challenge from access to information toward judging whether machine-generated answers can be trusted.

Students now use generative AI to explain difficult concepts, develop essay ideas, check drafts, solve problems and prepare presentations, making chatbots another potential layer of everyday learning.

The arising challenge, according to pundits, is that the same systems can produce convincing but false information, fabricate sources and generate manipulated images, leaving children to distinguish useful assistance from answers that only sound correct.

Kaspersky’s observations show that children’s interest in AI tools continues to grow ‘as these technologies become more accessible and integrated into everyday learning.’

‘In fact, AI is likely to become as commonly part of their studies as search engines, online dictionaries and educational videos.’

The company’s guide comes as international education agencies shift their focus from whether children should encounter AI to how schools, parents and students should manage its use.

Unesco’s AI Competency Framework for Students recommends teaching children to develop human-centred attitudes, understand AI ethics, acquire technical knowledge and eventually participate in designing AI systems.

The framework places these competencies across three stages-understand, apply and create-reflecting a move toward preparing students to work with AI rather than treating the technology solely as a threat to academic integrity.

This reflects the modern-day reality that the availability of generative AI changes what it means to complete an assignment independently, particularly where a student can obtain a polished response without demonstrating how they reached it.

A child asking a chatbot to write an essay may receive a coherent answer within seconds, but the speed of producing the response can remove the research, reasoning, and writing practice that the assignment was designed to develop.

According to Kaspersky, learners need to start treating AI as an assistant that can, among other things, explain concepts, suggest arguments, identify weaknesses in a draft, or generate practice questions rather than completing schoolwork for the student.

A student using AI to solve a mathematics problem, for example, should be able to explain the method independently and reproduce the solution rather than simply transferring the chatbot’s response into an exercise book.

The same principle applies to research since a fluent AI response does not establish that its underlying information is accurate, current, or drawn from a genuine source.

‘When a child can generate an essay or receive a finished answer to a math problem in seconds, it may be tempting to submit the result without understanding it. This can save time in the moment, but it prevents the child from developing the very skills the assignment is intended to practice,’ it says.

‘Parents can agree with their children that AI may help explain a concept, suggest a structure, provide examples or ask practice questions, but it should not complete the entire task on their behalf.’

Unesco has warned that generative AI can create fabricated information and that education systems need safeguards because the technology is advancing faster than many regulatory and institutional responses.

A global Unesco survey of more than 450 schools and universities found in 2023 that fewer than 10 percent had formal guidance covering generative AI, highlighting how quickly the technology had entered education ahead of institutional rules.

In Kenya, the issue gathers particular relevance as the government’s National AI Strategy 2025-2030 identifies education among sectors where AI and digital skills are being integrated into the country’s broader technology agenda.

The strategy’s implementation roadmap also identifies limited access to devices, gaps in teacher training, and weaknesses in data privacy and security as challenges that could constrain digital education.

This means AI literacy cannot be reduced to teaching children how to write better prompts because they also need to understand the limits of the systems producing the responses.

Generative AI does not independently establish truth before producing an answer, meaning an apparently authoritative explanation can contain a wrong date, invented quotation, non-existent study or flawed reasoning.

Unicef says children are increasingly turning to AI chatbots for information, learning and creativity, while evidence on the effects of the technology on their cognitive, social and emotional development remains limited.

The privacy question becomes even more complicated when children begin using AI conversationally, as a homework prompt can easily contain private details about the student, such as their school, classmates or family.

A child asking for help with an assignment might paste an entire school document, upload a photograph of a worksheet, or include names and personal circumstances without considering the information as sensitive.

Kenya’s Data Protection Act requires parental or guardian consent before personal data relating to a child is processed and requires processing to protect and advance the child’s rights and best interests.

The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner has separately told the education sector that minors cannot provide valid consent on their own and that schools must ensure appropriate safeguards when processing children’s information.

For schools adopting AI tools, this puts data governance alongside academic considerations, requiring institutions to understand what information platforms collect, why it is processed and how long it is retained.

Unesco’s guidance, similarly, calls for privacy protection and age-appropriate approaches to the use of generative AI in education, while urging institutions to assess whether particular tools are ethically suitable.

The court ordered Zingo to hand over its premises, management, books, records, keys and other assets to the bank-appointed receiver and manager, Kolluri Venkata Subbaraya Kamasastry.

In the ruling, the court also authorised police assistance to enforce the takeover after rejecting Zingo’s bid to halt enforcement pending an appeal.

‘An order is hereby issued restraining the Plaintiff’s directors, employees, agents, and any other person acting under its authority from interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the second defendant (receiver) in the lawful discharge of his duties as Receiver and Manager of the Plaintiff’s business and assets,’ the court ordered in the ruling dated September 1, 2026.

The ruling followed failed mediation and two applications after the court dismissed Zingo’s earlier bid to stop NBK and its receiver from taking over and operating its business.

NBK said Zingo had defaulted since a 2017 consent acknowledging $5.6 million (Sh733 million), while the company argued enforcement would cause loss.

The dispute began after NBK advanced facilities to Zingo to establish a leather factory on property registered as LR No. 9363/98 and provide working capital.

The facilities were secured by charges of $882,354 over LR No. 209/8628 and $2.2 million over LR No. 9363/98, a floating debenture of $794,000 and directors’ guarantees totalling $3.47 million.

The bank’s representative, Paul Chelang’a, told the court that the company has been in default since the December 20, 2017 consent, which acknowledged an outstanding debt of $5,666,000, and has repeatedly made applications to hinder the lender’s recovery efforts.

He also stated that recent valuations set the forced-sale values of the two properties at Sh661 million, which he said was not enough to cover the outstanding debt. He asserts that the Bank has properly issued the required demand and statutory notices.

Furthermore, he argued that this was the company’s sixth attempt to prevent the statutory power of sale, claiming the application was an abuse of court process, the plaintiff remains in default, and there was no sufficient basis for the orders requested.

An earlier judgment says that a 2017 consent consolidated the debt at $5.66 million and provided a further $1.1 million working-capital facility.

In March 2024, the High Court rejected Zingo’s claim against NBK, holding that the company had acknowledged the debt but disputed how funds were handled.

The court said interest and penalty disputes did not justify withholding the principal. In January 2025, the Court of Appeal declined to stop NBK from exercising its remedies.

The latest dispute concerns receivership and emerged after NBK appointed Kamasastry as receiver and manager in August 2025. He took control of the business on September 1 before an interim injunction issued the following day stopped him. That injunction remained in force until Zingo’s application was dismissed on April 30, 2026.

Zingo filed an appeal and sought another injunction, arguing that the appeal could be rendered useless if NBK proceeded with enforcement. It also asked the court to send the dispute to mediation and allow it to amend its plaint.

The court rejected those requests. It said the April dismissal was a ‘negative judgment’ because it did not require either defendant to perform an executable act.

‘There is nothing arising from the dismissal order capable of being stayed,’ said the judge.

In relation to mediation, the court noted that the dispute had already gone through court-annexed mediation, but a report filed showed that the receiver had declined to participate.

‘Mediation is inherently a voluntary process that relies on the parties’ good faith participation. Given the circumstances, referring the case to mediation again would be pointless and only cause delays in resolving the pending applications,’ the court said.

Mr Kamasastry sought orders allowing him access to Zingo’s premises and control of its business, assets and affairs. He said employees and director Robert Njoka had prevented him from returning after the April ruling. He also alleged resistance despite police presence and a threat involving a firearm.

Zingo denied obstructing or threatening the receiver. It argued that the April ruling merely dismissed its injunction application and did not authorise a forcible takeover. The company said it remained a going concern and that taking control would cause substantial loss.

The court rejected that position and allowed Mr Kamasastry’s application in full. It said the receiver’s appointment had already been upheld and that the September 2025 injunction lapsed when Zingo’s application was dismissed.

‘The Plaintiff’s continued obstruction of the receiver is unlawful and cannot be tolerated,’ the court said. It added that the alleged threat to the receiver’s team was ‘a matter of grave concern’ and could lead to contempt proceedings if substantiated.

The court’s final orders require Zingo and its personnel to give Kamasastry unrestricted access to the properties -LR No. 9363/98 and LR No. 209/8628. They are also required to hand over management, assets, books, records, documents and keys, and must not interfere with his duties.

The Officer Commanding Mwiki Police Station, Infinity Police Post or the Officer Commanding any police station in proximity to the Plaintiff’s premises were authorised to assist if necessary.