Category: Business Daily

The High Court has issued a landmark judgment curtailing the powers of the Attorney General (AG) and the State Corporations Advisory Committee (SCAC) in human resource matters affecting State corporations and public universities.

The court on Friday nullified a July 2023 advisory issued by the Attorney General and a subsequent circular by the State Corporations Advisory Committee (SCAC), which sought to remove State corporations from the control of the Public Service Commission (PSC) because they are not part of the ‘public service’.

According to court papers, this position effectively suggested that the PSC has no constitutional mandate over the State Corporation’s human resource policies, establishment structures, or appointments.

However, the court has declared that both offices-AG and SCAC- had unlawfully encroached on the constitutional mandate of the PSC. The court said their interventions were unconstitutional.

It stated that both offices violated the constitutional mandate of the PSC by attempting to control human resource policies in the parastatal sector.

There are 280 operational State Corporations in the country, according to the Inspectorate of State Corporations, and 38 public universities, according to the Commission for University Education.

The court found that the AG’s advisory letter, which was endorsed by SCAC a month later through a circular in August 2023, sought to usurp the PSC’s authority over personnel management in State corporations.

The judgment emphasized that such actions violated Article 234 of the Constitution, which vests the PSC with exclusive powers to oversee human resource policies across the public service.

‘It is crystal clear to me that the advice given by the second respondent (Attorney General) does not meet the constitutional threshold and is therefore illegal, null, and void,’ the judge stated.

The ruling further noted that the AG’s advisory had disrupted the established governance framework, creating confusion in a sector already grappling with conflicting legal interpretations.

The case was filed by activist John Githongo and the Katiba Institute, who argued that the AG’s directive -asserting that the PSC lacked authority to determine terms of service for State corporations- was an unconstitutional overreach.

They said the Attorney General’s advisory and the follow-up circular from SCAC, undermined the Constitution and sowed confusion in a sector already struggling with competing legal interpretations.

The contested advisory, addressed to board chairpersons of all State corporations and copied to senior government officials, including the Prime Cabinet Secretary and Head of Public Service, claimed that human resource policies fell under the jurisdiction of Cabinet Secretaries working with SCAC.

The AG’s letter claimed that the PSC lacked jurisdiction to approve human resource policies for these entities. Instead, it vested this authority in the Cabinet Secretary and SCAC.

The court rejected this position, affirming that State corporations are integral to the public service and thus fall under the PSC’s regulatory oversight.

Citing Article 260 of the Constitution, the judge ruled that employees of State corporations are public officers, and their terms of service must conform to standards set by the PSC.

‘State corporations collectively fall within the Government of the Republic of Kenya, as captured under the definition of ‘public service’ in the Constitution,’ the judgment stated, adding that by quashing the two contested letters and reasserting PSC’s authority, the court was restoring clarity.

The court further dismissed attempts to justify SCAC’s role through the State Corporations Act, declaring Section 5(3) unconstitutional for seeking to exclude the PSC from its rightful functions. The court said the legal provision contravened the Constitution by attempting to strip the PSC of its mandated functions.

SCAC has no constitutional role in discharging this function,’ the court held, adding that its circular was ‘unconstitutional, unlawful, null, and void from inception.’

The judgment also rebuked the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) for issuing direct advisories to State corporations, bypassing the PSC.

Describing such actions as ‘cheering anarchy,’ the court ruled that the SRC must channel all remuneration advice through the PSC to maintain constitutional order.

‘It is not permissible for SRC to bypass PSC in matters pertaining to terms and conditions of public service,’ the judge asserted.

Beyond nullifying the contested advisories, the ruling reinforced the PSC’s supremacy in approving organizational structures, staff establishments, and human resource manuals across public institutions. It clarified that State corporations and public universities are not autonomous in employment matters and must comply with PSC regulations.

Additionally, the court urged Parliament to amend outdated provisions of the State Corporations Act to align with constitutional provisions.

It stressed that constitutional powers vested in the PSC cannot be reassigned through legislation or executive directives. ‘Any interpretation suggesting otherwise is incorrect,’ the judge ruled.

The judgment also established a precedent on the legal weight of the AG’s opinions, stating that they are binding only in the absence of judicial interpretation.

The court said the Attorney General’s advice is binding on government organs unless overturned by a court and that they remain subject to judicial scrutiny.

The judge noted that the court’s intervention was necessary to stop the confusion caused by conflicting directives. It said this confusion had undermined the PSC’s constitutional mandate and risked destabilizing governance structures across State corporations.

Observing that the ruling resolves jurisdictional conflicts among government bodies, where overlapping directives from Cabinet Secretaries, SCAC, SRC, and the PSC created confusion in public administration, the court warned that allowing multiple centers of authority over human resource matters would erode Kenya’s constitutional framework.

‘Where is the consistency with Article 234 when the PSC is completely sidelined?’ the judge questioned.

The court noted that the judgment was to ensure that all State corporations and public universities operate under the PSC’s oversight.

Credit Bank Ltd can now proceed with the planned sale of a property in Upper Hill area -where Africa’s tallest building was to be built a few years ago- to recover a debt of more than Sh2 billion.

The lender got the nod to auction the property after its owners -One Upperhill Towers Ltd- failed to convince the Court of Appeal to suspend the forced sale.

In a ruling, the appellate court noted that although One Upperhill Towers Ltd had an arguable appeal, the loans granted to its sister companies -Jabavu Village Limited and Hasson Pharmaceuticals Limited- continued to grow and there was no evidence that the facilities were being serviced.

‘An injunction is an equitable remedy that a court can grant when it believes it is fair and appropriate. Secondly, where there is clear evidence that the applicant is in default, and the suit property herein was charged to secure the loan, the property becomes a commodity for sale upon the default,’ said the court.

The court added that the right of the bank to realise the security becomes established upon default.

‘From the material before us, the loan facilities had accumulated to $9,611,501.89 and $6,162,440.67 at the time the parties were before the superior (High) court. They certainly continue to grow. The fact that the applicant was heavily indebted to the 1st respondent (Credit Bank) is not in question,’ said the court.

The sale of the property had been stalled earlier by court injunctions as the company and its affiliates obtained court orders stopping the forced sale.

Evidence tabled in court stated that the lender granted loans amounting to Sh1.2 billion to Jabavu Village Limited and Hasson Pharmaceuticals Limited.

One Upper Hill Towers moved to court early this year contending that although the loan was being regularly serviced, the lender had instructed auctioneers to sell the property to recover the outstanding amounts.

The property owner submitted that the intended sale was malicious, unprocedural and unlawful as the mandatory provisions of the Land Act had not been followed, and its right to redeem the property was being compromised.

The lender opposed the case arguing that there was default in the repayment of the loan which led to the letter dated September 6, 2022 seeking the settlement of the outstanding arrears and the regularisation of the current account.

Credit Bank said when nothing was done to pay the arrears to regularise the current account, it went ahead and issued the statutory 90 days’ notice, which was followed by the 40 days’ notice under Section 96(2) of the Land Act with regard to the property.

The bank added that the property was valued and the notification of sale went out. In a ruling in February, the High Court dismissed the application but not satisfied, One Upperhill Towers ltd, moved to the Court of Appeal.

The appellate court ruled that Credit Bank is a bank, and if it turns out that the notices were not procedurally issued, the value of the property can be repaid.

‘In conclusion, we find that the application is not merited. The same is dismissed with costs to the respondents,’ ruled the court.

An administrator of the estate of the late Mombasa tycoon Tahir Sheikh Said (TSS) has lost an appeal challenging the striking out of a case she had filed against Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB), regarding charges registered against two parcels of land in Malindi.

The Court of Appeal ruled that it found nothing upon which to fault the High Court for concluding that Ms Fatma TSS’s case was subjudice in two cases at the Environment and Land Court (ELC) in Malindi, thus not capable of being maintained.

‘The judge’s finding on this issue was well-grounded and by no means in error in view of the fact that she purported to litigate over the same issues, subject matter, and parties litigating in two previous suits currently pending determination in Malindi,’ ruled the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal, in its December 5 decision, ruled that Ms Fatma’s contention did not persuade it that allowing KCB’s application to strike out her case and an application (at the High Court) amounted to a denial of her constitutional right to a fair hearing.

‘Had the appellant desired to be granted audience to ventilate allegations of fraud and illegality stemming from alleged ‘new evidence,’ nothing would have been easier for her than to seek joinder as a plaintiff or interested party in either of the earlier cases and present evidence as may be necessary to prove claims pleaded in her case,’ ruled the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal further said that Ms Fatma would be more than welcome as a witness and close member of the deceased’s family to testify on any of the common issues raised in the cases.

It said that initiating a separate case in a different court over the same issues, parties, and subject matter was nothing short of an abuse of the court process.

‘We reach the inescapable conclusion that the appeal has no merit and is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondent (KCB),’ ruled the Court of Appeal.

Through her lawyer, Ms Fatma had told the Court of Appeal that the High Court misapprehended the law on res judicata (issue already decided) and that no evidence was adduced to demonstrate that the plaintiffs in Malindi ELC cases were connected to her.

She said that the basis for her case was evidence of fraud relating to forged charge documents alleged to have been signed by the deceased (TSS) in the form of a forensic report produced in a criminal case. She argued that the new evidence could not have been available in the earlier cases.

KCB, through its lawyer, opposed the appeal, arguing that the High Court was correct in holding that Ms Fatma’s application was res judicata and that a comparison of the two applications revealed that the subject matter was the properties.

The lawyer also argued that applications related to the same borrowing/transaction secured by the charges created by the deceased in favour of KCB, and that the action which triggered all the cases was the commencement of realization of the securities by the bank.

At the High Court, Ms Fatma had sought a declaration that the charges created over the properties were forgeries, illegal, null, and void.

She wanted the order for the cancellation of the charges registered against the properties.

Ms Fatma also sought an injunction restraining the bank from selling, disposing of by public auction or otherwise, the properties.

However, KCB filed an application seeking that the case by Ms Fatma together with the ensuing proceedings be struck out on account of being sub judice to two cases at the ELC Malindi.

The High Court went on to strike Ms Fatma’s application as fatally incompetent on the grounds of res judicata and allowed KCB’s application.

Elon Musk’s satellite internet provider Starlink has finally regained the subscriptions it lost in Kenya when its capacity was strained, but it has yet to reclaim the market share it shed amid stiff competition from local firms.

In the quarter to September, Starlink added 2,045 new subscriptions, raising its total user base to 19,470 and surpassing the previous peak of 19,146 recorded in December 2024, which had given it a 1.1 percent share of Kenya’s fixed internet market.

Although this marks the fastest positive growth Starlink has reported in Kenya since January, the rebound has not lifted its market share, which had slipped to 0.8 percent in June after six consecutive months of declining subscriber numbers.

Data from the Communications Authority of Kenya shows that Starlink’s share of the fixed internet market stagnated at 0.8 percent in the quarter to September, tying with Vijiji Connect, as some local competitors expanded their presence.

Market leader, Safaricom, added 79,288 fixed internet customers during the period, raising its market share to 35.6 percent from 34.3 percent in June.

Others, including Jamii Telecoms (Faiba), Ahadi Wireless, Vilcom Network, and Mawingu, also significantly increased their subscriber numbers, strengthening their market positions and posing stiff competition to Starlink, which had disrupted the Kenyan internet market upon entry.

Overall, total fixed internet subscriptions in Kenya rose by 147,150 in the three months to September, from 2.14 million to 2.29 million, but more than half of the new customers joined Safaricom, with Starlink accounting for just 1.4 percent of the additions.

Starlink initially recorded rapid growth after entering the Kenyan market, claiming 0.5 percent market share by September 2024, and doubling it within three months.

However, this swift expansion strained its capacity, forcing the firm to pause new sign-ups in November 2024, not only in Kenya but also in other fast-growing African markets, including Nigeria and South Sudan.

With capacity stretched, Starlink’s browsing speeds in Kenya dropped to around 45 megabits per second (Mbps) from highs of over 200 Mbps when the firm launched in July 2023. The pause in new sign-ups, coupled with the sharp decline in speeds, caused the company to lose subscribers and market share.

In the quarter to March, Starlink’s users fell by over 2,000, while its market share dropped by 0.2 percentage points to 0.9 percent. In the quarter to June, its user base grew marginally by around 400, but its market share slipped further to 0.8 percent amid stiff competition from local players.

Meanwhile, the satellite internet segment has attracted new entrants, including Safaricom, which has partnered with Starlink as a reseller of its satellite internet in Kenya.

Courts will soon have more leeway to strike down contracts containing oppressive or excessively one-sided terms if Parliament passes the newly proposed law that could reshape business and consumer agreements across the country.

Parliament has received the Law of Contract (Amendment) Bill, 2025 which aims to give judges powers to intervene in agreements where one party is clearly at a disadvantage.

This will mark a departure from the current practice where several courts have ruled that it is not their business to rewrite contracts for individuals who commit to bad deals. For instance, any contract that absolves a party from liability for death caused by their negligence will be rejected. Likewise, sale agreements that seek to absolve the seller from responsibility if the goods prove defective will be struck out.

‘The principal object of this Bill is to amend the Law of Contract Act to protect parties to a contract against unfair and unconscionable terms,’ reads the memorandum of the Wajir East Constituency MP Aden Daudi Mohamed-sponsored bill.

‘The Law of Contract Act provides for the application of English common law principles in contract law which has resulted in the use of unfair and unconscionable terms. Therefore, the bill seeks to prevent parties from relying on such unfair and unconscionable terms.’

Passage of the bill into law could reshape how contracts are drafted, enforced and contested across sectors ranging from finance and real estate to retail and services.

Currently, the country’s contract law primarily follows the principles of English common law, which emphasises the doctrine of freedom of contract. Parties are generally bound by the terms they sign, and courts intervene only in exceptional circumstances such as duress, misrepresentation, undue influence or fraud.

Under the proposed law, judges would be able to invalidate or modify contract provisions that are deemed grossly unfair, thereby enhancing protections for consumers, small businesses and other vulnerable parties.

Parties to a contract will not be permitted to include terms that exclude or limit liability for death caused by negligence of the other party.

Similarly, any clause that seeks to exclude or restrict a party’s liability for loss or damage arising from their negligence will be invalid unless the term is reasonable.

The bill clarifies that where a term attempts to limit liability for loss or damage resulting from negligence, a person’s agreement to that term will not in itself amount to a voluntary acceptance of risk.

‘Where a contract term excludes or restricts liability for loss or damage resulting from negligence, an agreement to the term by a person shall not indicate the person’s voluntary acceptance of risk,’ reads the bill in part.

In contracts involving a consumer, the supplier will be barred from excluding or limiting liability for loss or damage caused by a breach of contract. The supplier will also not claim to be entitled to render a contractual performance that is ‘substantially different’ from which was ‘reasonably expected’ of them.

The bill also prohibits suppliers from drafting contracts that exclude them from liability in case they sell defective goods.

‘In the case of goods supplied for consumer use, liability for loss or damage shall not be excluded or restricted by reference to a contract term contained in or operating by reference to a guarantee of the goods where the loss or damage arises from the goods proving defective while in consumer use; and results from the negligence of a person concerned in the manufacture or distribution of the goods,’ reads the bill in part.

The bill states that goods will be deemed to be in consumer use when a person is using them or possesses them for purposes other than exclusively for business.

Further, the bill says ‘anything in writing is a guarantee if it contains or purports to contain a promise or assurance that defects will be made good by complete or partial replacement or by repair, monetary otherwise.’

About 63 percent of patients made out-of-pocket payments for medicines following stockouts in public and private health facilities between April and May 2025 after the US government withdrew funding to Kenya, a survey said.

The survey was conducted by the State-owned National Syndemic Diseases Control Council (NSDCC), and focused on evaluating the impact of service disruptions caused by the withdrawal of cash support by US President Donald Trump early this year.

NSDCC is mandated to manage syndemic diseases, including HIV, sexually transmitted infections, malaria, leprosy, tuberculosis, and lung disease. The survey revealed that the monthly average out-of-pocket spending on healthcare rose from Sh420 to Sh1,150-nearly a threefold increase that made healthcare unaffordable for many households.

The assessment, done in over 5,000 healthcare facilities across the country, also showed that about 18 percent of patients sold assets to pay for treatment, while others delayed care or abandoned treatment altogether.

For families already navigating economic pressures, the sudden shift from free or subsidized medicines to full retail prices has created impossible choices between medication, food, and school fees.

‘Furthermore, people living with HIV reported overwhelming fear (92 percent) of antiretroviral therapy interruption, with 18 percent resorting to selling assets just to afford their life-saving medications, highlighting the extreme financial and psychological burdens imposed,’ the report read.

The financial burden was severe for patients managing chronic conditions. Those living with HIV, who previously accessed antiretroviral therapy at no cost, faced increased monthly medicine bills that consumed a big portion of their household income.

Similar pressures affected TB patients and those who required long-term management of conditions like hypertension and diabetes.

Meanwhile, over 40 percent of public health facilities experienced drug and commodity stockouts during this period, especially the essential public health programmes, largely triggered by the sudden disruption of donor-funded procurement systems.

More than one-third of affected facilities reported stockouts of cotrimoxazole, a critical medicine for preventing opportunistic infections among people living with HIV.

HIV test kits were unavailable in 17 percent of facilities, which undermined early diagnosis and linkage to treatment. Tuberculosis services suffered similar disruptions, with nearly 15 percent of facilities lacking GeneXpert cartridges, delaying diagnosis and increasing the risk of undetected transmission.

The shortages expose how quickly Kenya’s medicine supply chains can fracture when donor-supported pipelines stall at a time when about 83 percent of counties rely entirely on the Kenya Medical Supplies Authority.

In malaria-endemic regions, 16.2 percent of facilities ran out of rapid diagnostic tests, forcing clinicians to rely on symptoms rather than a confirmed diagnosis. Reproductive health services were equally affected.

Family planning commodities were out of stock in 19 percent of disrupted facilities, while contraceptive implants were unavailable in 17.4 percent. Adolescents and young women were also affected, as they were turned away or offered substitute methods.

The elderly and people affected by chronic conditions are the worst hit by the OOP expenditure that has continued to rise over the years despite increased budgets by the State for healthcare.

On June 25, 2024, Kenya witnessed a moment that will be remembered for years to come.

Across cities and towns, a youthful voice rose, and it is undisputed that this Gen Z awakening was a powerful reminder that citizens expect fairness, accountability, and transparency in the management of public finances.

The moment challenged the way public policy is conceived, communicated, and executed. The protests were more than a reaction to specific tax proposals; they were a call for a new social contract, demanding that public sentiment serves as the compass guiding national decisions.

The rejection of key revenue measures forced a recalibration of Kenya’s fiscal framework. In response, the National Treasury unveiled MTP IV, 2023-27, initiating a fiscal consolidation agenda focused on broadening the tax base, reducing reliance on debt, and adopting innovative, sustainable approaches to financing national development.

This was not a mere technical adjustment but was a pivotal shift, aligning planning and resource mobilisation with economic realities and societal expectations, anchored in zero-based budgeting.

The government recognised the limits of fiscal headroom. The moment demanded decisive action that balanced prudence with innovation. From this assessment emerged a revitalised privatisation agenda.

Kenya’s development ambitions require capital volumes that borrowing and taxation alone cannot provide. Several State-owned enterprises had become persistent burdens on the Exchequer, underperforming despite repeated fiscal support.

Modernised privatisation offered a practical path to unlock dormant value, drive efficiency, and redirect resources toward transformative projects, creating fiscal space for sectors that directly impact citizens’ lives.

At this inflexion point, Kenya needed a vision grounded in courage and disciplined leadership.

The President’s State of the Nation Address on November 20, 2025, signalled precisely that. The Road to Singapore framework articulated by President William Ruto provides a benchmark for the discipline and ambition required to transform Kenya.

Singapore’s ascent rested on prudent financial management, targeted investment, and deep public trust. Kenya is embracing a similar ethos: resource discipline, long-term planning, and strategic capital allocation.

It is within this context that the State’s long-standing shareholding in Safaricom must be understood. Safaricom has been central to Kenya’s technological and economic ascent, delivering consistent dividends and bolstering national development.

Yet the current context requires a shift. Responsible stewardship sometimes necessitates releasing value to redirect it where it can generate the greatest national impact. The decision to partially divest the government’s stake in Safaricom reflects a measured, strategic transition.

This decision is neither abrupt nor politically motivated. It is informed by a sober evaluation of national priorities, fiscal constraints, and critical infrastructure needs. Kenya’s economic fundamentals remain solid, with projected growth of 5.3 percent in 2025.

Fiscal pressures, however, are significant. Public debt stands at about Sh10.6 trillion, or 68 percent of the gross domestic product. More than half of all tax revenue is consumed by debt servicing, limiting investment in healthcare, education, social protection, climate resilience, and essential infrastructure.

A responsible state cannot rely indefinitely on debt to finance development. Sustainable prosperity demands innovative, disciplined, and strategic fiscal choices.

The partial divestment from Safaricom is designed to unlock value and channel it to sectors with the highest multiplier effect. Kenya requires more than Sh 1.8 trillion in new infrastructure investment over the next five years to advance the Bottom-Up Economic Transformation Agenda.

Roads, water systems, energy grids, digital infrastructure, and industrial parks form the backbone of a modern, competitive economy. Traditional financing has reached its limits and must be complemented through alternative mechanisms.

The Government is strengthening instruments that attract private capital while safeguarding national interests.

These include Public-Private Partnerships, blended finance models, and capital deployment through the twin funds: The National Infrastructure Fund and the Sovereign Wealth Fund. Resources released through divestment will be catalytic, enabling layered co-investments by local and international partners.

The aim is to translate fiscal prudence into productive power and turn disciplined financial management into tangible economic outcomes.

The partial divestment also responds directly to concerns Kenyans have voiced about the cost of living, public debt, and accountability. The Government has listened. It has chosen a path that expands domestic capital mobilisation, empowers local investors, and strengthens national ownership of development projects.

This approach signals a new public finance philosophy anchored in transparency, efficiency, and responsiveness to citizens.

Proceeds from the Safaricom divestment will flow transparently through the National Infrastructure Fund, complemented by the Sovereign Wealth Fund to preserve part of the value for future generations.

The Infrastructure Fund will invest in projects that expand opportunity, integrate markets, and strengthen competitiveness. Both Funds operate under robust governance and accountability frameworks to safeguard public value, and Parliament will ensure this.

Kenya’s progress has historically depended on citizens, institutions, and the private sector acting in concert.

The partial divestment is an invitation for all stakeholders, pension funds, county governments, diaspora communities, private investors, and citizens, to participate in building a resilient, competitive nation. The aim is to generate prosperity through shared responsibility and sustain it through disciplined national investment.

Kenya is not stepping back from past achievements. It is repurposing its successes to unlock new frontiers of opportunity.

The divestment represents a deliberate act of national renewal, aligning prudent financial management with long-term ambition. The moment for decisive action has arrived, and we must seize it with unity, resolve, and purpose.

Factories run by the giant Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA) are soaked in Sh26 billion debt following a borrowing spree that flouted financial guidelines, an audit by the tea industry regulator has revealed.

The audit by the Tea Board of Kenya (TBK) flags several blunders, including KTDA sanctioning inter-factory loans at the headquarters and over-valuing assets to get bigger loans, while factory managers took loans not approved or beyond the limits approved by their respective boards of directors.

The blunders left KTDA-managed factories with a combined Sh26.06 billion debt by June 2025, with processors located in the Rift Valley and Western Kenya holding more than three-quarters of the loans, TBK says.

The regulator audited KTDA-managed factories to evaluate their financial sustainability and address challenges facing the sector, following a directive by the Ministry of Agriculture last month.

In a presentation to a committee of Parliament, TBK says it analysed amounts borrowed by factories, utilisation of the loan proceeds, and loan balances for factories.

The regulator found that of the Sh26.06 billion loans by the end of June, factories located West of the Rift (WoR) owed Sh21.61 billion while those in the East of the Rift (EoR) owed Sh4.45 billion.

‘From the audit on loans, TBK established that there were no Board resolutions approving the lending/borrowing from/to factories, as these arrangements are done at the KTDA head office,’ TBK says about inter-factory loans.

KTDA factories have loaned each other to the tune of Sh10.36 billion, but there lacks a policy guideline on inter-factory financing, which has led to arbitrariness in issuance and repayment of such loans, the Board observes.

‘Several factories are experiencing cash flow constraints, which have hindered their ability to repay inter-factory loans within the stipulated one-year period,’ it adds in its report to the Departmental Committee on Agriculture and Livestock.

Last month, KTDA phased out the decades-long inter-factory loan programme in favour of factories borrowing from commercial banks and revealed that WoR factories had borrowed more from EoR factories.

KTDA’s East Block factories are located in Kiambu, Murang’a, Nyeri, Kirinyaga, Embu, and Meru counties.

The West Block, on the other hand, includes factories in Kericho, Bomet, Nyamira, Kisii, Nandi, Vihiga, and Trans Nzoia counties.

KTDA manages 71 tea factories with an estimated 700,000 smallholder farmers across the country, and TBK regulates the tea industry on behalf of the government.

The Board also analysed Sh12.8 billion worth of commodity loans, finding that they were used to finance operations and not to pay bonuses released in October 2024, as earlier indicated.

It said KTDA lacks details on specific factories that benefited from the Sh12.8 billion ($99.7 million) commodity loans, which were procured against expected incomes for the period running from July 2024.

‘Closing stocks as at 30th June 2024, which KTDA-MS used as a guarantee for the commodity loans to finance the second payment in October 2024, were overvalued, especially for the factories in the WoR,’ TBK said.

The audit also found that some factories lacked board resolutions sanctioning the loans for use in paying bonuses, raising concerns about whether they had asked for the money or the decision was made in the boardroom in Nairobi.

Holes poked in the borrowing of some Sh2.59 billion through asset-based financing included cases where several factories borrowed amounts exceeding board-approved limits and over-quoting of equipment prices.

‘Equipment supplied to factories like Kambaa and Sanganyi was significantly more expensive than similar units supplied in other factories,’ the audit says.

The audit further faults some factories for stating that they were borrowing to finance projects, only to use the cash on unrelated issues.

Kebirigo, Ragati, and Chinga factories borrowed Sh300.17 million under project financing that would ideally go to capital-intensive uses, such as withering expansions, acquisition of automatic withering machines, and installation of orthodox lines, but they ‘spent the money on other items’.

On fertiliser financing, TBK established that the government owes KTDA Sh4.67 billion, being a subsidy refund for the importation of fertilizer between July 2021 and June 2023.

The Board now wants KTDA to provide details on the latest loan balances by its factories, and warns against borrowing to pay tea bonuses at the end of the year.

‘Going forward, the second payment of green leaf should be based on actual performance and funds available rather than borrowings and overstated stock valuation to show higher performance,’ it says.

TBK has also recommended that a forensic audit on loans borrowed by KTDA on behalf of its factories since July 2021 be undertaken, to give tea farmers confidence in the probity of the loans.

It also wants KTDA to implement a retention policy immediately to address cash flow challenges facing its factories and has further called for physical verification of assets acquired through the loans, to verify utilisation of the loan proceeds and value for money.

Tea farmers WoR have been hit by successive runs of lower earnings, with this year likely to be no exception amid subdued demand for their produce at the auction in Mombasa.

Data from the regional auction showed that tea grown in zones WoR fetched an average Sh226.17 a kilo over the nine months to September 2025, compared to Sh270.11 in a similar period of last year, translating to a Sh43.94 drop or 16.26 percent.

The main WoR tea-growing zones in Kenya include Kisii, Kericho, Nandi, and Nyamira counties.

Comparatively, tea grown in EoR fetched Sh379.96 a kilo at the auction in the nine months to September 2025, down from Sh387.72 realised in a similar period, marking a drop of Sh7.76 a kilo or two percent.

The EoR main tea growing zones include Kiambu, Murang’a, Nyeri, Kirinyaga, Meru, and Embu counties.

The festive season acts like a magnet for Kenyans, pulling us from the cities and towns back to the village. Families gather, often for the first time in months, around a table heavy with nyama choma, mukimo, and tea. The atmosphere is warm, the laughter is loud, and the guard is down.

Inevitably, as the food settles and the sun dips, the conversation drifts toward the future. Parents, feeling the weight of their mortality or perhaps just the ache in their joints, begin to speak about “when I’m gone.”

It feels like a sacred moment. The children, sensing the gravity, pull out their smartphones to hit ‘record.’ Someone – perhaps the organised cousin – volunteers to take minutes. When Dad points a finger and announces that Joe gets the prime plot in Kasarani while the girls share the village acreage, everyone nods. It feels official, it feels binding.

They record every word. They have witnesses. They have minutes signed by Mzee himself.

Then, months or years later, they discover a cold, hard statutory truth: good intentions, clear audio, and signed minutes do not equal a legal will. In the eyes of the law, that “sacred” family meeting might be worth exactly nothing.

The 90-day time bomb

Consider the story of a typical Kenyan family. The father, battling a terminal illness, is discharged from the hospital. The family throws a homecoming party – a celebration of life in the shadow of death.

During the family meeting, surrounded by his wife, children, and brothers, the father makes his wishes crystal clear: “Joe inherits the commercial plots. The rest of you share the farm.”

Joe records this declaration. An uncle writes the minutes. The father signs them. Nobody questions the validity of a dying man’s wish. Joe, confident in his inheritance, starts building immediately, sinking millions into foundations and walls.

The father dies seven months later.

At the funeral, the unity cracks. Siblings sue, and the court journeys begin. Finally, after years, comes the judgment that leaves Joe standing in the rubble of his investment: the father’s clear, witnessed, recorded wishes were invalid.

Why? Because they constituted an oral will, and the father had the ‘misfortune’ of living four months too long.

Under the Law of Succession Act, an oral will is a valid concept, but it has strict requirements. For an oral will to be valid, it must be made before at least two competent witnesses, and the testator (the maker of the will) must die within three months of making it. Ninety days. No extensions.

If the testator outlives the 90 days, you can’t say “but he meant it.” Unless you are in the armed forces or merchant marines on active service, if you survive to day 91, your oral will evaporates. The law views oral wills not as estate planning tools, but as emergency tools for people facing imminent death who physically cannot write.

“But we have a video!” you say. “We have him on camera saying it!”

This is the modern trap. In the age of smartphones and TikTok and Zoom, we assume a video is the ultimate proof. Our courts disagree.

The issue was settled tragically in the landmark case of In re Estate of Kevin John Ombajo (2021). Kevin Ombajo (“Big Kev”), gravely ill with a brain tumor and having lost his sight, recorded audio-visual statements on his phone in 2016. He had a previous written will from 2015, but these new recordings contradicted it, representing his updated wishes.

He died seven months after making the recordings. His widow argued that these recordings were his true final wishes. The court’s answer was a firm “No.” Justice Achode held that a video recording is not a written will because it lacks a physical signature and proper attestation on the document itself. Instead, the court treated the video as an oral will captured electronically.

Because Ombajo survived more than three months after recording the video, the “oral will” had expired. The 2016 video was tossed out, and the 2015 written will governed the estate.

The lesson? Technology has not updated the Law of Succession Act. A video recording, no matter how high-definition, is just evidence of an oral will. It expires in 90 days.

The supremacy of written wills

This brings us to the “Gold Standard”: the Written Will.

For a written will to be valid, it must be signed by the testator (or by someone in their presence and direction). Crucially, this signature must be made, or acknowledged, in the simultaneous presence of two competent witnesses, who must then sign the will themselves.

This is where family meeting “minutes” fail. Even if Dad signs the minutes, did the witnesses sign them as a will? Were they present at the same time with the testator? Usually, minutes are just a record of a discussion. Without the specific formalities of the law, those minutes are just pieces of paper.

Conflict between oral and written wills

There’s also a hierarchy that surprises many people: a written will cannot be revoked by an oral will.

If your mother executed a formal written will in 2010, and then in December 2024 gathers the family to say, “I’ve changed my mind, I want everything to go to the last born,” those words are legally hollow.

Even if she dies the next day (satisfying the 3-month rule), the oral declaration cannot overturn the written document.

The law assumes that written documents, created when a person was likely healthier and had legal counsel, reflect their true intent better than deathbed declarations, which can be influenced by pain, confusion, or the pressure of weeping relatives.

The witness trap: The “poisoned gift”

Let’s say you decide to do it right. You write it down. You need witnesses. Who do you call? Naturally, you call your children-the beneficiaries. Don’t.

This is a classic legal trap. If a beneficiary (or their spouse) witnesses a written will, the will remains valid, but their gift becomes void. They technically inherit nothing.

For oral wills, the risk is even messier. The law requires that if there is a conflict in testimony, the contents must be proved by a “competent independent witness”. An “independent” witness is defined as someone who is not a beneficiary. If your only witnesses to your oral will are your heirs, and a dispute arises, you have no valid witnesses.

Therefore, for a witness to a will, ask the neighbour, the doctor, or the lawyer.

The nightmare of intestacy

What happens when the oral will expires, or the minutes are rejected by the court? You hit intestacy. This is the legal term for dying without a valid will.

The default rules of the Law of Succession Act take over, and they are rigid. A surviving spouse generally receives a life interest in the property. She can live in the house and farm the land for the rest of her life, but she cannot sell it or divide it among the children without a complex court process.

The property enters a state of legal limbo. Development stalls. You cannot use the title deed for a loan, for instance, without a court’s approval. The family land becomes a museum: you can visit it, but you can’t leverage it.

How to fix it (The action plan)

So, this festive period and you are at that family meeting. The nyama choma is finished, and Mzee has just declared his wishes. The phone is recording. First, record it, but don’t trust it. Treat the recording and the minutes as rough drafts, not the final product.

Secondly, act fast. You are on a 90-day clock, and you cannot revoke an old written will with this talk. The next is to get a lawyer who is well versed in estate planning and succession matters. Take the recording or minutes to him promptly.

You will then have the lawyer transcribe the minutes, and draft a formal written will based on those wishes.

The final main action will be to execute the will properly. Have Mzee review and approve it, then sign it in the presence of two independent witnesses (not you), who also sign immediately.

Kenyan law allows for oral wills, but it treats them with deep suspicion. They are temporary, fragile, and easily defeated by a piece of paper from a decade ago.

As you gather this holiday season, by all means, have the conversation. Record the memories. But if you want those wishes to survive longer than the Christmas leftovers, put them in ink. A written will is the only legacy that doesn’t have an expiration date.

Wananchi Group, trading as Zuku, shed more than 24,000 customers in the three months to September despite a much-touted takeover that was expected to turn around the company and lift service quality.

Zuku lost significant market share across all three of its services -fixed internet, direct-to-home (DTH) and cable television- surrendering ground to rivals even in segments it once firmly dominated.

Industry data from the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) shows the steepest decline was in cable TV, where Zuku lost 30 percent of its customers, with subscriptions falling from 66,212 to 44,593, a loss of 21,619 users.

In the DTH (satellite TV) segment, its second largest in Kenya, Wananchi lost 1,591 customers, ceding ground to Multichoice’s DStv, which grew its subscriptions by a record 43 percent, as well as to Azam and StarTimes.

The company also lost customers in the fixed internet market, its largest business by subscriber numbers. Its market share fell to 11.8 percent from 12.7 percent in June, after a further 1,562 customers left the network.

Wananchi Group’s subscriber numbers have fluctuated over time amid quality concerns, with customers reporting intermittent and unexplained downtimes, particularly in the fixed internet segment.

The company’s takeover by Mauritian telecommunications firm Axian Telecom Fibre Limited, long in the pipeline, had been expected to rejuvenate confidence in Wananchi and revive a growth trajectory that was disrupted when Safaricom and Jamii Telecom ate into its dominance in less than five years.

Axian, which recently bought Tanzania’s Tigo and Zantel and merged them to form Yas, secured regulatory approval last month to acquire a 99 percent stake in Wananchi Group. This marked the Mauritian operator’s entry into the Kenyan telecommunications market.

Experts had projected that Axian’s entry would help restore Zuku’s lost glory, especially in the internet business, where it was once the country’s leading service provider, by injecting new capital to repair ageing infrastructure blamed for service disruptions and prolonged downtimes.

‘The brand’s (Zuku’s) biggest Achilles heel has always been service quality: frequent outages, inconsistent speeds and customer frustration. Yas [Axian] must address these issues head-on if it hopes to win back trust,’ noted tech commentator Moses Kemibaro in a recent blog.

‘Given Yas’ strong marketing playbook in Tanzania -bold, lifestyle-driven and digital-first- this could inject fresh energy into a brand that desperately needs reinvention.’

Over the quarter to September, only Safaricom, Ahadi Wireless, Vilcom Network and Mawingu Networks, which itself welcomed a new shareholder during the period, grew their market share; every other player either stagnated or declined.