Category: Business Daily

Several airlines continued to face flight delays on Tuesday as they struggled to clear the backlog created by a two-day aviation workers’ strike that brought operations at Kenya’s major airports to a near standstill.

The strike, which began on Sunday and was called off on Tuesday morning, forced airlines to cancel and delay flights, leaving thousands of passengers stranded at airports, including the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) in Nairobi.

Major carriers in Kenya, including Kenya Airways (KQ) and Jambojet, said they expected normal flight schedules to resume on Wednesday as they continued to deal with the effects of the industrial action.

Foreign carriers operating flights to and from Nairobi also continued to face disruptions, with airlines such as Etihad postponing some scheduled flights on Tuesday as they worked to clear backlog from Sunday and Monday.

The Kenya Aviation Workers Union (KAWU) called off the strike after reaching a return-to-work agreement with the government, Kenya Airports Authority (KAA), Kenya Civil Aviation Authority (KCAA) and Jambojet.

The agreement commits KAWU and KCAA to resume negotiations on a collective bargaining agreement (CBA), while salary discussions will be handled within the ambit of the Salaries and Remuneration Commission. It also provides for the release of agency fees owed to the union and protection of workers who participated in the strike from victimisation or disciplinary action.

KAWU had cited unresolved labour issues, including a stalled CBA, disputes over union agency fees, and its recognition dispute with Jambojet. The union also raised concerns over workers’ welfare and employment conditions.

The strike affected JKIA, Moi International Airport in Mombasa, Eldoret International Airport and Kisumu International Airport. The disruption was particularly severe at JKIA, which serves as Kenya’s main international aviation hub.

KQ, which uses JKIA as its hub, said it continued to experience delays on Tuesday following the suspension of the strike.

‘Customers should expect some delays as our teams restore flight schedules. We anticipate resuming our normal scheduled operations by Wednesday,’ said KQ in a statement.

Jambojet also said it expected to resume its full schedule on Wednesday after operating most of its flights on Tuesday, albeit with some delays as priority was given to earlier bookings.

‘Our immediate priority is to support passengers whose travel plans were affected, while ensuring that all flights operate safely,’ Jambojet CEO Karanja Ndegwa told Business Daily.

The airlines are rearranging their schedules to clear the flight backlog, with some destinations receiving higher frequencies than normal and others being served using larger aircraft.

‘We are also adjusting our schedules and operational resources to accelerate the recovery and restore the network to normal by Wednesday 2nd. We will continue to closely monitor the situation and provide guests with timely updates on their flights,’ added Mr Ndegwa.

The latest disruption was the second major aviation workers’ strike in Kenya this year, highlighting persistent labour tensions in a sector that serves as a critical gateway for regional and international travel.

The February strike also disrupted operations at JKIA and other airports before workers returned to their stations following government-mediated talks.

While the latest agreement has ended the strikw, airlines are still dealing with the operational consequences, with passengers warned to expect delays as carriers work through the accumulated backlog and restore their normal schedules.

Competition Authority of Kenya (CAK) can proceed with its review of the proposed acquisition of Diageo’s 65 percent stake in East African Breweries (EABL) by Japan’s Asahi Group Holdings, even as a legal challenge over the transaction remains pending before the High Court.

In a ruling delivered on Monday, the High Court clarified that the competition regulator is free to continue evaluating the transaction and make a determination under the Competition Act.

The court also said an appeal challenging the deal before the Capital Markets Tribunal should proceed. However, the transfer of Diageo’s controlling stake to Asahi cannot be completed until the ongoing court case is determined.

The court held that maintaining the status quo would preserve the transaction without prejudicing the rights of any party while allowing statutory regulators and dispute-resolution bodies to carry out their mandates.

‘I do note that the petitioner sought a raft of injunctive and disclosure orders including an order of status quo to preserve the transaction. An order of status quo will allow the appeal to be concluded as well as the Competition Authority to determine the matters before it so that the petitioner or any party may avail themselves of the dispute resolution mechanisms in the Act,’ the judge said.

The court found that preserving the status of the transaction as it stood on June 18, 2026, was necessary pending the determination of the appeal before the CMA Tribunal and CAK’s review of the acquisition.

The dispute stems from a petition filed by shareholder Christine Irungu, who challenged the constitutionality of the sale of Diageo’s controlling interest in EABL to Asahi Group Holdings.

Ms Irungu argues that the transaction violates several constitutional provisions, including those relating to transparency, access to information, consumer rights, fair administrative action and protection of property rights.

She claims that Diageo, EABL and the regulators failed to disclose key details about the transaction, including information relating to the tender offer, share premium, the impact on minority shareholders and regulatory safeguards.

The petitioner also accuses the Capital Markets Authority (CMA) and CAK of failing to adequately protect investors and the public interest.

According to court filings, she contends that the CMA failed to shield minority shareholders from the possibility of a controlling shareholder benefiting disproportionately from a control premium. She further argues that CAK did not sufficiently consider the competition implications of the transaction, including its impact on consumers, distributors and the wider beverage market.

On June 18, the court issued conservatory orders halting completion of the transaction.

Diageo Kenya and Diageo Plc subsequently moved to court seeking to set aside the orders and allow the transaction to proceed.

The companies argued that issues raised by the petitioner fall within specialised statutory frameworks governing takeovers, mergers and competition regulation and should therefore be handled by the relevant regulators and tribunals.

They pointed to an appeal pending before the CMA Tribunal challenging a CMA decision that exempted Asahi from making a mandatory takeover offer to EABL’s minority shareholders.

The firms also noted that CAK was still reviewing the acquisition and that any decision by the regulator could be challenged before the Competition Tribunal.

Diageo argued that the courts should not assume supervisory powers over matters assigned by law to specialised regulatory bodies.

The brewer also rejected claims that its previous acquisition of additional EABL shares through a 2022-2023 tender offer was part of a pre-arranged plan to later sell an enlarged controlling stake to Asahi.

It argued that the petitioner had delayed in bringing the challenge and had not demonstrated any personal or public prejudice arising from the transaction.

Asahi Group adopted a similar position, arguing that the dispute should be pursued before the CMA Tribunal and the Competition Tribunal rather than through constitutional litigation.

CAK also raised a preliminary objection, saying the High Court lacked jurisdiction because the Competition Act provides an elaborate mechanism for reviewing merger decisions. The regulator relied on provisions of the Fair Administrative Action Act requiring parties to exhaust available statutory remedies before approaching the courts.

The court’s decision means regulators can continue reviewing the acquisition while preserving the existing ownership structure until the legal and regulatory processes are concluded.

In today’s busy world, many employees wear two hats, one as a dedicated professional at work and another as a caregiver performing unpaid care work at home. Working caregivers shoulder the greater responsibility of balancing professional duties with caring for loved ones with severe disabilities, age related needs, or health conditions.

Yet, in the workplace, they are often invisible, unrecognised, and unsupported. Among the affected groups of employees who are providing caregiving support while pursuing demanding careers are those who are caregivers of persons with severe disabilities (PWSD).

Caregiving responsibilities for PWSD are associated with a range of challenges, including long-term care that presents physical, emotional and mental health tolls on carers, who often experience stress, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep loss, a lack of time and a lack of control over their own time, among others.

With these challenges in place, their ability to sustain paid employment is threatened. Consequently, carers of PWSD in employment are often forced to reduce their working hours, take less demanding jobs or leave the labour market altogether.

A World Bank survey of 114 mothers of children with disabilities in Kenya and Uganda demonstrated that caregiving demands are intense, stating that 15 percent of mothers reported spending their entire day caregiving.

Additionally, these mothers were 1.9 times more likely to lose their jobs and 2.1 times more likely to quit than mothers of children without disabilities, due to inflexible work schedules, medical emergencies, and other responsibilities. These findings clearly demonstrate that employers can do much to support employees who juggle work and caregiving responsibilities for PWSD.

One of the measures employers can adopt to support working carers of PWSD is caregiver-friendly workplace policies, as an intentional employer initiative to reduce conflict between work and unpaid caring responsibilities and support carers’ lives outside of work.

To date, most workplaces continue to operate under deeply ingrained norms, including a full time, forty hour plus workweek, rigid reporting and leaving times, very limited access to paid time off or leaves of absence, and work responsibilities that employers insist can only be completed in the traditional way they are always completed. Because of these entrenched norms, many workers with caregiving responsibilities for PWSD struggle to or cannot meet their employers’ expectations.

Once adopted, it is anticipated that the caregiver friendly workplace policies will address these deeply rooted norms by introducing flexible work arrangements such as flexible work schedules, reduced working hours, part time work, job sharing, and working from home, among others. Furthermore, these policies are expected to incorporate unpaid leave provisions beyond the mandatory employer’s time frame and provide support services such as counselling, support groups, workshops and seminars on caregiving issues.

This initiative will not only safeguard the employment opportunities for working carers of PWSD from being disrupted by their caregiving responsibilities but also attract and retain young carers in organisations and harness their transferable skills for meaningful careers.

To greatly benefit from such initiatives, working carers of PWSD must embrace disclosure.

This is crucial as it serves as the initial step for conversations between the working carers, employers and colleagues in the workplace about unpaid responsibilities held outside of employment. Most importantly, it activates workplace support.

These practices provide organisations with opportunities that make caregiving a ‘talkable’ subject and supply employers and employees with a common basis for discussing caregiving responsibilities, as well as providing working carers with any additional support that they may require.

In addition, failure to support working caregivers in the workplace also has a detrimental effect on employers, including increased absenteeism, unplanned absences, increased employee turnover, decreased employee retention, and productivity loss. This clearly demonstrates that employers also stand to benefit significantly by adopting carer friendly workplace policies as part of their employment practices.

By implementing such policies, employers can use them as a foundation for integrating paid employment with unpaid caregiving to mitigate the above negative consequences. Employers must recognise that unpaid caregiving is no longer a personal and private matter in family

life, but has become a significant social and economic policy issue across the globe that requires their attention too.

The Kenya Union of Savings and Credit Co-operatives (Kuscco) was formed in 1973 as an umbrella body for saccos and expanded into a multi-billion shilling institution offering financial and other services.

A Sh13.3 billion fraud scandal plunged it into insolvency, forcing members to abandon rescue efforts and vote for liquidation last week.

The decision came after auditors told members that Kuscco could not be revived without a fresh injection of capital. Members rejected any proposal to inject more money.

The Commissioner for Co-operative Development David Obonyo gazetted the decision on Monday.

What is liquidation and what does it mean for Kuscco’s existence?

Liquidation is the formal process of winding up an organisation by selling or realising its assets, settling its debts and distributing any remaining value to those entitled to it.

For Kuscco, the process effectively marks the end of the organisation as it currently exists. The formal cancellation of Kuscco’s registration and the issuance of liquidation order means the institution will no longer operate as a going concern.

Kuscco’s remaining assets will instead be preserved and realised by the liquidators to maximise recovery for creditors and members.

Who appoints the liquidator and what powers will they have over Kuscco’s affairs?

Mr Obonyo has appointed a team of three people to oversee the liquidation.

The three liquidators are Deputy Commissioner for Co-operative Development Peter Wanjohi Kiama, Principal Co-operative Officer Habil Olembo Jesse, and Deputy Chief State Counsel Mariam Adam Abubakar.

The liquidators have been gazetted and authorised to take control of Kuscco’s affairs from its previous management and directors. Their tasks will include identifying and securing assets, collecting debts owed to Kuscco, selling assets where appropriate, settling legitimate claims and distributing the proceeds according to the order of priority.

The process will therefore stop the current scramble among individual creditors to seize Kuscco property through separate court actions.

How will Kuscco’s Sh5.4 billion assets be distributed among creditors and members?

The Sh5.4 billion represents the estimated value of assets that Kuscco expects to realise. This is substantially below its obligations amounting to about Sh17 billion, meaning there will not be enough money to repay everyone in full.

The liquidators will establish the valid claims against Kuscco and determine how available funds should be distributed to ensure equity.

Claims will be dealt with through the formal liquidation process, taking into account the legal priority of different classes of creditors.

How much can saccos realistically expect to recover?

Saccos should not expect to recover the full value of their investments. Kuscco’s liabilities exceed its estimated assets by Sh11.6 billion, even before additional liquidation costs are taken into account.

The final recovery rate will depend on how much the liquidators ultimately realise from Kuscco’s assets and how much is consumed by liquidation expenses.

Legal fees, professional fees, staff and administrative costs, taxes and the cost of preserving or selling assets could reduce the amount available for distribution.

Recovery could, however, improve if the liquidators collect more from loans owed to Kuscco, successfully sell assets at better values or recover funds from transactions linked to the fraud.

What happens to the 292 court cases seeking to attach Kuscco assets for Sh6.48 billion?

The 292 cases are expected to be dealt with within the liquidation framework. Their combined claims of Sh6.48 billion are already higher than the estimated Sh5.4 billion in assets available for distribution.

Liquidation is intended to halt the race among creditors to obtain court orders and attach Kuscco property. Instead, claims will be assessed by the liquidator and dealt with within the liquidation framework.

Existing court orders will not necessarily disappear automatically. The liquidators may have to seek directions from the courts where necessary. The key change is that recovery will move from individual enforcement actions towards a collective process.

What happens to the court cases against Kuscco, as well as the cases Kuscco has filed against its former managers and directors?

The cancellation of Kuscco’s registration ends its status as a going concern, although the society is deemed to continue in existence solely for the purpose of winding up its affairs, according to Cecil Miller, managing partner at Miller and Company Advocates, who cited Section 63 of the Co-operative Societies Act.

He says there is legal precedent showing once a co-operative society is in liquidation, it lacks the capacity to sue or be sued directly. Only the liquidators can act for it, subject to the Commissioner’s oversight.

Mr Miller explains that Section 66(1)(b) empowers the appointed liquidators to institute and defend suits and other legal proceedings on behalf of Kuscco. This means the liquidators will take over the suits that Kuscco had filed against its former managers and directors.

‘In practice, this means all pending court cases against Kuscco will continue, but the liquidators will now institute and defend suits on the society’s behalf, and any resulting judgment or settlement becomes a claim against the assets in liquidation rather than one Kuscco can settle directly outside that process,’ he said.

How long will the liquidation process take?

The liquidators have been given up to one year to complete the process, but this period could be extended depending on the complexity of the liquidationt.

No fixed timetable guarantees that Kuscco will be wound up within a particular period. The duration will depend on the complexity of its assets, debts, litigation and claims.

The process could take considerable time because the liquidators must identify and value assets, recover outstanding loans, dispose of property, resolve disputes and verify claims before making distributions.

Court cases, if any, could also delay the realisation of assets. Members are therefore likely to receive recoveries in stages.

Does this leave saccos without an umbrella body for advocacy?

No. Members authorised the establishment of a new body called the Kenya Federation of Savings and Credit Co-operatives (Kefesco) to take over functions such as advocacy, training and research.

Kefesco will be separate from Kuscco and will not inherit its debts or liabilities. This means the new organisation can represent the interests of saccos without becoming responsible for the financial problems that brought down Kuscco.

Most board strategy retreats fall short not because they lack information, but because they devote too little time to strategic thinking.

Over the next few weeks, many boards will leave their usual boardrooms for annual strategy retreats. The intention is to step away from the regular board agenda and reflect on the future. What conversation does the board need to have at the strategy retreat?

For a business midway through an approved strategy, the priority may be assessing execution and considering whether developments since its approval have changed the circumstances facing the business. For one approaching the end of its current strategy period, the opportunity is to help shape the direction of the next strategy period. Occasionally, significant changes in the operating environment may warrant reconsidering the current strategy before it expires.

These are different conversations and should not automatically have the same retreat agenda.

For a board midway through an existing strategy, the retreat should offer more than an extended review of implementation. Persistent difficulty in delivering expected outcomes may point to a problem with the strategy rather than its execution. Equally, strong performance should not place a strategy beyond scrutiny.

When presented with a green dashboard, directors naturally spend less time on that aspect of the business and attention moves toward the red and amber indicators. That is reasonable from an oversight perspective, but from a strategic perspective, it can create blind spots.

A green indicator tells us that we achieved what we planned. It does not necessarily tell us whether the target was ambitious enough or whether we have fully captured emerging opportunities. Performance against plan and performance against opportunity are not always the same thing.

One useful question the board could ask itself is this: If management presented this strategy for the first time today, given what we now know, would we approve it?

For a board approaching the end of its current strategy period, the conversation is different. By the time directors receive a polished proposal for the next three or five years, management may already have made crucial decisions, discarded some alternatives and committed to a preferred direction.

The board should not formulate the strategy – that is management’s job. But it should engage early enough to clarify the most important challenges and opportunities the new strategy is intended to address, and to influence the questions asked, the evidence considered, and the alternatives explored. A board cannot meaningfully consider alternatives it never sees.

Where circumstances have changed materially, the calendar should not dictate the conversation. Developments in customers, competition, technology, regulation or industry economics may have altered the context in which the strategy was developed. The question here is which elements of the strategy need modification in response to the changes in the environment.

Directors also need to arrive well prepared. That requires more than reading management’s papers. Some of their understanding of developments beyond the organisation should come from independent sources. Otherwise, they are less able to bring a different perspective to the discussion. Independent judgement is strengthened by independent perspectives.

Then there is the familiar strategy pack, sometimes running to well over a hundred pages. Everyone agrees that directors have read it and presenters will focus on the few matters requiring discussion or decision.

Then the meeting starts. Before long, slides are being presented page by page and discussion time steadily disappears. Management wants to be thorough, presenters want to demonstrate command of their areas, and directors want to be well informed. This is understandable, but the aggregate result can be a session full of information and short on strategy.

The pre-read may well merit a hundred pages. But the board pack and the board conversation need not have the same architecture. The scarce resource at a strategy retreat is collective thinking time.

Explore uncertainties

Management needs to identify what genuinely requires the board’s attention, directors need to come prepared, the and the Chair needs to protect discussion time. Presenters might focus on three things: what has changed, why it matters strategically, and what they want the board to consider.

Not every conversation needs to end in a decision. Boards need room to explore uncertainties and possibilities while they still have time to respond.

Strategic thinking should not be confined to the annual retreat. Regular board meetings will necessarily monitor implementation but should also consider what has changed and what that might mean for the strategy. Most developments will require no change. Some may call for different tactics. Occasionally, a few will warrant reconsidering the strategy itself.

A successful strategy retreat therefore begins long before directors arrive at the venue. Success is not measured by how much material was covered or how many slides were presented. It is measured by whether the board leaves clearer about what should remain unchanged, what may need to change, and what now deserves greater attention.

The civil servant’s pension scheme, Public Service Superannuation Fund (PSSF), is changing its investment policy from the current 79.3 percent concentration in fixed income securities to more diverse asset classes including listed shares, private equity and off-shore investments.

The fund had Sh270.1 billion out of its Sh340.3 billion total assets invested in government bonds, Treasury bills, Eurobonds, asset-backed securities and bank fixed deposits in the year to June 2026.

It now says it is ready to take more risks in pursuit of higher returns for its members whose annual contribution hit Sh60.8 billion in the review period.

‘The new direction seeks to balance between generating inflation-beating returns while preserving members’ capital over the long term,’ said PSSF Chief Executive Officer Dr Jonah Aiyabei.

Retirement Benefits Authority (RBA) rules allow pensions to invest up to 90 percent of their assets in government debt while allocations to other categories like equities have caps.

The five-year-old PSSF held all its funds in Treasury bills and bonds three years ago but has been venturing into other assets in the last two years.

It recently participated in the Kenya Pipeline Company’s initial public offering and Talanta City Stadium’s infrastructure asset-backed bond.

Under the new policy, PSSF may allocate up to 20 percent of its assets to listed equities, giving it greater exposure to growth opportunities in the stock market. The framework also permits offshore investments of up to 15 percent, enabling the scheme to diversify geographically and reduce concentration risk within the domestic economy.

In the real estate segment, the Fund can invest as much as 20 percent in property assets, reflecting the long-term income and capital appreciation potential of the sector.

Up to 10 percent of the portfolio may be deployed into alternative investments such as private equity, infrastructure projects and private debt. The policy also permits exposure to infrastructure-linked instruments and sustainability-linked investments.

‘With an average member age of 39 years and approximately 99.5 percent of our members more than a decade from retirement, the PSSF can tolerate short-term market volatility in pursuit of higher long-term gains,’ said Dr Aiyabei.

The scheme has Sh18.3 billion invested in Linzi Bonds whose proceeds were used by the government to build the Talanta Stadium and affordable houses for military officers while offering annual returns of up to 15.04 percent. It also holds Sh239.8 billion in Treasury bills and bonds, Sh11.5 billion in Eurobonds and fixed deposits of Sh569.3 million.

This means the fund has invested 79.1 percent of its fund in fixed income securities while holding Sh2.3 billion in cash and fixed deposit underlining low risk appetite.

Currently it has invested Sh47.8 billion in listed equities, or 14 percent of its assets against RBA’s cap of 70 percent.

It invested Sh12.3 billion in the Kenya Pipeline Company’s Sh106.3 billion IPO, making it the fourth largest shareholder in the firm while helping boost the success of the offer which had failed to attract corporate investors.

Members of PSSF make a 7.5 percent contribution from their salary which the government tops up with a 15 percent contribution.

The fund has a membership of 529,635, the bulk of whom are teachers at 332,950, disciplined forces (120,084), civil servants (60,322) and 16,279 from county governments.

Prior to PSSF’s launch in 2021, public servants were covered by the defined contributions scheme managed by the National Treasury. Contribution to the fund was mandatory to public servants who were below the age of 45 when it came to be but voluntary for the older ones while every new employee since is automatically enrolled.

The management of PSSF disclosed they are likely to declare returns of between 13 and 15 percent to their 529,635 members this year which will be a drop from the 17.98 percent posted last year when interest rates were high.

PSSF reported a 15.3 percent increase in annual contributions to Sh60.8 billion in the review period from Sh52.7 billion the year before on the back of higher membership.

This means the fund is collecting averagely Sh5 billion monthly which solidifies its position as the second largest fund after the National Social Security Fund whose monthly collections average Sh8 billion.

Pension funds in the country had allocated 46.35 percent of their Sh3.16 trillion assets in government securities as at June this year with equities taking 14.3 percent, guarantee funds (19.3 percent) and immovable property (7.97 percent), marking the preferred investment classes.

Safaricom has started paying shareholders its final Sh46.08 billion dividend ahead of the official September 4 payment date, giving investors early access to the telecoms giant’s record payout.

The company approved a final dividend of Sh1.15 per share at its July 31 annual general meeting for shareholders on the register by the August 4 book closure date. Together with the Sh0.85 interim dividend paid in March, the full-year dividend totals Sh2 per share.

The overall distribution of Sh80.13 billion is 66.7 percent higher than the Sh48.08 billion paid for the previous financial year, making it the largest dividend payout in Safaricom’s history.

The bumper payout follows a 37.2 percent jump in net profit to Sh95.6 billion for the year ended March 2026, driven by stronger M-Pesa earnings and significantly lower losses from Safaricom Ethiopia.

The final dividend alone amounts to Sh46.08 billion, compared with Sh26.04 billion a year earlier.

Safaricom has previously paid dividends ahead of schedule, including in 2024, as it shifted from cheque payments to electronic transfers through bank accounts, Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) and M-Pesa.

The payout also marks the end of a three-year period during which the telco kept its dividend unchanged as heavy investment in Ethiopia and the depreciation of the Ethiopian birr weighed on group earnings.

Safaricom Ethiopia, which launched commercial operations in 2022, has narrowed its losses and is expected to break even in the financial year ending March 2027, easing one of the biggest drags on group profitability. Kenya remains Safaricom’s main earnings engine, with M-Pesa, mobile data and fixed connectivity continuing to drive growth as voice and SMS revenues mature.

M-Pesa generated Sh182.7 billion in revenue during the year to March 2026 and processed transactions worth Sh41.68 trillion, underscoring its growing contribution to group earnings.

The government has set a target to borrow Sh38.74 billion against the Sports Fund to complete the construction of 33 new and existing stadiums across the country.

The new facility will mark the second securitisation under the Sports, Arts and Social Development Fund (SASDF), after the Sh44.8 billion Talanta bond whose proceeds are in use in the construction of the 60,000-seater Raila Odinga Stadium in Nairobi.

The Sports Fund is already recruiting a transaction advisor and lead arranger to structure the new loan, which is expected to match the Talanta bond’s 15-year tenor.

‘The fund is in the process of implementing a financing programme aimed at mobilising resources through a loan facility to finance the construction and completion of 33 new and ongoing stadia and related infrastructure across the country,’ the Sports Fund said in a disclosure.

‘The estimated amount to be sourced is the cumulated project contract price amounting to Sh38.74 billion (exclusive of the facility fee), for a proposed repayment period of 15 years. The proposal should aim at providing the facility in the shortest time period, preferably not exceeding 60 days upon award.’

The advisors will be required to identify funding sources, negotiate financing terms with the lenders or investors, structure financial models, and ensure sustainability throughout the life of the stadium projects.

The State has launched a series of stadium construction and expansion projects across the country, including in Mombasa, Kisumu, Nakuru and Eldoret, and more than 20 other counties.

It is also upgrading the Kasarani and Nyayo National Stadiums in Nairobi in readiness for the June 2027 Africa Cup of Nations tournament, which is being co-hosted by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda.

Under the securitisation plan, the fund’s collections are used to pay interest and principal to lenders in the bond issuances, effectively allowing the government to borrow against future taxes.

The fund is mainly financed through taxes and levies raised from the betting industry, with Sh2.07 billion targeted per month.

In the year to June 2026, taxes on betting services rose 24.9 percent to Sh16.5 billion, against a target of Sh14.26 billion.

The overall funding for the SASDF in the 2026/2027 budget was set at Sh25.2 billion, part of a wider budgetary allocation of Sh45 billion to the Sports and Tourism Ministry. The Tourism Fund was allocated Sh14.3 billion.

The State has turned to securitisation of these future taxes and levies to finance large and costly public projects, including roads, as its room to borrow continues to shrink due to a ballooning of public debt to Sh13 trillion.

It is part of alternative financing plans that include public-private partnerships (PPPs) across the energy, transport, water, housing, health, and digital infrastructure sectors. In the current year, the government is targeting at least Sh70 billion in PPP investments.

Last year, the Treasury securitised Sh7 out of the Sh25 per litre collected under the Road Maintenance Levy Fund (RMLF) to service loans of Sh175 billion contracted to pay pending bills to road contractors.

The government is planning to leverage a further Sh5 per litre from the levy to secure another Sh125 billion in a new roads bond. The government increased the levy from Sh18 to Sh25 per litre in July 2024.

The Tourism ministry is meanwhile dipping into the Sh5 billion per year Tourism Levy to partly repay private investors in hotels and commercial facilities for the ongoing Sh31 billion development of the Bomas International Convention Complex (BICC).

The Tourism Levy is set at a rate of two percent of the gross receipts derived from the monthly sale of food, drinks, accommodation and other services in all regulated hotels, restaurants and other tourism activities.

Kenya is also planning to take up to 90 percent of the annual revenues from the Railway Development Levy (RDL) to secure funding for the extension of the standard gauge railway (SGR) from Naivasha to Malaba.

On the sports fund, the government is looking to utilise the headroom left after servicing the Talanta bond to load on more debt.

In the current year, the fund will spend Sh6.5 billion on the Talanta bond repayments, with a disbursement of Sh3.25 billion having been made on July 7, and the second one of a similar amount to come on January 7, 2027.

The 15-year Talanta bond was issued in July 2025 by Liaison Group, through a special vehicle known as Linzi FinCo 003 Trust.

The bond has a 15.04 percent rate of return, which will earn investors Sh57.6 billion in interest over the life of the debt. This interest income is exempt from withholding tax, giving the bond the same status as government-issued infrastructure bonds.

The paper is amortised, meaning that its principal will be paid down in equal instalments of about Sh2.98 billion annually, and therefore reducing the interest expense over time.

Kenya’s food import bill has climbed to near-record levels amid widespread crop failure due to drought, signalling deeper reliance on markets abroad for supplies to feed households.

The value of food and beverage imports rose by 20.6 percent to Sh169.02 billion in the January-June period. This is Sh28.88 billion higher than Sh140.14 billion in the same period last year, the latest provisional official data show.

The latest bill is Sh4.25 billion below the Sh173.28 billion recorded in the first half of 2023, when Kenya encountered one of its worst droughts in decades.

The rebound reverses two consecutive years of declines, with food imports falling 14.5 percent in 2024 to Sh148.18 billion and a further 5.4 percent to Sh140.14 billion in 2025.

The increase comes as poor rainfall and crop failure hit major agricultural regions, threatening domestic production and putting fresh pressure on food supplies.

Agriculture Principal Secretary Paul Ronoh said the government had deployed scientists to assess crop losses in the country’s main maize-growing areas and determine the impact on food security.

‘If we establish that food security will be affected, the government will allow maize imports,’ Dr Ronoh said recently in Nakuru.

The possible return to maize imports points to growing concern over domestic supplies as farmers contend with erratic rainfall, pests and diseases that have reduced production.

The Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation (Kalro) said weather disruptions had significantly reduced production across many maize-growing regions.

‘Most regions have experienced crop failure due to depressed rainfall, while diseases and pests have worsened the situation,’ Kalro director-general Patrick Ketiema said in July.

The supply shock is already reflected in higher imports of key staples, with purchases of maize, rice and wheat increasing steeply in the opening months of the year.

Kenya imported 116,913 tonnes of maize in the first quarter, 33.4 percent more than the 87,651 tonnes imported a year earlier, according to the KNBS data. Spending rose 77.3 percent to Sh3.74 billion from Sh2.11 billion.

Rice imports rose more than sixfold to 318,378 tonnes from 51,235 tonnes, while spending also increased nearly sixfold to Sh21.82 billion from Sh3.66 billion.

Unmilled wheat imports rose 22.4 percent to 646,283 tonnes from 527,964 tonnes, but spending jumped more than ninefold to Sh22.26 billion from Sh2.41 billion.

The latest developments echo the 2023 food crisis, when severe drought combined with global supply disruptions following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to push up the cost of staples and farm inputs.

The government responded by allowing duty-free imports of selected food commodities, including maize, rice and animal-feed ingredients, in a bid to increase supplies and stabilise prices.

Three years later, the prospect of another increase in food imports comes as drought conditions have again deteriorated, particularly in the country’s arid and semi-arid areas.

The State Department for Asals and Regional Development said in February that successive below-average rains had reduced water availability, pasture regeneration and crop production.

The poor October-December 2025 short rains and below-average March-May long rains have also worsened food insecurity, with the Kenya Food Security Steering Group estimating that 3.5 million people now require humanitarian food assistance. That is up from 2.2 million people in 2025, reflecting the growing strain on household food supplies and livelihoods.

The steering group is a multi-agency entity coordinating food security in Kenya under the leadership of the National Drought Management Authority (NDMA) alongside the UN World Food Programme (WFP).

The pressure comes as President William Ruto administration’s fertiliser subsidy programme reached fewer farmers in the year to June 2026, according to a draft agriculture budget report.

The number of farmers accessing subsidised fertiliser fell by 425,586, or 30.9 percent, to 949,951 from 1.38 million a year earlier.

It was the first decline in the reach of Dr Ruto’s flagship farm-input support programme since he took office.

The combination of weaker rainfall, crop losses and reduced access to subsidised inputs risks further constraining domestic food production at a time when demand is rising.

Consumers are already feeling the effects, with several commonly purchased fresh foods recording price increases well above overall food inflation of 9.0 in August.

Irish potatoes were 32.7 percent more expensive in August than a year earlier, at Sh118.05 per kilogramme, according to the KNBS, while sukuma wiki rose 29.8 percent to Sh121.21 per kilogramme and tomatoes increased 29.3 percent to Sh111.03.

A kilogramme of cabbages rose 21.7 percent to Sh74.52, oranges 18.8 percent to Sh124.69, and onions 11.1 percent to Sh120.37, while beef with bones increased 12.1 percent to Sh777.36 over the same period.

The renewed increase in food imports presents policymakers with the double challenge of securing adequate supplies while limiting the impact of higher food costs on consumers.

Kenya Airways (KQ) board of directors on Tuesday kicked out George Kamal as acting group managing director and chief executive officer and replaced him with the company secretary and head of legal Habil Waswani, who also takes over in acting capacity.

Kamal held the position since mid-December 2025, when he took over from Allan Kilavuka, who went on terminal leave ahead of the expiry of his tenure in April 2026, holding the interim position for just over eight months.

KQ’s board chairman Kiprono Kittony said Mr Kamal’s leadership at the airline has steered it across a turbulent time, but did not disclose the reason for letting him go, or whether he will retain his previous role of chief operations officer.

‘During his tenure, he brought extensive aviation expertise to bear in stabilizing the airline’s operations and successfully steered the company through the most recent executive leadership transition,’ said Mr Kittony in a statement.

Mr Waswani’s tenure will commence on September 15, as the board seeks a substantive holder of the position. The chairman said the board has already kicked off the process of recruiting a CEO, and is expected to conclude soon.

Kamal joined KQ in March 2023 as the COO, from Iraqi Airways, where he served as the chief executive and operating officer, prior to which he was the head of operations at Air Arabia.

Waswani, on the other hand, joined the company in March 2021 as the company secretary and director of legal services and regulatory compliance, joining from the National Bank of Kenya, where he served in a similar position.

The bulk of his career has been in the financial services sector, with stints at the Diamond Trust Bank and the Kenya Reinsurance Corporation, both as a general manager legal and company secretary.

‘His career spans senior corporate governance roles across leading banking and insurance institutions. He is also a multiple recipient of the prestigious Legal 500 GC Powerlist East Africa Awards since 2004,’ said Mr Kittony.

The new CEO will be expected to execute a turnaround strategy for the airline, steering it out of consistent losses back to profitability, amid global challenges in the aviation industry that have impacted the airline.

In the half-year to June 2026, the national flag carrier’s losses rose by 32 percent to Sh16 billion from Sh12 billion last year, bogged down by capacity constraints and rising fuel costs.

It has been banking on growing demand for air travel in Kenya and across the globe to grow its revenues in efforts to return to profitability. The airline’s challenges include a heavy debt burden that, coupled with years of losses, has deepened its negative equity position. The government has continued to offer financial support to the airline amid plans of bringing in a strategic investor that are yet to materialize.