The remarks were shared on Sunday, December 7, 2025, through his official X account, where the youthful legislator cautioned that the planned deal could transfer substantial power to foreign operators at the expense of Kenyan interests.
The National Treasury is considering the sale of about 15 per cent of Kenya’s stake in Safaricom to Vodacom.
The valuation places the deal at approximately KSh34 per share—higher than the current market trading price—and is expected to generate up to KSh245 billion for the government, including advance dividends paid ahead of the transfer.
If completed, the arrangement would reduce the government’s stake in Safaricom from around 35 per cent to roughly 20 per cent.
If completed, the arrangement would reduce the government’s stake in Safaricom from around 35 per cent to roughly 20 per cent.
Vodacom would emerge with close to 55 per cent control, solidifying its influence over the Nairobi Securities Exchange-listed firm.
Supporters of the deal argue that the funds raised could support infrastructure and national programmes. However, Salasya insists that the sale would expose Kenya to long-term economic disadvantages.
Salasya, in an extensive statement, described Safaricom as more than a communications firm, stating that it embodies Kenya’s identity in the technology world and represents a local innovation that changed global financial trends.
He said that allowing any foreign group to hold majority ownership would be a costly national error.
“Safaricom and M-Pesa are not ordinary inventions. They are the backbone of our digital economy. They keep businesses running, move billions daily and support families. Selling majority control to outsiders is a direct threat to our independence,” he posted.
According to him, Kenya attained international recognition largely due to the success of M-Pesa, which became a model replicated across different regions.
He emphasised that the company’s performance supports national development, as its profits are channelled into State programmes and tax revenue.
The MP noted that Vodacom already commands markets in parts of Africa—including Nigeria, Tanzania and South Africa—and warned that expanding its dominance into Kenya would give it strategic influence over local transactions, communications and digital infrastructure.
Salasya said Kenya’s economic security cannot rely on international decisions that may shift depending on corporate interests abroad.
The outspoken legislator has recently questioned several state decisions, especially regarding the government’s push to reduce its stake in profitable entities.
He argued that investments such as Safaricom, major banks and parastatals linked to public savings should remain firmly safeguarded.
Salasya suggested that short-term revenue arguments should not override national strategic protection, saying that even high-performing public institutions are being converted into commercial transactions.
In his earlier criticism, he accused government agencies of mismanaging procurement processes and cited examples involving the Kenya National Trading Corporation (KNTC), claiming that the agency had been used to facilitate questionable import deals.
Salasya’s remarks form part of a wider wave of opposition from various leaders who have questioned how the planned transaction will be handled and how proceeds will be applied.
In recent days, other politicians have challenged the move, saying that Kenya risks losing direct influence in a company that plays a role in strategic sectors, including digital payments, information flows and government service delivery.
Calls have also been made for parliamentary scrutiny, competitive bidding and transparency on capital utilisation.
Safaricom remains Kenya’s largest taxpayer, a leading brand in the region and the anchor institution behind mobile money systems accessed by millions.
Supporters of the deal argue that the funds raised could support infrastructure and national programmes. However, Salasya insists that the sale would expose Kenya to long-term economic disadvantages.
Salasya, in an extensive statement, described Safaricom as more than a communications firm, stating that it embodies Kenya’s identity in the technology world and represents a local innovation that changed global financial trends.
He said that allowing any foreign group to hold majority ownership would be a costly national error.
“Safaricom and M-Pesa are not ordinary inventions. They are the backbone of our digital economy. They keep businesses running, move billions daily and support families. Selling majority control to outsiders is a direct threat to our independence,” he posted.
According to him, Kenya attained international recognition largely due to the success of M-Pesa, which became a model replicated across different regions.
He emphasised that the company’s performance supports national development, as its profits are channelled into State programmes and tax revenue.
The MP noted that Vodacom already commands markets in parts of Africa—including Nigeria, Tanzania and South Africa—and warned that expanding its dominance into Kenya would give it strategic influence over local transactions, communications and digital infrastructure.
Salasya said Kenya’s economic security cannot rely on international decisions that may shift depending on corporate interests abroad.
The outspoken legislator has recently questioned several state decisions, especially regarding the government’s push to reduce its stake in profitable entities.
He argued that investments such as Safaricom, major banks and parastatals linked to public savings should remain firmly safeguarded.
Salasya suggested that short-term revenue arguments should not override national strategic protection, saying that even high-performing public institutions are being converted into commercial transactions.
In his earlier criticism, he accused government agencies of mismanaging procurement processes and cited examples involving the Kenya National Trading Corporation (KNTC), claiming that the agency had been used to facilitate questionable import deals.
Salasya’s remarks form part of a wider wave of opposition from various leaders who have questioned how the planned transaction will be handled and how proceeds will be applied.
In recent days, other politicians have challenged the move, saying that Kenya risks losing direct influence in a company that plays a role in strategic sectors, including digital payments, information flows and government service delivery.
Calls have also been made for parliamentary scrutiny, competitive bidding and transparency on capital utilisation.
Safaricom remains Kenya’s largest taxpayer, a leading brand in the region and the anchor institution behind mobile money systems accessed by millions.
0 Comments