Court trims interested parties in Hustler Fund’s legality case
CBK, in its defence, insisted it has no role in the establishment or management of the fund, distancing itself from allegations touching on financing and accountability.
The legality and governance of the Hustler Fund is now under the spotlight after the High Court in Nairobi trimmed down parties in a petition challenging the scheme.
Justice Bahati Mwamuye, in a ruling, ordered the removal of the Office of the President, the Central Bank of Kenya (CBK), Safaricom, and Airtel, agreeing with the Attorney General that their inclusion was improper and had been done without the court's consent.
More To Read
- Fuel prices hold steady for December–January despite fluctuating global oil costs
- Three-week drop in benchmark crude sets up Kenyans for further fuel price relief
- Safaricom secures Sh17.8 billion boost for Ethiopia expansion
- Safaricom shares sale explained: Why government chose Vodacom
- MPs to hold public hearings on proposed sale of 15 per cent Safaricom stake to Vodacom
- Kenya’s 5G users hit 1.5 million as adoption accelerates
The petitioners, Benard Odero Okello and Kevin Ndoho Macharia, argue that the fund operates without a properly constituted board, raising concerns over transparency and accountability.
They had initially listed CBK, Safaricom, Airtel, Kenya Commercial Bank, the Retirement Benefits Authority (RBA), and the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) as interested parties.
CBK, in its defence, insisted it has no role in the establishment or management of the fund, distancing itself from allegations touching on financing and accountability.
Safaricom and Airtel similarly maintained their involvement was limited to providing mobile platforms for disbursement and repayment, with no control over the fund.
With the petition now streamlined, focus shifts to whether the Hustler Fund - a flagship government loan scheme anchored in the Finance Act 2022 - has the necessary oversight structures to ensure proper management.
Meanwhile, the National Assembly has applied to join the case, arguing that since the fund's legal framework is rooted in its legislation, the dispute directly touches on parliamentary processes.
Top Stories Today
