Safaricom is facing one of the most uncomfortable periods in its recent history, with senior executives leaving, court decisions exposing failures, public contracts attracting questions, customers complaining about services and the company’s old image of dependable management coming under growing pressure.
The latest departure involves Esther Masese Waititu, Safaricom’s Chief Financial Services Officer, who resigned after nearly three years overseeing the financial services division that includes M Pesa, credit products, payments and several businesses carrying much of the company’s future growth.
Waititu joined Safaricom in February 2023 and was placed in charge of the company’s financial services business, giving her direct responsibility over one of the most valuable divisions within Kenya’s largest telecommunications company.
Her resignation was announced on July 20, 2026, with Safaricom confirming that she would leave the company on July 31, bringing her tenure to an end during a period of major changes within its senior management team.
Safaricom appointed Boniface Mungania, the Director of Public Sector Digital Transformation, to take over the financial services office on an interim basis after Waititu’s departure from the company.
The company said Waititu had resigned to pursue other opportunities, and no public evidence has shown that she left after a personal disagreement with Chief Executive Officer Peter Ndegwa or after raising concerns about wrongdoing.
Her exit still carries weight inside the wider Safaricom story, since it follows the departure of other experienced executives connected to M Pesa, strategy and the company’s long term business plans.
Senior executives are leaving Safaricom
Michael Mutiga, Safaricom’s Chief Business Development and Strategy Officer, is leaving the company after Stanbic Bank appointed him its chief executive for Kenya and South Sudan from August 1, 2026.
Sitoyo Lopokoiyit, who led M Pesa Africa from April 2021, left Safaricom on March 31, 2026, after nearly fifteen years within the Safaricom and Vodacom group.
Lopokoiyit had played a major part in the growth of M Pesa across several African countries, making his departure a major loss of knowledge from the business carrying Safaricom’s biggest ambitions outside traditional calls and mobile data.
Waititu’s resignation now means Safaricom has lost another executive from the same broad financial services side of the company only four months after Lopokoiyit completed his exit.
Mutiga’s move to Stanbic removes another senior officer who worked on business development, deals, investment plans and the company’s strategy during a period when Safaricom is spending heavily outside Kenya.
Each executive has been linked publicly to a new opportunity or a personal career decision, and there is no confirmed evidence showing that the three departures resulted from one dispute inside Safaricom.
The timing still leaves shareholders with fair questions about management stability, succession planning and the amount of experience leaving several important offices within a short period.
Safaricom has not published any detailed account showing whether the executives raised concerns about company strategy, government projects, reporting structures, M Pesa plans or spending decisions before choosing to leave.
Esther Waititu controlled a major part of Safaricom’s business
Waititu’s position placed her over financial services at a time when M Pesa has become far more than a simple money transfer service used by customers sending cash between mobile phones.
The division now covers merchant payments, savings, credit, international transfers, business payments and other services that place Safaricom at the centre of Kenya’s financial system.
Her departure requires more than a routine farewell notice, since changes at that level can affect product plans, partnerships, compliance work and the daily management of services used by millions of customers.
Safaricom has not reported any disciplinary case against Waititu, and nothing published so far connects her resignation to corruption, misconduct or an investigation involving the company.
The lack of evidence should stop claims that she was pushed out over wrongdoing, but it should not prevent shareholders from asking why several executives are leaving important offices during the same year.
Safaricom should give shareholders a clear account of how the company plans to replace the experience lost through these departures, particularly within M Pesa and financial services.
The Sh104 billion health technology contract
The management changes are happening during continuing arguments over Safaricom’s involvement in the Sh104 billion health technology contract linked to the Social Health Authority.
The contract involved a Safaricom led group selected to provide an Integrated Healthcare Information Technology System supporting the rollout of Kenya’s new public health insurance programme.
The award was challenged in court by Busia Senator Okiya Omtatah, who questioned the decision to give the contract to Safaricom and two other companies through the procurement process used by the government.
Auditor General Nancy Gathungu later defended findings that raised serious questions about procurement of the system, including the use of a specially permitted method, missing budget arrangements and gaps within documents supporting the deal.
A civil society statement discussing the audit said the procurement had not been budgeted, lacked open competition and did not clearly state the full work or number of health facilities covered under the contract.
The High Court later upheld procurement of the health technology system, finding that the government had lawfully used the specially permitted method, though the court identified gaps concerning transparency and supporting records.
That court decision means it would be wrong to report that Safaricom received an illegal contract after the procurement survived the legal challenge brought against it.
The audit questions remain part of the public record, and the size of the contract still requires clear information about costs, payment arrangements and the duties assigned to every company within the group.
Safaricom has not publicly released enough simple information showing what part of the Sh104 billion relates to its work, how much revenue it expects and which firms will receive payments from the project.
The company’s decision to appoint its Director of Public Sector Digital Transformation as interim head of financial services after Waititu’s exit may attract interest, considering Safaricom’s increasing role in government technology work.
That appointment does not prove wrongdoing, though it shows how closely the company’s financial services and public sector businesses now sit within the same management structure.
Safaricom carries growing influence inside government services
Safaricom already controls the mobile service and M Pesa accounts used by millions of Kenyans, giving the company access to communications and financial systems carrying enormous public importance.
Its growing participation in government technology contracts means the company now earns money from projects connected to public health, digital payments and other services managed using taxpayers’ funds.
That position brings greater responsibility, since Safaricom operates under government licences and regulatory decisions at the same time it competes for large contracts issued by public offices.
The company must show how it deals with any conflict arising from its position as a regulated telecommunications operator, financial services provider and government contractor.
Safaricom’s public statements regularly mention strict controls and compliance with Kenyan law, but large contracts require detailed records that ordinary citizens can examine without depending on public relations statements.
The Sh104 billion figure is large enough to demand publication of the payment model, expected contract period, duties assigned to each partner and the method used to check costs.
High Court ruling exposed SIM swap failures
Safaricom suffered another blow in July 2026 after the High Court upheld a ruling that found the company and Diamond Trust Bank responsible for failures connected to a Sh4.4 million SIM swap fraud.
The customer lost Sh4.4 million after fraudsters took control of her mobile number and accessed her bank account through a series of unauthorised transactions.
The court upheld the lower court’s finding that Safaricom and DTB had separate duties to protect the customer, with Safaricom carrying 60 percent of the blame and the bank carrying 40 percent.
The decision found that Safaricom’s failure during the unauthorised SIM swap created the opportunity used by the fraudsters, with the bank separately failing to stop suspicious transactions from the customer’s account.
The ruling matters far beyond one complaint, since a Safaricom line can provide access to M Pesa, banking applications, email accounts, social media pages and services using mobile numbers for security checks.
Kenyan customers have raised SIM swap complaints for years, with many victims struggling to receive compensation after telecommunications companies and banks blamed each other for losses.
The High Court decision places part of that responsibility directly on Safaricom, showing that mobile companies cannot treat an unauthorised replacement as a minor mistake after the new SIM card opens access to financial accounts.
Safaricom has not released recent figures showing the number of SIM swap complaints received, the number linked to employees or agents and the value of losses reported by customers.
Those figures would help customers judge whether the court case involved an isolated failure or a wider weakness within the process used to replace and register SIM cards.
Data privacy complaints have damaged trust
Safaricom has faced public questions over customer privacy and the procedures followed when government agencies request telephone records, location information or subscriber details.
Human rights groups have asked the company to explain its handling of customer information in cases connected to suspected abductions, arrests and state investigations.
Safaricom has denied handing over customer data outside the law and has said it follows the legal process required before sharing protected subscriber information.
The company still holds some of the most sensitive information belonging to Kenyan citizens, including phone records, locations, identification details and M Pesa transaction histories.
Trust around that information depends on records showing how many requests are received from public bodies, how many carry court orders and how many are rejected for failing to meet legal requirements.
Safaricom does not publish a detailed yearly report giving those numbers, leaving customers without a clear picture of how often state agencies ask for their information.
Major technology and telecommunications companies in other markets publish such reports without exposing active investigations, meaning Safaricom can provide similar information without releasing the names of customers.
Service complaints remain common
Safaricom continues reporting strong customer numbers and revenue, but daily complaints about mobile data, failed transactions, poor connections and customer care remain common across social media.
Customers often complain that data bundles end faster than expected, internet connections become unstable and support channels provide repeated answers without solving the reported problem.
M Pesa outages create wider problems since traders, workers and families depend on the service for payments, transport, food purchases, bills and access to emergency money.
Safaricom usually issues service notices when major failures occur, though the company rarely publishes full reports stating what caused an outage and what was done to stop a repeat.
The limited number of strong competitors means many customers remain on Safaricom after poor service, since leaving the network can create difficulties when most relatives, customers and businesses use M Pesa.
That market position allows Safaricom to keep earning from users who may be unhappy but lack a practical replacement offering the same wide network of agents and merchants.
M Pesa agents are earning less
M Pesa agents have played a central part in Safaricom’s success by providing cash deposits, withdrawals, registration services and daily support across towns and villages.
Recent reporting showed that growth in the number of agents had pushed average commission earnings lower, creating pressure for small businesses paying rent, staff wages and security costs from shrinking income.
Safaricom benefits when more M Pesa shops open since customers gain easier access, but each new outlet can reduce the number of transactions available to existing agents within the same area.
The company has continued earning large sums from M Pesa transactions, leaving agents to carry cash handling risks and running costs that can make their outlets harder to maintain.
Falling average commissions can push some agents to close, cut staff or depend on other businesses to cover the cost of running an M Pesa outlet.
The Ethiopia business remains expensive
Safaricom has spent heavily on its entry into Ethiopia, where the company entered a market requiring a new network, customer recruitment, staff and wide investment in equipment.
The Ethiopian business remains a long term project, meaning profits from Kenya continue supporting costs connected to the company’s growth outside its home market.
Safaricom has reported customer growth in Ethiopia, but investors still require clear information about when the business will begin producing steady returns after years of heavy spending.
The company must continue investing in its Kenyan network at the same time, since customers at home should not receive poorer services as more money and management attention go into Ethiopia.
Executive departures from strategy and financial services carry extra weight during this period, since those offices are closely connected to spending decisions and future returns from Safaricom Ethiopia.
Profits have not ended the questions
Safaricom remains one of Kenya’s biggest and most profitable companies, meaning none of the current controversies show that the business faces an immediate financial collapse.
Strong profits can still exist alongside poor customer experiences, management departures, court losses and public questions about contracts involving large amounts of money.
M Pesa remains deeply rooted in daily life, giving Safaricom stable income and protection from problems that would cause customers to abandon a smaller company.
The company’s size has created a position where service failures can continue without causing a large or immediate fall in its customer numbers.
Shareholders should judge Safaricom using profits, management stability, court cases, customer complaints, data protection and the performance of investments made outside Kenya.
The departure of Esther Waititu does not prove a corruption scandal or confirm a fight inside the company, but it adds another senior exit to a year already marked by management changes.
Michael Mutiga’s departure for Stanbic and Sitoyo Lopokoiyit’s exit from M Pesa Africa mean Safaricom has lost three experienced executives connected to strategy and financial services during 2026.
Safaricom must explain how their responsibilities will be filled, what experience remains within the affected teams and whether current projects will continue without delays or management gaps.
Peter Ndegwa faces a difficult period
Peter Ndegwa has led Safaricom since April 2020, overseeing the Ethiopia entry, growth of financial services and deeper participation in large government technology projects.
His time in office has produced major business growth, though the company now carries a longer list of public disputes than the one he inherited.
The Sh104 billion health technology contract has faced audit questions and a court case, the High Court has upheld liability against Safaricom in the SIM swap dispute and experienced executives are leaving major offices.
Ndegwa and the board must deal with those issues using records and direct answers rather than broad statements about growth, purpose and company values.
Shareholders need facts explaining executive departures, the costs connected to public projects, losses arising from fraud cases and the steps taken after courts find failures within company systems.
Customers require clearer information about outages, data use, SIM replacement controls and the handling of complaints that can leave them without money or access to their accounts.
Safaricom’s old image is weakening
Safaricom once enjoyed an image of dependable service, disciplined management and professional conduct that placed it above most Kenyan companies in the eyes of customers.
That image has weakened as service complaints, data privacy fears, court cases, expensive government projects and executive departures become a larger part of the company’s public record.
The resignation of Esther Waititu may turn out to be a normal career move, though its timing means it cannot be separated from the wider management changes taking place across Safaricom.
The company remains rich, dominant and profitable, but those strengths do not erase questions about internal stability and the quality of services offered to customers.
Safaricom’s condition should be measured through hard facts rather than claims that the company is collapsing or statements from management suggesting that everything remains perfect.
The hard facts show three important executives leaving during 2026, a Sh104 billion public contract carrying audit questions, a court decision placing 60 percent responsibility on Safaricom in a Sh4.4 million fraud case and continuing public complaints about customer service.
Those facts describe a company facing growing pressure at the same time it remains one of the strongest businesses operating in Kenya.
Safaricom can stop the damage by publishing more information about executive exits, public contracts, SIM swap complaints, data requests and service failures.
Silence will leave customers and shareholders filling the missing details with rumours, particularly after another senior executive walks away from one of the company’s most valuable divisions.
