Kenya’s cooperative movement is staring at a historic transformation, with sector leaders deliberating over a proposal to rebrand SACCOs as credit unions, a move described as largely semantic but symbolically weighty in a country where SACCOs remain deeply embedded in the financial lives of millions.
The discussions took place during the Leadership, Ethics and Strategic Governance Forum, a three-day meeting convened by the Cooperative Alliance of Kenya (CAK) under the theme “Leading Through Disruption: The Co-operative Sector Strategic Response at Board and Operational Levels.” The forum brought together chief executives and cooperative leaders from dairy unions, agricultural societies, and deposit-taking SACCOs, serving both as an annual stocktaking exercise and a strategic platform to chart the sector’s future.
Leaders acknowledged that the cooperative movement is navigating a pivotal moment, with legislative reforms and expert recommendations converging to reshape how SACCOs operate, compete, and govern themselves.
ALSO READ:
Why income from SACCO non-core activities should not be taxed
Central to the deliberations was the proposed Cooperative Bill currently before Parliament, alongside findings from a committee of experts appointed last year by Cabinet Secretary Wycliffe Oparanya to review the Sacco Societies Act, 2008.
CAK Chief Executive Officer Daniel Marube urged leaders to embrace a long-term vision. “The sector must begin to define what cooperatives should look like over the next 30 years, even as we assess whether current governance structures remain fit for purpose,” he said.
Sector leaders also weighed proposals to establish a central liquidity facility, a deposit guarantee fund, and a stabilization mechanism, measures which are intended to strengthen resilience in a sector that has at times faced governance challenges and liquidity pressures.
However, leaders cautioned that such mechanisms must remain anchored within the cooperative movement. While recognizing the government’s role in oversight and ensuring a stable operating environment, they warned against ceding operational control of shared liquidity frameworks to external entities.
ALSO READ:
Concerns were also raised over potential regulatory overreach. Provisions that would allow regulators to influence internal matters such as staff lending terms and interest rates drew criticism, with executives warning that excessive intervention could undermine competitiveness and staff motivation.
The prevailing view was that regulators should focus on prudential oversight, such as financial ratios and stability measures, while leaving day-to-day operational decisions to boards and management.
By Masaki Enock
Get more stories from our website: Sacco Review.
For comments and clarifications, write to: Saccoreview@
Kindly follow us via our social media pages on Facebook: Sacco Review Newspaper for timely updates
Stay ahead of the pack! Grab the latest Sacco Review newspaper!
