Months after a sweeping inquiry was ordered into Afya Savings and Credit Co-operative Society (SACCO), insiders are now speaking out, suggesting that the probe did little to address the deep-seated financial and governance failures that have plagued the organization since 2022, with multiple sources indicating that the delays in action and the timing of the inquiry appear to have shielded former leadership figures with close ties to regulatory authorities from accountability, even as the SACCO struggled under historical mismanagement, opaque financial practices and chronic operational weaknesses that threatened both its stability and the confidence of its members.
From 2022 through early 2024, Afya SACCO was engulfed in escalating fiscal instability, marked by irregular cash withdrawals running into hundreds of millions of shillings, unexplained increases in directors’ allowances, and unrecorded payments, while delegates repeatedly petitioned the Commissioner for Co-operative Development to intervene and implement corrective measures, only to encounter reluctance and inaction during the tenure of the former board, chaired by an associate of the Commissioner, fuelling perceptions that personal connections compromised regulatory oversight and delayed urgently needed reforms.
Following the election of a new chairperson in June 2025, who has undertaken a series of reforms that insiders describe as concrete steps toward stabilising the SACCO and restoring operational integrity, the subsequent government-mandated inquiry, conducted by a team appointed under overlapping mandates, concluded its on-site work without publicly disclosing its findings, prompting delegates to question whether the exercise genuinely sought to investigate the SACCO’s longstanding financial irregularities or whether it functioned as a mechanism to divert attention from the failings of prior leadership, especially as rumours within the organisation suggest that the former chair may have influenced the inquiry to recommend removal of the current board in a bid to obscure her own mismanagement.
Insiders further reveal that Afya SACCO’s governance challenges were compounded by weak oversight, lack of transparency, and delayed regulatory interventions, and while the new leadership has made tangible improvements acknowledged by both members and regulators, the absence of a full forensic audit authorised by the SACCO’s supreme organ, the delegates’ meeting, has left critical questions unresolved about the fate of substantial sums of money and the reasons past mismanagement was allowed to persist, fostering a climate of uncertainty and mistrust among members who continue to rely on the SACCO for their financial security.
The emerging narrative from these insiders paints a picture of regulatory processes entangled with personal loyalties, incomplete investigations, and delayed responses, suggesting that although formal inquiries were conducted under statutory authority, the enforcement of accountability measures remains limited, and delegates fear that without a comprehensive audit and public disclosure of findings, previous leadership failures may remain unexamined, perpetuating vulnerabilities within the SACCO and undermining confidence in its capacity to responsibly manage members’ resources.
“Hello Cyprian. Afya Sacco fruad scandal goes higher up that most may think. Afya sacco had alot of governace issues and financial challenges that are historica. From 2022 to 2023 and early 2024 things got worse. During the said duration, some delegates visited the commissioner of cooperative development to seek solutions on how to revive the sacco and he was reluctant. The chair of board was his kins mate madam mogire. In 2025 June, a new chair of board was elected an she’s evidently turning around the organisation. Quite some positive steps and the delegates and members and even regulator can testify.In October 2025. The commissioner of cooperative development issued a gazette notice of a 21 day inquiry that he wanted to conduct in Afya sacco. He appointed a team with two different appointments drafted. The inquiry team finished onsite and left. Questions : while it’s the right of the commissioner to conduct inquiry, why didn’t he conduct it when he was approached by delegates? Was he then trying to protect his kin who was chairman at the time? Delegates are worried as the commissioner may want to avert a forensic audit ordered by the supreme organ which is the delegates meeting. Is commissioner trying to cover up mismanagement of the former chair that brought the sacco to its knees. The word around is that the former chair is behind the inquiry and they want to recommend removal of the whole board to cover up her deeds.”
