Shareholders in agricultural giant Kakuzi PLC woke up to devastating news on Wednesday morning as the National Land Commission delivered a crushing blow that could wipe out a quarter of the company’s productive landholdings and threaten its entire business model.
The commission has ordered the Nairobi Securities Exchange-listed firm to immediately surrender a staggering 3,250 acres to Murang’a County and vulnerable residents in what it terms a final settlement of historical land injustice claims dating back to the colonial era.
The land grab represents approximately 26 percent of Kakuzi’s total productive estate of 12,229 acres, sending shockwaves through the investment community and raising alarm bells about the future of one of Kenya’s oldest agricultural enterprises.
The timing could not be worse for investors. Kakuzi’s share price tumbled 3.67 percent to Sh400 by midday trading, though remarkably low volumes of just 215 shares suggest many shareholders remain unaware of the full implications of this catastrophic directive.
The company’s two major shareholders, UK multinational Camellia Plc with 50.7 percent and local businessman John Kibunga Kimani holding 33.35 percent, now face the prospect of watching billions of shillings in asset value evaporate overnight.
Kakuzi management issued a defiant statement declaring it will deploy every legal weapon in its arsenal to fight the order.
The company warned that any disruption to its agricultural resources will deliver a material negative impact on operations and earnings, potentially triggering widespread job losses across its estates.
The firm emphasized it has invested heavily in its landholdings and depends entirely on these assets to deliver shareholder value.
The scale of what Kakuzi stands to lose is truly staggering.
According to its latest annual report, the company has meticulously cultivated 1,410 hectares of macadamia, 1,117 hectares of avocado, 1,912 hectares of trees and 510 hectares of tea across its estates.
Losing 3,250 acres would decimate these carefully managed plantations and destroy decades of agricultural investment.
The National Land Commission’s directive follows years of bitter disputes with communities in Murang’a who have accused Kakuzi of illegally acquiring thousands of acres during Kenya’s colonial period.
The commission conducted an exhaustive investigation after receiving petitions from Kenyans claiming they were dispossessed of their ancestral lands.
The NLC’s orders go beyond just land surrender, requiring Kakuzi to hand over 3,200 acres to settle the most vulnerable claimants and an additional 50 acres to Murang’a County Government for public use.
Even more alarming for Kakuzi, the commission has ordered the company to address longstanding community grievances including lack of access roads to schools and other communal facilities.
The national government and Murang’a county authorities have been directed to coordinate implementation, including issuing titles and regularizing settlement schemes within what is currently Kakuzi land.
This represents the latest chapter in an escalating war against major agricultural landowners in Kenya’s fertile Central and Rift Valley regions. Del Monte has already been forced to surrender 1,312 acres to Murang’a County and 697 acres to Kiambu County.
Kakuzi’s sister company, Eastern Produce Kenya Limited, faces similar pressure to cede land from communities in Nandi County where it operates tea plantations.
The parent company Camellia has maintained that these land claims have been repeatedly refuted through Kenya’s legal system, but the NLC appears unmoved by previous court determinations.
In earlier directives, the commission had already ordered that Kakuzi’s leases should not be renewed until historical injustice claims are resolved and that any 999-year leases must be converted to 99 years.
Adding another layer of complexity, some community members living around Kakuzi estates have been strategically buying shares in the company through the Kakuzi Neighbourhoods Development Foundation, which now holds a 2.52 percent stake worth Sh197.7 million at current market prices.
This tactic appears designed to gain access to annual general meetings and other shareholder forums where they can amplify their grievances.
For the roughly 1,400 retail investors who hold the remaining shares in Kakuzi, the situation presents an impossible dilemma.
Daily trading volumes rarely exceed 300 shares, meaning liquidity is extremely limited for anyone wanting to exit their positions before the legal battle plays out.
These small shareholders now find themselves trapped in a company facing an existential threat to its core assets.
Legal experts suggest the fight ahead will be long and expensive. Kakuzi must navigate Kenya’s complex land laws while simultaneously trying to maintain agricultural operations and investor confidence.
The company faces the real possibility that even if it wins in court, the legal fees and operational disruptions could inflict serious financial damage.
The broader implications for Kenya’s agricultural sector are equally troubling.
If the NLC’s orders stand, they will establish a dangerous precedent that could embolden similar land claims against other large commercial farms across the country. Foreign investors in Kenya’s agricultural sector will be watching nervously, knowing their own landholdings could be next on the chopping block.
Kakuzi’s statement that it will use all legal means to preserve shareholder rights suggests a scorched earth legal strategy is coming.
The company has no choice but to fight, as surrendering a quarter of its productive land would essentially destroy the business model that has sustained operations for generations.
As this drama unfolds in Kenya’s courts, Kakuzi investors face an agonizing wait to discover whether their holdings will retain any value or whether they have been caught in an unstoppable wave of land redistribution that will reshape the country’s agricultural landscape forever.
More trouble is brewing for one of the world’s largest tea producers, James Finlay, as 1,300 former tea pickers have now filed fresh suits against the multinational in Scotland seeking compensation for injuries suffered as a result of harsh working conditions.
Behan & Okero Advocates has confirmed the cases have formally been filed in Scotland, and several other workers could follow suit by lodging more claims against the multinational.
The fresh cases have pushed claims against James Finlay to Sh2.614 billion, even as the Kenyan courts hold the keys to a crucial inspection of farms where workers say they suffered injuries.
Behan & Okero Advocates is working with Wales-based Hugh James Solicitors, the law firm that successfully represented coal miners in a £2 billion (Sh301 billion) compensation claim against the Welsh government, and Scotland’s Thompson Solicitors in the Edinburgh cases.
For James Finlay, the cases have opened a can of worms.
Aside from the risk of paying billions of shillings in reparations, the company is staring at potential boycotts in the United Kingdom where multinationals with a Kenyan presence have previously become pariahs on account of human rights abuses.
Last year, Kakuzi PLC was blacklisted by top retail chains in Europe after a group of neighbouring residents sued the multinational’s parent companies for injuries allegedly sustained from vicious assault by guards protecting avocado farms.
Kakuzi lost hundreds of millions after top retailers like Tesco and Sainsbury’s suspended purchase of avocadoes grown in the multinational’s farms in Murang’a.
Seven Kenyans fired the first salvo in the All Scotland Sheriff Personal Injury Court, filing a suit in 2017 demanding that James Finlay Kenya compensates each of them with Sh2 million for injuries suffered on the multinational’s farms in Kericho and Bomet counties.
Elly Okongo Ingang’a, Lucas Onduse Omoke, Vitalis Otieno Muga, Rebecca Okenyuri Nyakondo, Joice Mongare Ochoi, Christopher Owamba Chuma and Gesula Matela Idinga each filed individual cases in Edinburgh, Scotland.
The seven claims filed on May 8, 2017, were test cases, which were to open the door for thousands of other past and present workers to sue James Finlay.
Both sides of the compensation war agreed that Scotland’s courts have the authority to determine the dispute.
James Finlay is enjoying orders barring the inspection until local courts adopt the directions issued by Scottish judge Kenneth McGowan.
But for three years, lawyers representing the claimants have been unable to access James Finlay’s farms to allow experts collect evidence intended for the Scottish cases.
The inspection was barred following a case filed by James Finlay, which has revealed a gap in local laws that could affect other cases in which foreign courts where orders are issued for enforcement in Kenya.
Kenya’s laws only refer to adoption of foreign judgments, or orders issued at the end of a case.
The Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Orders Act does not give direction on how to deal with court orders issued in foreign courts and which are not final in nature.
Kenya’s Supreme Court has now been asked to determine whether there is need to get a local endorsement of foreign orders in instances where both parties have agreed to have a matter determined by judges in other countries.
The seven claimants also want the top court to rule on whether foreign orders issued before the end of a case must be endorsed by Kenyan judges before execution.
The High Court and Court of Appeal have already pronounced themselves on the dispute, ruling that Kenya’s Judiciary must endorse orders issued by its foreign counterparts. The move has now stalled inspection of James Finlay farms, and by extension the cases in Scotland.
On December 18, 2018 Mr McGowan ordered James Finlay to allow a team of lawyers and scientists to inspect farms and collect evidence to be used in the seven test cases.
The inspection was to be done no later than February, 2019.
Kakuzi PLC is a Kenyan agricultural cultivation and manufacture company. Its products include tea, avocados (of which it has been Kenya’s largest exporter), pineapples, and livestock.
In 2019 and 2020, 85 claims were brought in London against Camellia Plc and its subsidiaries, Linton Park Plc and Robertson Bois Dickson Anderson Limited. Those claims were based on allegations of serious human rights abuses against local residents by security guards employed by Kakuzi PLC, a company within the Camellia group based in Kenya.
The legal claims were brought with the support of and in conjunction with the Kenya Human Rights Commission, the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO) and the Ndula Resources Centre.
The Accusations
1. Ten women were raped by Kakuzi’s security guards, including a 16-17 year-old girl who was raped after being caught collecting firewood on the company’s land and another who was violently raped, also after being caught collecting wood, by two guards. Some became pregnant and contracted HIV as a result.
2. A young man was beaten to death by Kakuzi’s security guards in May 2018 for allegedly stealing avocados
3. Men and women were beaten, injured or unlawfully detained by Kakuzi’s security guards, including a man who sustained serious long-term injuries after being kicked in the head by a guard wearing heavy boots
4. Thirty-four men and women involved in a protest on 2 September 2014 were violently attacked by Kakuzi’s security guards, including with a rungu (wooden club)
5. A journalist and cameraman reporting on a protest led by children at Gitutu Secondary School in September 2016 were violently assaulted by Kakuzi’s security guards
The attacks were part of a pattern of systemic violence and intimidation of villagers by Kakuzi guards over many years and which have been documented by local human rights organisations.
The Kakuzi farm occupies land acquired during the colonisation of Kenya by Britain in the early 20th century. It also includes land seized from local communities during the Kenya Emergency (1952-1960) and land sold by European farmers who left Kenya after independence in 1963. Many local communities live on or next to land registered to Kakuzi. Their water sources, paths, roads, and schools are on land registered to Kakuzi.
Kakuzi plc Vs Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC)
In july 2021, Kakuzi PLC asked the High Court to withdraw a suit that the multinational filed against two human rights lobbies that raised the alarm over gross misconduct by the multinational’s security guards and which left several Murang’a County residents physically and psychologically damaged. Kakuzi’s move to withdraw the case caught lawyers representing the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and Ndura Resource Centre off guard, as they sought time to consult with the lobby on whether or not to consent to withdrawal of the case.
The multinational had sued KHRC and Ndura Resource Centre, demanding that the lobbies withdraw claims of human rights violations on the multinational’s Murang’a farms, or provide evidence of the alleged violations by security guards manning avocado and blue gum trees.
The two lobby groups had been vocal about violence meted out on Murang’a residents neighbouring Kakuzi’s farms in Murang’a. Camellia PLC struck an out-of-court deal with the claimants, and paid them Sh696 million before settling their legal bills
Recommended Reforms after out of court settlement.
1. The Companies agreed to the payment of financial compensation to the 85 victims.The sums in question remain confidential to the victims.
2. Kakuzi confirmed that it will develop and implement an Operational-level Grievance Mechanism (‘OGM’) to allow any other allegations of human rights abuses to be resolved fairly and quickly without need to go to court. Triple R Alliance, a leading human rights and OGM consultancy, will review, guide and oversee the OGM.An Independent Monitor will also observe and report on the OGM. The aim is to implement the OGM within 12 to 18 months.
3. The building of three new roads, two of which cross Kakuzi’s land, which will be accessible by motorable vehicle without any requirement to obtain a licence, thereby allowing the communities better access to local amenities and services.
4. The employment of around 30 predominantly female Safety Marshalls on Kakuzi’s farm to give visible reassurance to those using access routes and in particular vulnerable women over the next three years.
5. The establishment of a Technical Working Group to survey and properly demarcate over 150 acres of land which has been previously donated by Kakuzi.Kakuzi will endeavour to complete this survey over the next two years.
6. The funding of charcoal kilns and access to firewood so local communities can produce and sell sustainable charcoal for their own income generation over the next three years.
7. The construction and provision of staff at two social centres for community meetings to be located at Kinyangi and Munyu.
8. The design and implementation of a human rights defenders policy, to be implemented within 12 months.
Shallow reforms.
Britain’s largest supermarket chain, Tesco is yet to reinstate avocado supplies by Kakuzias it presses for compressive human rights reforms by the Murang’a-based agriculture firm.
The British retailer on October 11, 2020 temporarily dropped Kakuzi as its supplier of avocados pending investigations into alleged assault and sexual misconduct by some of its employees. The ban stands nearly a year later.
Tesco pressed for deeper reforms to safeguard the rights of workers and the communities living around the Kakuzi farms.
Through its Kent-based parent Camellia Plc, Kakuzi was sued over the alleged human rights violations by its employees— which it denied. The UK-listed company Camellia owns 50.7 percent of Kakuzi. The Nairobi Securities Exchange-listed Kakuzi recently pledged to accelerate human rights reforms to comply with international standards as aforementioned; employment of a manager in charge of human rights issues, an audit by a global firm on the impact of its operations on human rights, and the establishment of a dedicated operational-level grievance reporting mechanism that will provide multiple avenues through which their employees and the community can raise issues they would like the company to address.
Kakuzi also appointed former Attorney-General Githu Muigai to chair the company’s newly created Independent Human Rights Advisory Committee (IHRAC) that will provide technical advice to the board of directors.
The measures include funding of charcoal kilns and access to firewood, building two social centres for community meetings, and employing predominantly female safety marshalls on Kakuzi’s farm “to give visible reassurance to those using access routes and particularly women.”
Camellia and its local subsidiary are trying to win back the confidence of customers in Europe who value ethical corporate behaviour nearly as much as the quality of produce. The value of avocado supplies by Kakuzi to the UK and other countries in Europe in the half-year period to June this year fell by 52.88 percent to Sh137.2 million from Sh291.2 million in a similar period a year earlier, according to Kakuzi’s latest financial statements.
Resolving of the human rights disputes was to be of importance in Kakuzi’s readmission as a supplier of avocadoes to UK supermarkets, including Tesco that suspended their orders after the alleged abuses which they pleaded guilty by seeking out of court settlement and paid the victims. In early 2021 this year, The parent company of Kakuzi , Camellia Plc, paid Sh696 million to settle claims of alleged human rights abuses perpetrated by employees in its Kenyan agricultural operation.
The amount included payouts to victims of alleged violence and rape as well as remedial investments in the local community in Murang’a County where Kakuzi runs its agricultural business. The multinational also paid Sh348 million to settle similar allegations brought against its Malawian subsidiary, Eastern Produce Malawi (EPM), raising its total spend on the human rights row to Sh1 billion.
UK law firm Leigh Day had initially filed rights abuse claims against Kakuzi in the High Court in London but the assertions were dropped, with the litigation going ahead against Camellia and its subsidiaries Linton Park Plc and Robertson Bois Dickson Anderson Limited. As part of the deal, Leigh Day agreed not to bring or support any further claims against any part of the Camellia Group in connection with their operations in Kenya, “for a substantial period.”
The alleged abuses were carried out by employees of Kakuzi and EPM, including security guards as mentioned before.
Makuyu Golf club land scandal.
Vandalized Makuyu Golf Clubhouse that was abandoned 17 years ago, following land dispute between trustees and management of Kakuzi Limited in Murang’a. [Boniface Gikandi, Standard]In October 2019, Makuyu golf club won the right to manage 72 acres worth millions of shillings that it has been occupying since 1934.
The Environment and Land Court (ELC) sitting in Murang’a gave Makuyu Golf Club rights to the land, ending a protracted dispute with its neighbour, listed agricultural firm Kakuzi Limited.
The ruling by Oscar Angote brought closure to a matter that had been pending before the Nyeri and Thika courts since 2002. The judgement was read on Justice Angote’s behalf by Thika ELC Judge Lucy Waithaka. In his judgement, Justice Angote found that the golf club was formed in 1934 while the agricultural firm acquired thousands of acres of land in the area in 1966.
Angote added that Kakuzi Limited, formerly Kakuzi Fibreland Limited, failed to take possession of the land the club sits on when the firm bought out Sisal Limited, the land’s previous owners.
“I find that the club has acquired the title of the land by adverse possession… by being in possession of the land for a period of more than 12 years from 1934 to date,” read the judgement. The court battle arose after Kakuzi demanded fees for use of the land.
It also demanded to be notified when tournaments were organised and to share in any profits. The club’s trustees told the court the land was donated for use as a golf course by white settlers.
“Based on the evidence before me, I am satisfied that the plaintiff’s use of approximately 72 acres of land as a golf course has been continuous, exclusive and without the permission of the defendant for a period of 12 years,” read the judgement.
“The defendant’s title in respect of the said land has, therefore, been extinguished by effluxion of time.” It also emerged that the clubhouse, which is located on a 17-acre land and is valued at millions of shillings, had been vandalised.
The judge found the land had been used exclusively by club members “and Kakuzi Limited like any other philanthropic member of the society, or as part of its social corporate responsibility mandate”.
Kakuzi’s claims of having assisted in running the golf course were challenged by club officials who told the court they had sunk a 300-metre borehole to maintain the grounds. Kakuzi’s management had sworn an affidavit saying they supplied the club with water from one of their dams and paid the wages of the club’s watchmen.
The company also said they assisted the club with tractors and lawnmowers until their services were terminated in March 1996. Kakuzi’s management had claimed that they were granted a title, LR 11674, for the land in 1966 for a term of 941 years.
Conclusion
At this century and era, it’s unfair that a colonial company still owns such large parcels of land, owns roads and social amenities – violates human rights through assaults and labour slavery. Perhaps the best reform that can be done is land expopriation without compensation. With the action ofTesco, it shows how dumb the reforms are and it is just a matter of time before the cat gets of bag again and their human rights violation reverts back to factory settings as it were before.
Kakuzi and the parent company is a multi-million company and bribing victims , witnesses and media houses is their biggest deal with hopes of getting back onto their feets again. And all these back and forth depends on the government of the day which needs spiritual intervention since the corruption in the Jubilee government is beyond repair to take this matter into consideration, but being hopeful in the relevant authorities is all that’s needed with the push of People’s power. Kakuzi might be economically viable but the glass is already broken.
Kakuzi avocado farm has been holding into every string of hope after their reputation was dented with the expose of historical atrocities that have been documented, continues to grasp for air in desperate bid to win international trust after UK supermarkets that provided their biggest market decided to cut links and boycotted their products.
In March this years, Kakuzi Limited took two lobby groups to court seeking to lift the lid on investigations into rape, killings, and abuses in its expansive farm in Makuyu.
Kenya National Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and Ndula Resource Center (NRC) are said to have investigated the alleged atrocities by Kakuzi guards and which led to a case in the United Kingdom against Camellia PLC, Kakuzi’s parent company.
Although Camellia paid Sh696 million as compensation, Kakuzi in its case says that KHRC’s claims on what allegedly transpired is untrue and should be forced to produce the report of its investigations to the police, or before a magistrate.
Kakuzi says in its case filed before the High Court that it wrote to KHRC and NRC demanding that they either report to the authorities or be forced to admit that they had no evidence to support the claims by 85 people and delete an article published in KHRC’s website.
Those who sued Camellia are 79.
“It is incredulous for the respondents to state that they have been investigating the petitioner for the last 17 years yet no report has ever been disclosed to the petitioner,” the case filed by Kakuzi’s lawyers Kaplan and Stratton reads in part.
“Accusations of killings, rape and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence causing grievous bodily harm, abominable labour injustices, wanton violence, bad corporate governance are extremely serious accusations and must, as of right, be substantiated with sufficient evidence to support the charge before a court of law,” said the lawyers.
Kakuzi denies that there were such crimes happening on its land where it grows among others crops avocados. It argues that if they occurred, then KHRC and NRC are complicit in shielding the perpetrators.
According to Kakuzi, its business has been adversely affected by the claims.
“The only inference that can be drawn from the respondents conduct in refusing to provide the petitioner with the information sought and or in laying a complaint as provided under the law for each and every accusation in the article is false, misleading, and devoid of any evidentiary material,” the case continues to read.
Kakuzi, The Nairobi Securities Exchange (NSE)-listed firm says that it was dropped in the UK case.
In the case, Camellia PLC was accused of turning a blind eye to systematic human rights abuse by Kakuzi Limited employees including rape, killings, attacks, false imprisonment, and mistreatment for a period of 11 years.
The victims’ lawyers Leigh Day, had claimed that Kakuzi security guards have been inflicting unexplained harm to the locals surrounding its plantation.
The 85 victims include Kakuzi former employees, women, and girls who were allegedly raped by the guards after being caught while collecting wood on the company’s land. Some are said to have contracted HIV or became pregnant. They included 10 women and girls, including two who are less underage. A young man was claimed to have been clobbered to death by the guards.
Shortly after the UK case was settled, Kakuzi took the charities that supported alleged victims to court in Kenya.
When contacted last week by The Times and asked whether it was a “vexatious” case designed to silence criticism, Kakuzi suddenly decided to withdraw it.
In Feb 2021, Kakuzi's parent company Camellia PLC, settled claims costing KSH 694 million to 85 victims of violations.
KHRC issued a press statement on Feb 14, in response to the settlement
Kakuzi has now sued KHRC on claims that our allegations of Kakuzi violations are untrue. pic.twitter.com/M0EJuJoRr8
“Corporates are increasingly weaponising the law to burden their critics with the heavy cost of legal defense, to intimidate and silence them until they abandon their criticism. This is the strategy Kakuzi has employed.” Said Mary Kambo, Program manager on trade and Labour justice, Land and resource governance at KHRC.
“This legal strategy is commonly known as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). SLAPPs can be successfully resisted as was recently shown by the South African ruling in Mineral Sands Resources v Reddell where the court recognised the defamation suits as SLAPPs! The SLAPP suit by Kakuzi presents a unique opportunity for our courts to shape jurisprudence on SLAPP suits. Some jurisdictions have passed anti-SLAPP laws to prevent people including corporates from using courts to intimidate and muzzle their critics.“ She aimed at Kakuzi on the filing of the suit.
Such irony that @Kakuzi_Plc, a company accused by communities of killings, rape and assault and whose parent company settled the claims, early this year, to the tune of KSHS. 696 million is now suing @thekhrc for exposing its behaviour. @emilydugan@ItsGeorgeKegorohttps://t.co/A4rEmo57pf
“The Company is acting like a jester! To the extent that its parent Company has agreed to settle the human rights violations claims against it simply shows admission of liability by the Company. A laws suit against the CSOs is not the way to clear its very tainted reputation!” Said Nasanga Aki, Kenyan high court advocate in reaction to Kakuzi’s suit.
“Kakuzi is a corporate bully playing Victim.“ Olang Kolang, an advocate also commented.
On 14th February 2021, the two organizations released a press statement immediately after the compensation news came out and it is the statement that angered Kakuzi who were desperate for a clean image.
The press statement was in reaction to a costly settlement by Kakuzi’s parent company, Camellia PLC, over gross human rights violations alleged to have been committed by one of its subsidiary companies, Kakuzi.
On 11th February 2021, Camellia announced to its shareholders and traders that it would spend up to Kshs. 694 million to settle individual claims as well as pay legal fees for claims of gross human rights violations committed by Kakuzi security guards. These claims had been lodged in the London High Court by Leigh Day, a leading UK law firm that partnered with KHRC and NRC to bring the suit against Camellia. The UK suit comprised of 85 claimants who live around Kakuzi, with claims ranging from killing(s), assault and rape in the hands of Kakuzi guards.
Locally and in its suit, Kakuzi is alleged that KHRC and NRC violated its right to a fair trial under Article 50 of the Constitution and that the statement issued on February 14th is untrue and that it damaged Kakuzi’s reputation and that of its shareholders and partners. Kakuzi sought to compel the KHRC and NRC to withdraw the press statement and issue a public apology.
Further and following the settlement by Camellia, Kakuzi instituted a raft of reparative measures which included (1) funding of charcoal kilns and access to firewood for the local communities to produce and sell charcoal, (2) building two social centres, (3) employing safety marshalls, (4) building three new roads of motorable access by the community without any requirement to obtain a licence from the company as was previously the case (5) establishing of a Technical Working Group to survey and demarcate land which has been previously donated by the company, and (6) designing and implementing a human rights defenders policy. “These measures were not instituted as part of a corporate social responsibility (CSR) programme. They were part of a desperate attempt by Kakuzi to restore its UK market lost in the wake of media reports on Kakuzi’s nefarious behaviour towards its host community and workers.” KHRC said in a statement.
In reaction to the settlement deal, the two human rights groups reiterated that there were pending issues outlined in their February 14th statement that took that to court with the SLAPP suit making the following DEMANDS:
That the Murang’a County Assembly ensures that Kakuzi land leases are not renewed until all claims on historical land injustices are resolved.
Thatthe UK market sustains the current boycott of Kakuzi produce until all pending claims are addressed. We will further initiate an engagement with other Kakuzi markets to boycott any produce coming from Kakuzi until there is demonstrable change in attitude and behaviour on the part of Kakuzi.
That the national Parliament and the Senate immediately investigate Kakuzi on all the pending claims and institute appropriate accountability measures against the company.
That the National Land Commission implements forthwith, its decision of February 2019 directing the surrender by Kakuzi of ALL public utilities on its land including schools, markets, police stations, hospitals, public roads of access, wayleaves and easements to national and county government as appropriate.
Cornered Kakuzi perhaps for fear of more damages to the bad reputation they’ve propagated, are withdrawing the suit.
@Kakuzi_Plc has mastered the art of silencing its critics. The SLAPP suit therefore did not come as a surprise to the @thekhrc and Ndula Resource Centre. We're wondering what has changed now that the company is seeking to withdraw the suit. @ItsGeorgeKegorohttps://t.co/ztovAD9bqO
Even as the firm is cooking its heels, trouble seem to be a committed partner, a recent report by BBC revealed more cases of abuse in the firm.
“I was caught like that and he was catching me here like this. I was taken round. He stood up and stepped on me. He stepped on my neck. He held my neck and turned it around. He covered my mouth while I screamed.” Mudhikwa Musau, 88, lives in a village just a few minutes’ walk from the tree-lined perimeter of Kakuzi’s vast farmland in central Kenya, demonstrated how the assault was carried out.
