Kenya’s largest avocado exporter Kakuzi PLC has 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.
KHRC and Ndura Resource Centre lawyers are expected to inform the court whether they agree to the planned withdrawal, after which the suit will be formally terminated, depending on whether all parties agree on how to deal with the matter of legal costs.
The two lobby groups have been vocal about violence meted out on Murang’a residents neighbouring Kakuzi’s farms in Murang’a. A group of 79 Murang’a residents sued Kakuzi’s parent firm, Camellia PLC in the UK, following investigations by the two lobby groups.
Camellia PLC struck an out-of-court deal with the claimants, and paid them Sh696 million before settling their legal bills.
Despite the move, Kakuzi was insistent that KHRC and Ndura Resource Centre acted maliciously in publicly making accusations but refusing to furnish the multinational with investigation reports on the human rights violations.
Kakuzi was also disgruntled over an article published on the KHRC website after the out-of-court settlement, which accused the company of condoning violence on its farms for decades.
The company says it has more than 3,000 employees, extensive reach to small scale farmers numbering close to 3,000 and 1,300 shareholders.
"Unless the respondents are compelled by an order of the court to correct the untrue and misleading information contained in the article, they will continue to publish it in further violation of the petitioner's constitutional rights," Kakuzi said in the suit.
But the KHRC was adamant that the suit was an attempt to silence several wrongdoings on its 42,000-acre farm.
“Kakuzi continues to welcome a meaningful dialogue with the KHRC, and with the assistance of respected independent third parties, we could collectively explore how the details of these human rights allegations can be shared with the proper authorities and investigated for the benefit of the whole community.
“As an indication of Kakuzi's commitment to this as a way forward, we will withdraw the application. We hope that the KHRC will respond to this proposal positively and in the same spirit by agreeing to our proposal for meaningful dialogue," a Kakuzi spokesperson said.
