Tea farmers have threatened to institute contempt of court proceedings against Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA) directors and officers, if they go ahead with election of directors starting December 3 at the various KTDA-run factories, against a High Court order.
While the controversial elections had been stopped by Mombasa High Court after farmers sought to be enjoined as interested parties in a case where the tea auction house, East African Tea Traders Association (Eatta), had taken the Cabinet secretary for Agriculture to court to stop the implementation of new tea regulations, KTDA last week “withdrew” from the case as an interested party, with its lawyers arguing that it is no longer bound by the court orders.
KTDA and Eatta have been tussling with Cabinet Secretary Peter Munya after he was ordered by President Uhuru Kenyatta in January to reform the tea sector and get rid of cartels blamed for the poor pay.
But the gazetting of new regulations was opposed by both Eatta and KTDA which argued that they would kill the sector.
Ironically, farmers have been pushing for reforms after earning yet another low bonus this year, and had sought to be enjoined in the Eatta case against the CS as interested parties. But after the High Court in Mombasa allowed them to join the case, KTDA sought to withdraw and then conduct elections.
But in a rejoinder to the KTDA’s new position, the farmers’ lawyer Patrick Ngunjiri has now written to the law firm representing KTDA — Milimo, Muthomi and Company — warning that “should your client proceed to conduct elections in the tea factories as planned, your client, its directors, and officers shall be liable to contempt of court and shall be personally liable to penal sanction.”
In a letter dated November 26, 2020 the KTDA lawyer had told his client that Eatta “has wholly withdrawn the petition against KTDA (and) consequently, KTDA is no longer a party to the petition case as filled in Mombasa, and any litigations attendant issues therein do not affect KTDA and KTDA will not participate in the said proceedings henceforth,” said the letter.
In Mombasa, Justice Ogola had extended the interim orders to stop the elections and did not address the question of withdrawal arguing that the notice of withdrawal, filed on November 25, had not reached the court file.
“This means that all elections for the tea factories remain suspended until further orders by the court,” says Ngunjiri in his letter.
While KTDA has scheduled the elections to start from December 3 in all tea buying centres and for factory directors on December 4, Mr Ngunjiri tells the KTDA lawyer: “It is clear that your client construes the withdrawal to mean that they are no longer bound by the existing Court orders. This position is an erroneous misrepresentation of the law and blatant attempt to steal a match from other parties.”
The farmers are now telling KTDA that “any withdrawal of a party from a Constitutional petition is judicial process where all parties are heard on the issue and leave granted to any party wishing to withdraw. This allows the Court to determine the juridical effects of the decision to allow the withdrawal.”
The farmers say in their letter that they would rely on a Court of Appeal ruling in Harry Arigi versus Kenya Ports Authority in which it was held that “even where a party has a right to withdraw his suit, the Court has inherent jurisdiction to stop withdrawal if it constitutes abuse of the process of court.”
