Citibank Kenya has mounted a major legal battle at the High Court in Nairobi in a determined bid to shield its staff from aggressive criminal investigations surrounding a $2.02 million (approximately KSh 261 million) credit facility extended to Murang’a-based Kiru Tea Factory Company Limited.
The international financial institution has filed a constitutional petition seeking urgent conservatory orders to restrain state security and investigative agencies from summoning, arresting, interrogating, or initiating criminal proceedings against its officers over the approval, processing, and subsequent disbursement of the multimillion-shilling loan.
The Heart of the Financial Dispute
At the core of this escalating legal showdown is a state-backed inquiry into alleged financial improprieties, procedural irregularities, and potential regulatory breaches that took place during the structuring and execution of the credit transaction.
Investigative agencies have trained their spotlight on the lender, seeking to establish whether bank executives failed to execute mandatory due diligence during the credit evaluation process or knowingly overlooked key risk indicators before releasing the funds to the tea processing firm.
The probe into the transaction forms part of a broader, high-stakes investigation centering on former Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA) National Chairman Chege Kirundi.
Kirundi’s long-standing involvement and management decisions at Kiru Tea Factory have been under sharp scrutiny from law enforcement authorities, regulatory bodies, and local tea farmers who have raised concerns over corporate governance standards, financial management, and the operational integrity of the facility.
State detectives allege that the credit facility may have been approved under dubious circumstances, bypassing statutory approvals and internal corporate governance frameworks designed to safeguard factory assets and smallholder tea farmers’ interests.
Citibank Cites Constitutional Violations
In its court filings under petition HCCHRPET/E373/2026, Citibank strongly defends its commercial operations, maintaining that the loan was a legitimate banking transaction executed in the ordinary course of commercial lending.
The lender contends that the aggressive tactics deployed by state investigators constitute a heavy-handed abuse of police powers and cross constitutional boundaries.
Lawyers representing the bank argue that attempts to harass bank officials, force them to record incriminating statements, or threaten them with immediate prosecution infringe upon vital constitutional rights.
According to the petition, the state’s actions violate fundamental protections, including the right to fair administrative action, equal protection before the law, access to critical information, and the right to protection of property and reputation.
Legal counsel for Citibank contends that standard commercial lending decisions, which are governed by valid contractual agreements and civil banking laws, should not be weaponized or criminalized by state agencies without concrete evidence of fraud or criminal intent.
The bank warns that allowing state law enforcement to arbitrarily interrogate credit officers over routine risk assessments sets a dangerous and disruptive precedent for the entire Kenyan banking sector.
Seeking Permanent Court Orders
Citibank is asking the High Court to issue a permanent injunction that would effectively bar all investigative agencies, the Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI), and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) from pursuing its employees or compelling them to undergo police interviews regarding the Kiru Tea Factory transaction.
The application presents a complex legal challenge for the High Court, forcing judges to weigh the state’s legitimate mandate to investigate white-collar crime and protect public funds against the constitutional rights of corporate entities and their personnel.
As tea sector stakeholders watch closely, the court’s decision on whether to grant conservatory orders will determine whether investigators can proceed with questioning top bank personnel or if the dispute will remain locked in constitutional litigation for months to come.
Drop Your Comments, What do you think About The Article?