Association digs in over tea rules
Workers at Empire Kenya tea packing the product for auction and export in this picture taken early this month. The East African Tea Trade Association (EATTA) has challenged the implementation schedule for the tea sector reforms published by Agriculture Cabinet Secretary Peter Munya.
What you need to know:
- EATTA, which manages Mombasa tea sale, wants a declaration that the Crops (Tea Industry) Regulations Implemention Schedule published by the CS on August 3 and advertised in a local daily, were issued in a manner that is inconsistent with provisions of the Constitution hence null and void.
- The association also argues that the rules are a subsidiary legislation, which requires approval from the National Assembly prior to enactment as per the Statutory Instruments Act.
- The association, which has sued the CS, Agricultural and Food Authority and the Attorney General, says it is aggrieved by the regulations in view of the fact that there are consequences of not stopping respondents from implementing them.
The East African Tea Trade Association (EATTA) has challenged implementation schedule for the tea sector reforms published by Agriculture Cabinet Secretary Peter Munya.
EATTA, which manages Mombasa tea sale, wants a declaration that the Crops (Tea Industry) Regulations Implemention Schedule published by the CS on August 3 and advertised in a local daily, were issued in a manner that is inconsistent with provisions of the Constitution hence null and void.
In its petition at the High Court in Mombasa, EATTA says the CS did not engage it and other stakeholders before coming up with a compliance schedule, and that its publication contravenes the Constitution, which requires public participation and consultation in governance.
The association also argues that the rules are a subsidiary legislation, which requires approval from the National Assembly prior to enactment as per the Statutory Instruments Act.
It says approval from the National Assembly was not sought thus making the regulations and Mr Munya's publication of compliance timetable illegal from the start.
"In the circumstances, in view of the absence of parliamentary scrutiny of the regulations,the compliance timetable is void ab initio (from the start)," argues EATTA in its suit papers.
Double regulation of tea growers
The association, which has sued the CS, Agricultural and Food Authority and the Attorney General, says it is aggrieved by the regulations in view of the fact that there are consequences of not stopping respondents from implementing them.
It has named the Kenya Tea Development Agency Holdings as an interested party in the suit.
The association accuses the CS of not considering negative implications (of the regulations) saying he was merely concerned with government involvement in the tea sector through issuance and implementation of oppressive and costly directives without caring whether the stakeholders will be able to meet costs to be incurred.
EATTA, which comprises producers, buyers, brokers, tea packers and warehouse across 10 countries in Africa argues that it will be rendered jobless through interference of functions and with no source of income due to the effects of the regulations.
"The regulations will cause double regulation of tea growers, processors and organisations in the tea industry that are operating as cooperative societies," says the association in its petition.
It claims the regulations will be an unnecessary burden on the society as they introduce no new benefits in the regulatory framework of the tea industry.
"The regulations add no value to the governance of the tea industry and should either be withdrawn or amended radically to incorporate measures highlighted," argues EATTA.
Quash the implementation schedule
It says if the rules are withdrawn, the association will not suffer since similar measures as proposed in the regulations are already in place under the Crops Act and the Agriculture and Food Authority Act.
According to EATTA, restricting a registered broker to offer tea brokerage services to a maximum of 15 factories at the auction with no basis is an oppressive trade practice.
It says small and medium sized enterprises constitute the majority of tea buyers and will be mostly affected by the performance bond regulations.
"By virtue of the petitioner comprising 200 members from 10 countries across Africa, the immediate implementation of these regulations before proper consultations with tea stakeholders will result in individual countries setting up their own auction centres," EATTA says in its petition.
It also wants the court to quash the implementation schedule for being null and void and also wants an order issued compelling the CS and Agricultural and Food Authority from implementing the Crops (Tea Industry) regulations 2020.
The tea traders want an order issued restraining the CS from arbitrarily issuing further publications or circulars regarding the Crops (Tea Industry) Regulations 2020 which is yet to be acceded in Parliament.
****
Bone of contention
According to EATTA, restricting a registered broker to offer tea brokerage services to a maximum of 15 factories at the auction with no basis is an oppressive trade practice.
It says if the rules are withdrawn, the association will not suffer since similar measures as proposed in the regulations are already in place under the Crops Act and the Agriculture and Food Authority Act.
