By Ebi Kesiena
The Kenyan Government has suffered a major setback after the Court of Appeal dismissed an application to allow the importation of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) food into the country, saying that the appeal lacks merit.
Recall that the government lifted the decade-old ban on GMOs in 2022, in response to the biting drought that has hit the country, leading to food insecurity and livestock deaths.
The three-judge bench led by Justice Mohammed Warsame, Ali Abida Aroni and John Mativo threw out the appeal by the state which sought to overturn a ruling by the High Court, suspending the importation of GMO crops.
Although, the Kenya Peasants League, a lobby group representing peasant farmers, had moved to court to challenge the plan, legal counsel stressed that GMO products pose a health risk to Kenyans, particularly the poor and those with low incomes.
“The Applicant decries the manner in which such a major declaration on the importation and cultivation of GMO maize was never subjected to public participation, neither are the contents of reports, if any, that preceded the making of the said decision been subjected to public participation of stakeholders,” they argued in court documents.
Lawyer Paul Mwangi who was also a petitioner in the case argued that lifting the ban on the importation of GMOs violates the right of the people of Kenya to fair administrative action.
The High Court agreed with the petitioners and stopped importation of GMO products. However, the State through the Attorney General, Justin Muturi, moved to the Court of Appeal in February, seeking to overturn the verdict of Justice Mugure Thande.
In his appeal, the AG Justin Muturi cited public interest in seeking to have the ban lifted.
He told the court that the body mandated to regulate and research Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) continues to suffer paralysis in service delivery as a result of the order.
However, the Appellate court agreed with the farmers and declined to lift the ban, stating that the appeal does not meet the test of public interest.
“The public interest test was not meant to stand alone or replace either of the two tests”, the Judges stated.
“In the end, we find no merit in the application as the applicants did not satisfy us on all the three limbs”, the Court ruled.
