The High Court in Eldoret has halted the movement or spending of donor funds tied to a KSh 20 billion climate resilience project, as a bitter dispute unfolds between the original local implementing partner and an international financier over who controls the initiative.
- •At the heart of the case is the Green Planet Initiative 2050 Foundation, an NGO that was initially tasked with leading the Regeneration Kenya Project; which is an ambitious program to restore over 70,000 hectares of land across four counties.
- •The foundation accuses Swedish company Earthbanc AB and its local subsidiary, EarthTree Company Limited, of illegally sidelining it and rerouting donor funding without proper termination of the original agreements.
- •The court ordered that all disputed funds be placed in an interest-bearing escrow account, jointly managed by both parties’ lawyers, freezing the money while litigation continues.
“To preserve the subject matter of this substantial commercial dispute and ensure that justice can be meaningfully administered, it is necessary to impose interim measures that maintain the status quo without prejudicing either party’s ultimate rights,” Justice Reuben Nyakundi ruled.
Green Planet claims it spent years building community relationships and laying the groundwork for the project. It alleges that once the money began flowing, it was abruptly cut off and replaced by EarthTree; an entity it argues was created by Earthbanc to take over operations and finances. The foundation maintains that its bank accounts were bypassed, employees poached, and donor goodwill exploited.
Earthbanc has countered that Green Planet lacked the capacity to deliver on the project’s scale and that the transfer of operations, including funding, was a necessary shift to maintain momentum and ensure completion. It further claims the payments to Green Planet were not donor disbursements but subcontractor fees paid from its own working capital.
What began as a reforestation mission now risks becoming a high-stakes standoff over control of a multi-billion shilling climate fund. With donor confidence, public interest, and environmental goals on the line, the court’s directive to preserve the funds underscores the weight of the controversy.
As the project remains in limbo, the case is set for pre-trial hearings on June 24, with the escrow order expected to remain in place until the dispute is fully resolved.
