The Senate Committee on Labour and Social Welfare, chaired by Sen Julius Murgor (West Pokot) today heard responses from both law firm Kaplan & Stratton and Advocate Harrison Kinyanjui in an ongoing probe over unpaid compensation to former Kenya Breweries Limited (KBL) employees. The hearing, which follows a previous tense engagement with the Advocates Complaints Commission (ACC), aimed to clarify issues raised in a petition to the Senate brought by 125 aggrieved former KBL staff.

At the outset, Advocate Harrison Kinyanjui raised a preliminary objection, on the grounds that an appeal to this case was coming up for hearing on 2nd May 2025. Citing Senate Standing Order 103, which restricts parliamentary discussion on matters currently before the courts to avoid prejudice. However, the Committee pushed back firmly. Sen Miraj Abdullahi referenced a Speaker’s Ruling of 2nd August 2018, noting that even if active judicial elements are present, the Committee retains discretion on whether to proceed. Sen Gloria Orwoba further reinforced the Committee’s powers under Article 125(1) of the Constitution, affirming their authority to summon and gather information equivalent to that of the High Court.

Sen Beth Syengo supported proceeding with the session, pointing out that the Committee is bound by petition timelines and cannot delay proceedings indefinitely in deference to court schedules.

Kaplan & Stratton, represented by Advocate Peter Gachuhi, opened their submissions by distancing the firm from the central complaints in the petition. Gachuhi emphasized that the core grievances appeared to relate to Advocate Kinyanjui’s handling of client funds and not Kaplan & Stratton.

“We paid the firm of Harrison & Kinyanjui the judgment sum of Kshs. 9,405,541. These amounts were made in full and final settlement and discharge vouchers were duly signed. Those are legal and binding documents,” stated Gachuhi.

However, the Committee pointed out discrepancies. Sen Gloria Orwoba drew attention to the Consent filed and co-signed by Kaplan & Stratton and Harrison Kinyanjui , which referenced Paragraph 14 of the court judgment—a section specifically dealing with withheld refundable deposits, not the one-month salary in lieu of notice referenced in paragraphs 18 and 20 of the ruling.

In a surprising turn, Advocate Kinyanjui acknowledged this distinction, conceding that “the full and final settlement was in respect to the withheld monies.”

This admission raised questions about whether Kaplan & Stratton had indeed fully complied with the judgment. Sen Seki Lenku (Kajiado) noted Gachuhi’s hesitancy and suggested that the Committee could escalate the matter by summoning the CEO of EABL, KBL’s parent company. Gachuhi, in response, requested the Committee to await the outcome of a related court ruling scheduled for 2nd May 2025.

What initially appeared to be a matter of misconduct by Advocate Kinyanjui now points more squarely at Kaplan & Stratton’s failure to fully execute the judgment, especially in regard to the damages for unlawful termination.

The session was characterised by evasiveness with both parties deflecting responsibility while Senators pressed for clarity and accountability.

In terms of resolutions, the Committee directed the Advocates Complaints Commission to follow up with Kaplan & Stratton on the transfer of the outstanding sums to Advocate Kinyanjui for forward transmission to the 125 Petitioners, with a firm deadline of June 2025.