Inside Citibank’s Legal Battle to Shield Its Kenya CEO from the DCI

By Emmanuel Korir

A controversial tea-factory loan approved amid a bitter boardroom power struggle has drawn Citibank into a courtroom battle with Kenya’s top detectives, who want to question the bank’s chief executive over how millions of shillings were borrowed on behalf of Kiru Tea Factory.

Citibank has initiated legal proceedings to prevent Kenya’s top detectives from interrogating its CEO in a criminal investigation tied to a disputed loan for Kiru Tea Factory.

At the heart of this case is a question that could have ramifications extending beyond just one tea producer: did the officials who secured the loan possess the legal authority to commit the factory to this debt and did the bank conduct sufficient due diligence before approving the loan?

Citibank’s Kenyan branch has filed a petition seeking court orders to prevent the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI), the Attorney-General and the Director of Public Prosecutions from summoning, arresting, charging, or compelling its CEO, referred to in court documents as Mr. Mugambi, to provide a statement regarding the investigation.

A judge has already issued temporary orders halting the DCI from taking any action against the bank and its CEO while the case is being resolved.

The dispute centers around a credit facility granted to Kiru Tea Factory during a period of significant division within its board. Reports suggest that this conflict escalated into a leadership struggle, resulting in two rival annual general meetings held just days apart, with each faction asserting its right to represent the factory.

This timing has now become a focal point of the investigation.

Detectives are examining whether the individuals who approved and signed off on the loan had the authority to bind Kiru Tea Factory to this debt. They are also investigating whether Citibank performed the necessary checks before releasing the funds.

The investigation has evolved from merely asking questions to actively collecting evidence. On June 18, 2026, the DCI obtained search warrants from a Nairobi magistrate’s court, requiring Citibank to provide banking records related to the facility and transfers made between March and December 2021. The requested documents include account statements, records of account openings, real-time gross settlement payment records and instructions, as well as copies of board resolutions that investigators allege authorized the borrowing.

Court documents indicate that some funds transferred from Kiru Tea Factory accounts were deposited into an account associated with Litein Factory Company Ltd. This particular transaction has added complexity to the investigation as detectives strive to trace the flow and ultimate destination of the funds.

For Citibank, this case presents a significant challenge to its internal lending controls. Investigators have expressed concerns regarding what the court filings describe as the bank’s alleged “negligent acceptance of a credit application.” This allegation remains part of an ongoing investigation and has not yet been conclusively resolved by a court.

The bank is attempting to protect its chief executive from being directly implicated in the investigation while the legal battle over the probe’s scope continues. The stakes are considerable. Citibank has been a prominent player in Kenya since 1974 and is one of the country’s leading corporate banking institutions. Last year, the bank reported a profit of Sh6.5 billion and repatriated Sh10.5 billion to its parent company in 2025, as highlighted in the court documents.

A criminal investigation that extends into the office of a multinational bank’s top local executive is more than just a dispute over a single loan. It raises critical questions about the responsibilities of lenders when dealing with companies caught up in internal leadership conflicts and the extent to which investigators can go when they suspect corporate wrongdoing.

Currently, the interim orders have paused the DCI’s actions against the bank and its CEO. Nevertheless, the investigation remains active. The upcoming full hearing will determine if detectives can proceed with questioning Mr. Mugambi and whether Citibank’s challenge to the investigation will be upheld. Meanwhile, the main players are in a tense standoff: a tea factory embroiled in a boardroom power struggle, a global bank steadfast in its lending practices, and investigators striving to unravel the chain of authority behind a loan that is now under scrutiny. The next significant development will take place in the courtroom.