The Chair, Members of the Management Board, Supervisory Board, fellow shareholders, and attendees, good afternoon
My name is Dr. Harun Warui, and I speak today as the Lead Coordinator for Agroecology and Food Rights at the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Nairobi Office. I am here as an authorised representative to address the topic:
“Highly Hazardous Pesticides in Africa – A Crisis of Responsibility.”
Although this topical issue has been raised in the previous session here, I wish to bring to your attention that
As of December 31, 2024, Kenya has taken a landmark decision-withdrawing eight pesticide active ingredients officially classified as Highly Hazardous Pesticides (HHPs). This decision was driven by a parliamentary initiative and informed by scientific reviews conducted by Kenya’s Ministries of Agriculture and Health, alongside civil society engagement. It is a public health and environmental protection measure grounded in both evidence and experience-particularly the experiences of small-scale farmers, who make up the majority of Africa’s agricultural producers and who are disproportionately impacted by harmful agrochemicals.
Kenya’s move is not an isolated case – it is a forerunner of regional and global change. Across Africa, a rise of regulatory momentum is forming. Civil society, scientists, and government bodies are aligning to demand agricultural systems that nourish people, preserve ecosystems, and do no harm.
In this context, I ask:
What is Bayer’s vision for agriculture in the Global South, now that a shift away from HHPs is is at the horizon?
Among the active ingredients now banned in Kenya is Thiacloprid, sold by Bayer. It was withdrawn based on documented risks- that is reproductive toxicity, probable carcinogenicity, and severe ecological harm – particularly to bees, which are major pollinators in our food systems.
This brings me to a deeper question:
What does Bayer’s concept of “responsible innovation” truly represent, when it has profited from compounds like Thiacloprid – with global sales reaching approximately 3 billion Euros by 2014-and continues to market Imidacloprid and Glyphosate in Kenya, both of which are facing increasing restrictions and bans around the world due to their human health and environmental impacts?
Is this not the time for Bayer to lead in a different direction – toward products and systems that reflect the evolving global consensus on sustainability, equity and public safety?
- Is Bayer actively investing in agroecological innovation, farmer-led solutions, and non-toxic alternatives that prioritize human and environmental health?
Bayer invokes the ideal of food security under the motto of Food for all – Hunger for none. But how secure is food when the people who grow it are exposed to chemicals that impact negatively on their health, contaminate their soils and environment, and compromise their future?
And finally:
What does “Science for a better life” mean if it only applies selectively— depending on geography, regulatory environment or the level of public scrutiny?
In closing, I urge shareholders to seriously consider the concerns raised here today when deciding whether to approve the actions of the Board of Management and Supervisory Board.
I respectfully call on you to instead support the counter-motions put forward by the Coordination Against Bayer Dangers.
Thank you for your attention.
