Kenya recently announced a new tender for the Mrima Hill rare earth and niobium deposits — a prize long coveted by both the United States and China for its critical minerals.
Yet Chuanshan International Mining Company, once a frontrunner led by Chinese investor Han Ke, has fallen conspicuously behind. Is this due to fierce external competition, or something more insidious — perhaps a bitter corporate infighting? As journalists dug deeper, the truth turned out to be far from straightforward.
A cloud of controversy has engulfed Chuanshan International Mining Company, once hailed as a key player in Kenya’s extractives sector, after startling claims emerged of forged court documents, an alleged faked death, and a coordinated scheme to push out one of its founding directors. Documents reviewed by journalists raise serious questions about corporate governance, the integrity of official processes, and the role of state agencies in what is shaping up to be a high-stakes corporate dispute with international implications.
Mr. Han Ke was once at the center of the firm’s operations in Kenya. A seasoned investor in the mining sector, Han played a pivotal role in establishing the company’s footprint in Baringo County, where he spearheaded the development of the region’s first diatomite processing facility. The project not only opened up economic opportunities but also created jobs and supported community development initiatives among the local Pokot population.
Under his leadership, the company expanded its activities and gained recognition, including participation in the Kwalai Rare Earth Standard Project under Kenya’s Ministry of Mining in January 2024, where it reportedly achieved top performance results. Chuanshan also entered into a Community Development Agreement (CDA) with local stakeholders, with projections of creating up to 1,500 jobs and establishing an industrial park focused on health and manufacturing.
The company’s community engagement efforts were equally visible. In one notable initiative, it donated 160 solar panels and batteries to remote households in Baringo, helping to bridge the region’s energy access gap. Local leaders and residents praised the move as transformative, underscoring the firm’s role in grassroots development.
However, behind this public image of progress and partnership, a bitter internal dispute appears to have been unfolding.
According to documents now in the possession of journalists, the company tried to remove Han from his position as director under circumstances that are increasingly being questioned. Central to the dispute is a court document — referenced as E161/2025 — which purportedly declared Han dead, thereby paving the way for a change in the company’s shareholding structure.
Read the documents Here:
But in a dramatic twist, the Kenya Companies Registration Authority flagged the document as suspicious. Subsequent verification efforts revealed that the alleged death certificate and court ruling were forgeries.
Authorities at Capital Hill Police Station were drawn into the matter, launching investigations to authenticate the documents. Preliminary findings confirmed that the records used to effect changes in the company’s ownership were not legitimate.
The implications of this revelation are profound. Legal experts note that falsifying court documents and declaring a living person dead to alter corporate ownership constitutes serious criminal offenses, potentially involving fraud, conspiracy, and abuse of office. These claims, while yet to be fully substantiated in court, add a troubling dimension to the unfolding saga.
The fallout has already been significant. Chuanshan, once a strong contender for the very rare earth tender announced earlier, saw its advantage evaporate overnight after the forgery scandal became public. The damage to its credibility has severely undermined its operations in Kenya. Industry observers warn that the controversy could also dent investor confidence in the country’s mining sector, particularly at a time when Kenya is seeking to attract more foreign investment.
Government officials who had previously supported the company’s projects, including senior figures from the Ministry of Mining, had emphasized the importance of such investments in driving industrialization and improving livelihoods. The project had been aligned with national development blueprints such as Vision 2030, with expectations that it would transform Baringo into a hub for mineral-based industries.
Now, those ambitions risk being overshadowed by allegations of misconduct and governance failures.
For local communities in Baringo, the uncertainty is palpable. While the company’s projects had promised jobs, infrastructure, and economic growth, the ongoing dispute raises concerns about the sustainability of those benefits. Community leaders have called for transparency and accountability to ensure that development commitments are honored regardless of the corporate wrangles.
For Han, the battle appears far from over. From building a mining enterprise in Kenya to allegedly being declared dead on paper, his case underscores the high stakes and complex power dynamics that can define major investment projects.
What remains clear is that this unfolding scandal has exposed deep vulnerabilities not just within a single company, but within the systems meant to safeguard corporate integrity and the rule of law.
In a bitter satire of corporate malfeasance, a once excellent Chinese-funded company and a Chinese investor were effectively “killed” in Kenya — a damning indictment of both the perpetrators and the victim, while the forger’s actions stand as a blatant provocation to the Kenyan judiciary.
As of press time, Chuanshan had not responded to reporters’ requests for comment.