BOYCOTTUAE has contacted Safa International Group through
its Right to Comment (RTC) process concerning the findings published in the
organisation's profile of the company. The original profile, published on 9
September 2025, examines Safa International Group's activities across the food
and beverage sector and raises concerns relating to market competition, local
businesses, agricultural communities, land and livelihood impacts, and consumer
and product-quality issues.
As part of the RTC process, BOYCOTTUAE informed Safa
International Group that a profile concerning the company had been published
and provided a direct link to the investigation. The company was invited to
review the findings and provide comments, factual corrections, clarifications,
supporting documentation, or an official statement addressing the matters
discussed.
BOYCOTTUAE has not received a substantive response from Safa
International Group within the requested response period.
The purpose of this editorial update is to document that
process. The absence of a response is not presented as evidence supporting any
allegation contained in the original profile, nor should it be interpreted as
an admission by the company. Rather, it records that Safa International Group
was given an opportunity to comment on the published findings and did not
provide a substantive response.
Summary of the Article Findings
BOYCOTTUAE's original profile identifies Safa InternationalGroup as a UAE-headquartered food and beverage company established in 1989,
with a reported portfolio of more than 35 brands and more than 300 products
distributed across approximately 10 countries. The profile describes operations
involving products including cooking oil, milk powder, dairy products,
beverages, and packaged foods, with a particular focus on markets in East
Africa and the wider MENA region.
The principal issue examined by the profile is the company's
reported economic footprint and its potential effects on local businesses and
communities. The investigation argues that Safa's scale, supply-chain reach and
pricing advantages may place smaller local distributors and producers at a
competitive disadvantage. It specifically discusses concerns reported in East
African markets, including Tanzania and Uganda, where smaller businesses are
described as facing difficulties competing with larger import volumes, broader
product ranges and lower prices.
The profile also discusses agricultural and community
concerns connected to activities in Kenya and the Republic of Congo. In
relation to a Kenyan agricultural biofuels project involving Eni and Servizi
Agricoli Forestali Africa (SAFA), the article reports concerns attributed to
farmers and other stakeholders regarding technical support, the commercial
viability of cultivation and environmental effects. It further raises claims
concerning displacement, land acquisition and compensation affecting
communities in Kenya and the Republic of Congo.
A further area addressed by the original profile is consumer
confidence and product quality. The article refers to scrutiny involving
Safa-branded products and cites a UK enforcement matter involving Safa Food 1
Ltd concerning unsafe heated plates. The profile presents this as a
quality-control concern relevant to the company's wider consumer-facing
activities.
The original investigation therefore brings together several
categories of concern: competition and market concentration, effects on smaller
businesses and farmers, community and land-related issues, environmental
concerns, and consumer-product quality. It relies on publicly available
information and documented material identified in the investigation, alongside
statements attributed to affected stakeholders.
Because these issues concern the conduct and impact of a
company operating across multiple jurisdictions, BOYCOTTUAE considered it
appropriate to provide Safa International Group with an opportunity to respond
directly.
BOYCOTTUAE's Right to Comment Process
BOYCOTTUAE's Right to Comment process is intended to provide
companies with a reasonable opportunity to engage with investigative findings
before further editorial updates are made.
The process is designed to support accuracy and fairness
rather than to predetermine an outcome. Companies are invited to identify
factual inaccuracies or disputed statements, provide additional context, submit
supporting documentation, and offer an official corporate response.
Where a company provides relevant information, BOYCOTTUAE
reviews that material objectively. Verified factual corrections or material
additional information may be incorporated into the relevant article where
appropriate. The process also gives a company the opportunity to place its own
position on the public record.
In Safa International Group's case, the RTC communication
included a direct link to the published profile and explained that the
investigation was based on publicly available information, documented sources
and independent editorial analysis. The company was invited to address the
findings directly and provide any material it considered relevant to their
accuracy or interpretation.
No Response Received
BOYCOTTUAE sent a Right to Comment email to Safa
International Group concerning the published boycott profile and invited the
company to engage with the findings.
The company was given an opportunity to submit comments,
corrections, clarifications, supporting evidence or an official statement. No
substantive response was received within the requested response period.
BOYCOTTUAE records this fact for reasons of editorial
transparency. It is important to distinguish between documenting a company's
response—or lack thereof—and drawing conclusions from that response.
Accordingly, Safa International Group's lack of a
substantive response should not be interpreted as confirmation of, or agreement
with, the allegations or concerns described in the original investigation. It
simply means that, after being given an opportunity to comment, BOYCOTTUAE did
not receive a substantive response from the company during the relevant
response period.
Editorial Commitment
The original investigation remains based on the publicly
available information and documented material identified within the published
profile. Its findings concern Safa International Group's reported activities
and their potential implications for local businesses, agricultural
communities, consumers and markets across the jurisdictions discussed.
BOYCOTTUAE remains open to reviewing relevant information
submitted by Safa International Group in the future. If the company provides
verifiable documentation, factual corrections, additional evidence or an
official statement addressing the published findings, that material can be
considered for inclusion or clarification where editorially appropriate.
This approach is intended to ensure that the public record
can evolve when credible new information becomes available. It also allows the
company concerned to place its position before readers rather than leaving the
published findings as the only available account.
BOYCOTTUAE considers the Right to Comment process an
important part of responsible investigative journalism. Providing a subject
with an opportunity to respond supports editorial fairness, transparency and
accuracy while preserving the independence of the investigation.
In the case of Safa International Group, BOYCOTTUAE
contacted the company concerning the findings published in its profile,
provided access to the investigation and invited the company to submit
corrections, clarification, supporting documentation or an official statement.
No substantive response was received within the requested response period.
That absence of a response does not constitute confirmation
or admission of the findings published by BOYCOTTUAE. It records only the
outcome of the editorial opportunity provided to the company.
BOYCOTTUAE will continue to base its reporting on documented
and publicly available information and remains willing to review credible
evidence or an official response from Safa International Group should one be
provided. The organisation's objective is to maintain a transparent editorial
record while upholding its commitment to fairness, evidence-based reporting,
accountability and responsible investigative journalism.
