A former journalist’s bid to have the court order the Media Council of Kenya pay him for alleged defamation and slander.
In the ruling, Siaya resident magistrate, Jacob Punga Mkala also ordered the former journalist, Josiah Odanga to bear the cost of the suit that he filed on 24th May, 2024.
Delivering the judgement virtually, magistrate Mkala noted that the plaintiff, Odanga, did not make a case against the defendant on a balance of probability. “From the analysis of evidence placed before me, it is my holding that the plaintiff has not made out a case against the defendant on a balance of probability” said the magistrate adding “having considered the evidence and the case laws presented before me, and having found that the plaintiff has failed to prove his case on a balance of probability, I find the only order commending itself is that of dismissal of the suit”.
Odanga, formerly of The Star newspaper based in Siaya, had sued the MCK seeking a permanent injunction directed to the media regulatory body from defaming, or in any way slandering or publishing any defamatory or untrue statements against him.
He sought for general damages for slander, exemplary damages for defamation; aggravated damages for defamation and costs of the suit.
In his plaint, Odanga said that the defendant, MCK, issued a press statement on 23rd January, 2024 condemning him over an alleged unbecoming behaviour following a fight involving him and other colleagues on 20th January, 2024 during a function at Karariw primary school in Gem constituency and that the statement did not underscore that the matter was under investigation by the police.
He further stated that the defendant issued a second press statement on 25th January, 2024 stating that he (the plaintiff) had engaged in a fight for handouts and the defendant proceeded and cancelled his journalism license leading to his suspension from duty. However, the defendant, MCK, denied the allegations that it defamed him and averred that the said press statement was issued after all the parties involved in the incidents were interrogated and their views recorded, thereby validating the facts as stated by the parties themselves.
“The press statement was limited only to the conduct of the plaintiff and his accomplices in line with their roles as media personalities. Any such misconduct in their line of duty is therefore subject to the defendant’s scrutiny and sanction” MCK told the court adding “The defendant could not and cannot therefore issue press statements on the findings of police investigations as it is not the police spokesperson”
The media council further told the court that under section six of the media council Act (Cap 411B), it is mandated to develop and regulate ethical and disciplinary standards for journalists, media practitioners and media enterprises and to facilitate resolution of disputes between the government and the media, between the public and the media and intra media among others.
The MCK said that the statements were justified and were issued after interview and interrogation of all the parties involved in the incident and were not defamatory in nature.
In his judgement, magistrate Mkala said he had considered both statements by the defendant, the press statement issued on 23rd January, 2024 which offered a condemnation of the fighting incident that occurred and assured the public that investigation was ongoing.
“Even though the plaintiff alleges that he was defamed, a look at this statement does not appear to this court defamatory in any way” said Mkala adding “it condemns fighting between journalists that had occurred. It therefore refers to a true event that occurred and neither does it mention any name of a journalist and specifically the plaintiff.
The magistrate further said that in the plaintiff’s statement, he admits fighting with some colleagues.
“The plaintiff cannot therefore claim defamation when the defendant states the obvious” said the magistrate.
Mkala further said that the second press statement by the MCK communicated the decision of the council to suspend the three journalists involved in the fighting.
“Among other reasons for the suspension was the issue of fighting for handouts. This is what the plaintiff alleges was defamatory to him” said Mkala adding “at paragraph 42 of the plaint, the plaintiff admits to having been questioned about the issue of handout and having admitted to the defendant that the issue of handout is not uncommon in journalism, having admitted so, he cannot then turn around to claim to have been defamed”.
He said that the defendant, MCK, in their press statement, were just making reference to what the plaintiff had admitted.
by Philip Onyango
