County by CountyCourt ReportingInsightPress Freedom

Journalist Wins Sh 3 Million in Defamation Lawsuit Against Media Council of Kenya

Court's Ruling Against MCK Sparks Debate on Jurisdiction, as Experts Argue Journalist Misconduct Investigations Belong to the Media Complaints Commission

Siaya Oct 10 – In a shocking turn of events, a Kenyan journalist has won a landmark defamation case against the very media regulator meant to protect the rights of journalists. Josiah Omolo Odanga, accused of soliciting bribes, was publicly vilified by the Media Council of Kenya in statements that the court ruled destroyed his career and reputation. But in a dramatic court victory, Odanga has been vindicated, with the court ruling that MCK’s actions were not only defamatory but malicious, awarding him a hefty Ksh 3 million in damages and setting a precedent for media accountability.

Odanga, who was a journalist for the Star newspaper (Radio Africa Group), filed a lawsuit against the MCK due to press statements issued on January 23 and 25, 2024. These statements accused him of unprofessional conduct, specifically alleging that he solicited bribes in exchange for favorable news coverage. These accusations, which were published widely, led to the suspension of his journalism accreditation and caused significant damage to his professional reputation.

The accusations stemmed from an incident in Karariw Primary School Gem Constituency, where Odanga was covering a public event presided over by the area Member of Parliament Odhiambo Elisha Ochieng. During the function, tensions escalated between local leaders and some journalists, resulting in a physical attack on Odanga by an unidentified group.

Media Council of Kenya is training journalists and media practitioners across Kenya on elections reporting. Photo courtesy MCK

The Media Council, in its subsequent press releases, linked the altercation to alleged unprofessional conduct on the part of Odanga, suggesting that his involvement in the event was fueled by unethical practices. These allegations were given credence due to the council’s authority over media regulation in Kenya, leading many in the industry and the public to believe the accusations without further scrutiny, the court heard. MCK also suspended the accreditations of George Amolo from Royal Media Services (Ramogi), and Mary Goretty Juma from Mediamax Network (K24) for their alleged involvement in a public altercation at the Council’s Kisumu offices.

The press releases, published widely in both print and digital media, damaged Odanga’s standing within the journalism community and with potential employers, Odanga’s lawyers argued. His efforts to seek redress through MCK were met with silence. The council refused to retract its statements or issue an apology, despite Odanga’s repeated requests, pushing him to file a defamation suit.

Odanga’s legal suit argued that the Media Council’s statements were not only false but were issued with malice. He claimed that the council failed to conduct a proper investigation before publicly accusing him of unethical conduct. The lawsuit demanded that MCK retract the defamatory statements, apologize publicly, and compensate him for the damage done to his career and reputation.

The legal team representing Odanga emphasized that the press releases lacked factual backing and that the council’s statements were based on hearsay. They argued that by issuing the statements before the conclusion of any investigations, MCK acted irresponsibly, violating Odanga’s rights to a fair hearing and due process.

Key to Odanga’s argument was the testimony of Lameck Kevin Baraza, a fellow journalist who witnessed the effects of the defamatory publications. Baraza testified that after the statements were published, many of Odanga’s colleagues and employers began to view him with suspicion, drastically affecting his ability to secure work. His reputation as a trustworthy and ethical journalist was in tatters, and his professional relationships deteriorated.

The Kenya National Commission for UNESCO, in collaboration with members of KMSWG during a recent training session for police trainers in Nanyuki on the safety and security of female journalists. Photo courtesy

In its defense, the Media Council of Kenya claimed that its statements were made in the public interest. They contended that Odanga’s conduct during the Gem event had raised significant concern, and the council had a responsibility to alert the public and protect the integrity of journalism in the country. The defense further argued that the statements were based on reports from reliable sources, and the council had merely acted to maintain ethical standards in the media.

However, the court found this defense inadequate. Resident Magistrate Christabel Chepchirchir Maiyo, presiding over the case at the Siaya County Chief Magistrate Court, highlighted that the council failed to present any evidence to substantiate the allegations against Odanga. The magistrate noted that MCK had issued the statements while investigations were still ongoing, and by doing so, had failed in its duty to ensure that its actions were fair and unbiased.

After carefully reviewing the evidence, the court ruled in favor of Josiah Odanga. The ruling cited that the Media Council’s actions were not only defamatory but were also carried out with malice. Magistrate Maiyo awarded Odanga Ksh 2,000,000 in general damages and Ksh 1,000,000 in exemplary damages, highlighting the significant harm done to his career and personal reputation.

In a short text message (SMS), Odanga expressed his satisfaction with the ruling, saying, “Honestly, I’m overjoyed. I hope this judgment will go a long way in restoring my credibility as a journalist.”

The court stressed that as a regulatory authority, the Media Council of Kenya (MCK) should have acted with greater responsibility, especially given its significant role in shaping Kenya’s media landscape. Issuing defamatory statements without adequate evidence highlighted MCK’s failure to protect journalists and uphold ethical standards.

Kenya Union of Journalists Nakuru branch representative, Kioko Wa Kivandi, had previously warned MCK, asserting, “The Council was bound to lose this case—it was clear from the start. The CEO acted beyond his mandate, a role reserved for the Complaints Commission.” Kivandi emphasized that this misstep led to the Council’s avoidable legal defeat.

Josiah’s colleagues have reacted positively to the ruling, noting that it addresses key issues related to media regulation, governance roles, and the protection of journalists’ rights. They believe this decision establishes a precedent for managing defamation cases involving regulatory bodies in a time when digital media can easily spread both accurate and inaccurate information.

Christine Mumbi, Josiah’s lawyer, stated, “We have not heard from the MCK since we filed the case. Their only communication was a response to Josiah’s complaint from April, which occurred just this week. However, this response did not address the court case itself. Due to their lack of response and failure to defend themselves, we received an interlocutory judgment from the court against them.” The ruling was delivered on September 4, 2024.

At the time of publishing, MCK had not responded to our inquiries directed to CEO Mr. David Omwoyo.

Show More

One Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button
Close
Close