Justice Reuben Nyakundi rules that journalist Lincoln Njogu recklessly branded four Vihiga officials corrupt without seeking their response, despite court orders nullifying their removal proceedings.
Royal Media Services has suffered a major legal setback after the High Court upheld a KSh 16 million defamation award.
The case arose from a Radio Citizen broadcast that linked four former Vihiga County ministers to corruption.
Justice Reuben Nyakundi dismissed the broadcaster’s appeal, finding that journalist Lincoln Njogu published damaging allegations without proper verification.
The judge also faulted the journalist for ignoring court orders affecting the officials’ removal proceedings.
In a judgement delivered on October 27, 2026, the court upheld KSh 4 million for each official.
The award followed findings that the broadcast damaged their reputations and presented unproven allegations as established facts.
The Broadcast
The dispute originated from a June 25, 2021, broadcast on Radio Citizen’s Jungu la Makala Maalum programme.
Njogu reported that four Vihiga County Executive Committee Members had been removed over alleged abuse of office.
He praised the county assembly for taking action against corruption and misuse of public resources.
The officials, however, argued that the broadcast portrayed them as corrupt individuals.
They were Pamela Kimwele, Kenneth Keseko, Paul Mbuni and Dr Amos Kutwa.
Kimwele oversaw Administration, while Keseko headed Trade, Industry, Tourism and Entrepreneurship.
Mbuni was responsible for Lands and Physical Planning, while Kutwa headed the Health department.
The four maintained that the allegations against them had never been established.
They also argued that the broadcast damaged their professional standing and exposed them to public ridicule.
No Verification
During the trial, the officials described the personal and professional consequences of the broadcast.
Mbuni told the court that he had served 30 years without corruption accusations.
He said the broadcast damaged his reputation and professional standing as a consultant.
He also explained that the High Court had overturned his removal from office.
Kimwele testified that the allegations caused her considerable shame, anguish and professional embarrassment.
Keseko, an engineer and businessman, said customers questioned him after hearing the broadcast.
Kutwa, a medical doctor and former WHO consultant, described the damage to his international reputation.
Other witnesses also testified that the publication lowered the officials’ standing among members of society.
Royal Media defended the broadcast as legitimate reporting on public accountability and county assembly proceedings.
It relied on impeachment documents and argued that the publication enjoyed qualified privilege.
However, Njogu made a damaging admission during cross-examination.
He acknowledged that he never contacted any of the four officials before broadcasting the allegations.
He maintained that obtaining their responses was unnecessary.
The trial magistrate subsequently found Royal Media and Njogu jointly and severally liable.
On May 6, 2025, Principal Magistrate J.A. Agonda awarded each official KSh 4 million.
The compensation comprised general damages, punitive damages, and psychological distress.
The four awards collectively amounted to KSh 16 million, excluding costs and interest.
Court Orders
Royal Media and Njogu challenged the decision, raising 18 grounds of appeal.
Their arguments centred on jurisdiction, defamation liability and the damages awarded.
They first argued that the Principal Magistrate exceeded her KSh 10 million jurisdictional limit.
The appellants maintained that the combined KSh 16 million award exceeded that statutory ceiling.
Justice Nyakundi rejected the argument, finding that each official had a separate cause of action.
Consequently, jurisdiction depended on each individual award rather than the cumulative compensation.
Each official received KSh 4 million, comfortably within the magistrate’s statutory jurisdiction.
The court then examined whether the broadcast qualified for protection under qualified privilege.
Justice Nyakundi acknowledged that journalists enjoy constitutional protection when reporting matters of public interest.
However, he emphasised that media freedom does not authorise reckless attacks on individual reputations.
The judge considered the High Court orders that had stayed and nullified the impeachment proceedings.
He found that broadcasting the allegations without accounting for those orders demonstrated reckless disregard for truth.
The journalist’s failure to seek comment further weakened the broadcaster’s defence.
Drawing on Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd, the judge emphasised responsible journalism.
The principles require journalists to consider verification, source reliability, and the seriousness of allegations.
They also require reasonable efforts to obtain responses from people facing damaging accusations.
Justice Nyakundi concluded that the appellants had failed those important responsibilities.
He found that their conduct demonstrated express malice, defeating the statutory protections they had invoked.
KSh 16 Million
The broadcaster also challenged the damages, describing the awards as excessive and legally unjustified.
It argued that additional compensation for punitive damages amounted to double recovery.
It also questioned the separate award for psychological and emotional distress.
The High Court nevertheless found insufficient grounds to interfere with the magistrate’s assessment.
Justice Nyakundi considered the allegations’ seriousness and Radio Citizen’s extensive national audience.
READ ALSO: Court Restrains Sonko Over Claims Miguna Miguna Stole TVs and Suffered Machete Injury
He also considered the officials’ professional standing and the absence of an apology.
The judge found the KSh 4 million awarded to each official reasonable and proportionate.
He consequently dismissed the appeal and upheld the entire KSh 16 million judgement.
The original awards of costs and interest also remained intact.
Royal Media and Njogu were additionally ordered to pay the respondents’ costs of the appeal.
PAY ATTENTION: Reach us at info@gotta.news.
