Ask a lawyer:
what counts as defamation?
Introduction
Defamation in Kenya is governed by both statutory and common law principles. The primary statute that addresses defamation is the Defamation Act (Cap 36 of the Laws of Kenya). Additionally, the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, provides for the right to freedom of expression but also recognizes the need to protect individuals from unwarranted attacks on their reputation. This response will delve into the legal framework surrounding defamation in Kenya, including the definitions, elements, defenses, and relevant case law.
Table of Contents
Definition of Defamation
1.1 Defamation Act (Cap 36)
1.2 Common Law Principles
Elements of Defamation
2.1 Publication
2.2 Identification
2.3 Defamatory Statement
2.4 Falsity
2.5 Harm
Types of Defamation
3.1 Libel
3.2 Slander
Defenses to Defamation
4.1 Truth
4.2 Absolute Privilege
4.3 Qualified Privilege
4.4 Fair Comment
4.5 Consent
Relevant Case Law
Conclusion
1. Definition of Defamation
1.1 Defamation Act (Cap 36)
The Defamation Act (Cap 36) provides the statutory framework for defamation in Kenya. According to Section 3 of the Act, defamation is defined as:
Libel: A defamatory statement in a permanent form.
Slander: A defamatory statement in a transient form.
1.2 Common Law Principles
Under common law, defamation is generally understood as a false statement made about an individual that damages their reputation. The statement must be communicated to a third party and must be of such a nature that it lowers the person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society.
2. Elements of Defamation
For a statement to be considered defamatory under Kenyan law, it must meet several key elements:
2.1 Publication
Requirement: The defamatory statement must be published, meaning it must be communicated to at least one person other than the plaintiff.
Source: Defamation Act, Section 3.
2.2 Identification
Requirement: The statement must refer to the plaintiff, either directly or indirectly, in such a way that a reasonable person would understand it to be about the plaintiff.
Source: Common Law Principles.
2.3 Defamatory Statement
Requirement: The statement must be defamatory, meaning it must lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right-thinking members of society or expose them to hatred, contempt, or ridicule.
Source: Common Law Principles.
2.4 Falsity
Requirement: The statement must be false. Truth is a complete defense to a defamation claim.
Source: Common Law Principles.
2.5 Harm
Requirement: The plaintiff must show that the defamatory statement caused harm to their reputation. In cases of slander, special damages must be proven unless the statement falls into certain categories such as imputations of a crime or professional incompetence.
Source: Common Law Principles.
3. Types of Defamation
3.1 Libel
Definition: Libel refers to defamatory statements made in a permanent form, such as written words, pictures, or any other form that can be seen.
Source: Defamation Act, Section 3.
3.2 Slander
Definition: Slander refers to defamatory statements made in a transient form, such as spoken words or gestures.
Source: Defamation Act, Section 3.
4. Defenses to Defamation
Several defenses can be raised against a defamation claim:
4.1 Truth
Definition: If the statement is true, it is a complete defense to a defamation claim.
Source: Common Law Principles.
4.2 Absolute Privilege
Definition: Certain statements are protected by absolute privilege, meaning they cannot be the basis for a defamation claim regardless of their truth or intent. Examples include statements made in parliamentary proceedings or judicial proceedings.
Source: Common Law Principles.
4.3 Qualified Privilege
Definition: Statements made in certain contexts are protected by qualified privilege, meaning they are not defamatory unless made with malice. Examples include statements made in the course of duty or in the interest of the public.
Source: Common Law Principles.
4.4 Fair Comment
Definition: Statements that are opinions rather than assertions of fact may be protected as fair comment, provided they are made without malice and on a matter of public interest.
Source: Common Law Principles.
4.5 Consent
Definition: If the plaintiff consented to the publication of the defamatory statement, they cannot later claim defamation.
Source: Common Law Principles.
5. Relevant Case Law
Several cases have shaped the understanding of defamation in Kenya:
Phineas Nyagah v Gitobu Imanyara [2013] eKLR: This case emphasized the need for the plaintiff to prove that the defamatory statement was false and caused harm to their reputation.
Nation Media Group Limited & 2 others v John Joseph Kamotho & 3 others [2010] eKLR: This case highlighted the defenses of truth and fair comment, noting that a statement of opinion on a matter of public interest is not defamatory if it is made without malice.
Conclusion
Defamation in Kenya is a complex area of law that balances the right to freedom of expression with the need to protect individuals from unwarranted attacks on their reputation. The Defamation Act (Cap 36) and common law principles provide a comprehensive framework for understanding what constitutes defamation, the elements required to prove it, and the defenses available. By understanding these legal principles, individuals and entities can better navigate the complexities of defamation law in Kenya.
Answered by mwakili.com