The High Court in Kenya has issued an injunction against former Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko, restraining him from publishing defamatory statements about Miguna Miguna, a Canada-based lawyer. This decision was made in response to a Sh75 million defamation claim filed by Dr. Miguna. The court ruled that Mr. Sonko had failed to provide a factual basis for specific allegations linking Dr. Miguna to contested statements touching on criminal conduct.
The civil dispute stems from a public exchange between Dr. Miguna and Mr. Sonko, who were former rivals in the Nairobi gubernatorial race. Dr. Miguna had questioned the source of Mr. Sonko's finances, prompting Mr. Sonko to publish a broadcast on March 3, 2026, titled “Mike Sonko’s Response to Miguna Miguna on the cash & money laundering claims.” Dr. Miguna subsequently issued legal notices demanding a retraction, which were not honored by Mr. Sonko.
Dr. Miguna, who practices law in both Kenya and Canada, lodged a defamation suit seeking Sh75 million in damages, a deletion order, and a public apology. He claimed that the online publications defamed him and threatened his professional standing. Dr. Miguna also sought orders compelling Mr. Sonko to remove the disputed videos, posts, and text broadcasts from social media platforms, including X, YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram.
Mr. Sonko opposed the application, arguing that Dr. Miguna had previously accused him of being a money launderer, cartel operator, and drug lord. He described the contested publications as a proportionate response intended to defend his reputation and denied acting maliciously. However, Justice Kennedy Kandet found that allegations about Dr. Miguna's supposed conduct were distinct from criticism of Mr. Sonko's finances.
The judge ruled that Mr. Sonko's affidavit did not identify an incident, witness, investigation, or other source supporting the allegations. The court also questioned the electronic evidence presented by both parties, citing discrepancies in the certificates and archived posts. Despite these issues, the judge found that Dr. Miguna had established an apparent infringement of his reputation through the specific allegations.
The judge declined to compel immediate removal of existing publications, explaining that Dr. Miguna had sought that relief only pending determination of his application, not the entire suit. The case is set for mention on December 3, 2026. Dr. Miguna had also sought permission to pursue contempt proceedings if Mr. Sonko failed to comply with the removal order within 24 hours.
The court's decision highlights the importance of protecting individuals' reputations, particularly in the context of public debates and online publications. The case will continue to be monitored as it has significant implications for freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial. Key points include the court's ruling that Mr. Sonko's statements were not justified, the importance of verifying allegations, and the potential consequences for defamatory statements.
Key points
- The High Court has restrained Mike Sonko from publishing defamatory statements about Miguna Miguna.
- Miguna Miguna is seeking Sh75 million in damages for defamation.
- The case highlights the importance of protecting individuals' reputations in public debates and online publications.
