The High Court in Nairobi has issued an injunction restraining a man from publishing or republishing alleged defamatory statements against Pastor Richard Stanley Takim and his church across social media platforms.
Justice Nixon Sifuna delivered the ruling in a defamation suit filed by Pastor Takim against Luke Chianga Chianga, who is accused of spreading damaging allegations on Instagram, Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and Telegram.
Background of the Case
Pastor Takim approached the court after the defendant allegedly circulated posts claiming that he and his church were involved in cultism and other vices. According to the pastor, the content was false, malicious, and intended to tarnish his reputation, integrity, and professional standing.
The court noted that the defendant had not filed a defence in response to the allegations.
Court’s Observations
In his ruling, Justice Sifuna observed that the material cited in the pleadings was potentially defamatory, as it was capable of lowering the plaintiff’s reputation in the eyes of right-thinking members of society.
However, the judge emphasized that a final determination on whether the statements were indeed defamatory would only be made at trial.
The court found that the application met the legal threshold for granting an interlocutory injunction. Justice Sifuna was particularly persuaded by the fact that the impugned content had been published simultaneously across multiple platforms, amplifying its reach and potential harm.
“As if to ensure it reaches a wide base of society,” the judge remarked, noting that the widespread circulation increased the risk of reputational damage.
The Injunction
As a result, the court granted an injunction restraining the defendant, his agents, or anyone acting on his behalf from publishing or republishing similar defamatory material about Pastor Takim pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
However, the court declined to issue a mandatory injunction compelling the defendant to delete the existing posts. Justice Sifuna ruled that the material should be preserved as evidence for the trial.
