‘Star’ accuses Uhuru of intolerance

  SHARE BOOKMARKPRINTRATING

PHOTO | PHOEBE OKALL Deputy PM Uhuru Kenyatta (right), his lawyer Desterio Oyatsi (centre) and The Star newspaper lawyer Nelson Havi (left) before the Media Council of Kenya Complaints Commission chair Grace Katasi (foreground) in Nairobi on November 6, 2012.  NATION MEDIA GROUP

By AGGREY MUTAMBO amutambo@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted  Wednesday, November 7  2012 at  00:30

IN SUMMARY

• Lawyer Nelson Havi old the Media Council’s Complaints Commission that Mr Kenyatta’s string of suits against the paper showed that he would clamp down on the media once elected president
• Mr Kenyatta told the commission chaired by Ms Grace Katasi that even though he would “definitely” continue to pursue legal means against the publication, there was nothing to fear as long as they wrote factual stories about him.
• In September, Mr Kenyatta complained to the council of an opinion piece written by a Mr Jerry Okungu, who said that it would be like Hitler’s reign should Mr Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto win in next year’s elections
• Mr Kenyatta argued that the piece was malicious first by comparing him to Hitler and then by missing the point that he has vowed to co-operate with the ICC

SHARE THIS STORY

Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta on Tuesday accused the Star newspaper of repeatedly injuring his reputation.

However, he came under criticism from the newspaper’s lawyer, who charged that he was only intolerant of the publication.

Lawyer Nelson Havi old the Media Council’s Complaints Commission that Mr Kenyatta’s string of suits against the paper showed that he would clamp down on the media once elected president.

The DPM has filed a complaint to the commission over the Star’s alleged malicious reportage against him.

On Tuesday, Mr Kenyatta told the commission chaired by Ms Grace Katasi that even though he would “definitely” continue to pursue legal means against the publication, there was nothing to fear as long as they wrote factual stories about him.

False or malicious

“If they write things that are false or malicious, we will continue to use the processes that are available to us in law. As long as I feel that my own rights are infringed upon, I would use due process as laid down by the law,” he said.

In September, Mr Kenyatta complained to the council of an opinion piece written by a Mr Jerry Okungu, who said that it would be like Hitler’s reign should Mr Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto win in next year’s elections.

In the article “What if Uhuru, Ruto, win?” published on February 6, Mr Okungu wrote: “It would remind the world of Adolf Hitler in the early 1930s when he won a German election in a landslide.”

The writer then went ahead to predict a likely scenario of anarchy, pillage and impunity should the two win while still facing cases at the Hague.

But Mr Kenyatta argued that the piece was malicious first by comparing him to Hitler and then by missing the point that he has vowed to co-operate with the ICC.

“Why did he specifically choose Adolf Hitler if there was no malice in it?” he asked.

“In recent times, no one has been accused of committing crimes similar to those of Hitler. As far as I am concerned, I am still innocent until proven guilty,” he added.

Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto are facing charges of crimes against humanity at The Hague court, but are also among the leading contenders for the presidency next year.

But the hearing occasionally veered off track, with Mr Havi questioning Mr Kenyatta on what his family owns, the Mungiki, the number of defamation cases against other media houses and The Hague.

This development drew the ire of the DPM’s lawyer, Mr Desterio Oyatsi, who accused the paper of “acting up for the media.”

Mr Havi was referring to another article published by the Star which Mr Kenyatta has presented to the commission. The article claims that the DPM sold 37,000 acres of land to the government to resettle IDPs when he was Finance Minister.

Mr Kenyatta said he has sued the Nation (one case), the Standard (two cases) but had taken the Star to court five times for defamation.