Tag: defamation suit

Why Kenya Railways Boss Mainga’s Involvement in Joho-Jaffer Defamation Case Came Up in Court
The Managing Director of Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC), Philip Mainga, has found himself unexpectedly mentioned in a high-profile defamation case involving Mombasa businessman Abubakar Ali Joho and his business rival, highlighting the complex web of relationships in Kenya’s port logistics sector.

The Unexpected Witness

Mainga’s name surfaced during court proceedings where Matilda Maodo Kinzani, an employee of Bulkstream Ltd, faces charges of publishing false and defamatory information about Abubakar Ali Joho – brother to Cabinet Secretary for Mining and Blue Economy Hassan Joho – and allegedly linking him to a Sh40 billion fraud scheme.

According to testimony from Police Constable Fredrick Muchiri of the Anti-Terror Police Unit (ATPU), Mainga allegedly informed Abu Joho about the existence of a defamatory document circulating on social media that targeted both him and his prominent brother.

“The information we received is that it was Mr Mainga who notified Mr Abu of the defamatory document. However, I have not examined his phone to verify the communication,” Muchiri told Mombasa Senior Resident Magistrate David Odhiambo during cross-examination last Friday.

The Business Rivalry Context

The defamation case centers on accusations that Abu Joho’s entry into the port logistics business disrupted a three-decade monopoly allegedly held by tycoon Mohamed Jaffer, owner of Bulkstream Ltd (formerly Grainbulk Handlers Limited). This business rivalry forms the backdrop of what Abu Joho describes as a “sustained smear campaign” against his family.

Abu Joho, who operates Autoport Freight Terminus and Portside Freight Terminal, directly blamed Jaffer for orchestrating the attacks. “He has had a monopoly for 30 years. Now that I have entered the port business, that’s where our troubles began. He is the monopoly; I am not,” he testified.

The Defamatory Document

The controversial document allegedly made grave accusations against Abu Joho, including:
- Involvement in drug trafficking
- Illegally acquiring Kenya Railways land in Mombasa
- Helping his brother embezzle Sh40 billion from Mombasa County coffers
- Personal attacks on his family’s reputation
The document was allegedly circulated in a WhatsApp group and later spread across social media platforms, prompting Abu Joho to file a formal complaint with the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) in July 2024.

Forensic Evidence Points to Accused

Despite Mainga’s alleged role in alerting Abu Joho to the document’s existence, police investigations traced the defamatory content to Kinzani’s electronic devices. Constable Muchiri emphasized that forensic analysis confirmed Kinzani as the author, not Mainga.

“It is not possible that Mr Mainga authored the letter because forensic analysis traced it to Ms Kinzani’s phone. I reviewed the forensic report, which links the document to the accused,” Muchiri testified.

Procedural Questions Raised

The defense, led by lawyer Michael Oloo, raised questions about the investigation’s handling, particularly why an Anti-Terror Police Unit was investigating a cybercrime case rather than the designated cybercrime division. Seven ATPU officers participated in raiding Kinzani’s home and workplace to seize electronic devices for forensic analysis.

Muchiri defended the unit’s involvement, stating: “We were not investigating Ms Kinzani for terrorism. This publication did not constitute a terrorist threat.”

Missing Evidence and Administrative Issues

In a surprising development, Muchiri admitted that his handwritten statement was missing from the court file, with only a typed version containing typographical errors available to both prosecution and defense teams.

“The statement in the file is typed, but it’s not signed by me. I wrote and submitted it to the investigating officer, but it’s missing. I don’t know why,” he revealed.

The case highlights the intense competition in Kenya’s lucrative port logistics sector, where established players face disruption from new entrants.

Abu Joho’s emergence as a significant player in the industry has apparently triggered what he describes as character assassination rather than fair business competition.

“This is not business competition. It’s character assassination. It has affected me, my business, and my family,” Abu Joho lamented during his testimony.

The Charges

Kinzani faces four criminal charges under Section 23 of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act for allegedly disseminating false and defamatory information online. She has denied all accusations and is currently out on Sh300,000 cash bail.

What’s Next

The case continues to unfold with the prosecution seeking to establish the full extent of the alleged defamation campaign.

While Mainga’s exact role remains unclear – he was not called as a witness despite allegedly being the one who alerted Abu Joho to the document – his mention underscores the interconnected nature of Kenya’s business and government circles.

The hearing is set to continue on August 8, 2025, with the lead investigator expected to provide more details about the forensic analysis that linked the defamatory document to the accused.

As this case progresses, it offers a rare glimpse into the high-stakes world of port logistics business, where competition can quickly escalate from boardrooms to courtrooms, dragging in unexpected players from Kenya’s public sector.
June 30, 2025
Court Rejects Senator Aaron Cheruiyot’s Bid to Gag Blogger Cyprian Nyakundi in Betting Tax Scandal Lawsuit

A Milimani Law court has rejected a gag order sought by Senate Majority Leader Aaron Cheruiyot against prominent blogger Cyprian Nyakundi, who accused the Kericho senator of involvement in a betting tax scandal.

The decision, hailed as a victory for freedom of speech, allows Nyakundi to continue his public commentary on the explosive allegations, spotlighting tensions between accountability and attempts to suppress criticism in Kenya’s political landscape.

This marks the second time in recent months that Cheruiyot has unsuccessfully sought to silence a whistleblower, raising questions about the senator’s approach to public scrutiny.

The court’s ruling today dismissed Cheruiyot’s request for interim gag orders, finding no legal basis to restrict Nyakundi’s commentary.

Represented by lawyer Donald Kipkorir, Nyakundi celebrated the decision on X, calling it a “major win for free speech and a defeat for judicial intimidation.”

The blogger had alleged that Cheruiyot was among Kenya Kwanza Alliance leaders profiting from irregularities in betting tax collections, claiming that intermediaries, rather than the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA), were handling the process, potentially diverting billions in public funds.

Nyakundi’s accusations, first published on X in April 2025, suggested that certain politicians were acting as agents for betting firms, undermining transparent tax collection.

Cheruiyot firmly denied any involvement, stating on X, “I do not even know how to bet, let alone have interest in a betting firm or related business. You ought to be embarrassed of yourself.”

He subsequently filed a defamation lawsuit and sought to silence Nyakundi, arguing the claims severely damaged his reputation.

The court’s refusal to impose the gag order reinforces Kenya’s constitutional commitment to freedom of expression, particularly under Article 33, which protects the right to seek, receive, and impart information.

The ruling is viewed as a significant precedent that public figures cannot use lawsuits to stifle allegations of misconduct, especially regarding sectors like betting where transparency concerns have persisted.

Echoes of the JKIA-Adani case

This case mirrors Senator Cheruiyot’s previous legal action against whistleblower Nelson Amenya, who exposed a controversial $2 billion deal between the Kenyan government and India’s Adani Group to lease Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA) for 30 years. Amenya’s revelations, which sparked nationwide protests and ultimately led to President William Ruto canceling the deal, prompted Cheruiyot to file a defamation lawsuit and seek a gag order to prevent further disclosures.

Like Nyakundi, Amenya successfully resisted the attempt to silence him. A French court, where Amenya resides, dismissed a related defamation case filed by a Kenyan businessman, ruling that Amenya’s posts on X were protected under European Union laws on freedom of expression due to their focus on matters of public interest.

The parallel outcomes suggest an emerging judicial trend toward protecting whistleblowers and journalists who expose alleged malfeasance in public affairs.

A pattern of litigation?

Cheruiyot’s repeated attempts to legally silence critics have drawn scrutiny, with observers questioning whether the senator is using litigation to shield himself from legitimate public scrutiny.

As Senate Majority Leader, Cheruiyot wields significant influence within the ruling Kenya Kwanza coalition, making allegations against him particularly consequential.

His legal actions against both Nyakundi and Amenya highlight what some see as a concerning pattern among Kenyan politicians who turn to defamation suits to counter accusations of corruption or misconduct.

Constitutional lawyer Dr. Jane Wambui notes that such lawsuits risk undermining Kenya’s democratic foundations. “Public figures must tolerate a higher degree of scrutiny,” she told this publication.

“Resorting to gag orders to suppress allegations, especially without conclusive evidence of falsehood, sets a dangerous precedent.”

The betting tax scandal specifically touches on a critical issue.

Kenya’s betting industry, valued at billions of shillings annually, has faced persistent allegations of tax evasion and opaque revenue collection practices.

What’s at stake?

Nyakundi’s claims center on the alleged use of intermediaries to collect betting taxes, bypassing the KRA and potentially costing the state billions in revenue.

He has advocated for direct tax collection by the KRA, arguing that middlemen create opportunities for corruption.

The allegations resonate with public frustration over Kenya’s rapidly growing betting industry, which has faced criticism for both lax regulation and its social impact, particularly gambling addiction among youth.

While Cheruiyot has categorically denied any involvement, the court’s refusal to gag Nyakundi ensures these allegations will remain in the public domain, fueling debate about transparency in the betting sector.

The defamation case itself continues, and Nyakundi has yet to provide concrete evidence substantiating his claims.

However, the ruling allows him to continue his commentary, placing pressure on Cheruiyot to address the accusations through proper legal channels rather than suppression.

The court’s decision comes at a time when Kenya’s judiciary is increasingly positioned as a defender against attempts to curtail free speech.

Recent rulings, such as the High Court’s declaration of Worldcoin’s operations as illegal on May 6, 2025, underscore a commitment to protecting public interest over private or political agendas.

For journalists and whistleblowers like Nyakundi and Amenya, these judicial victories strengthen their ability to hold power to account, despite the significant risks they face, including legal costs and personal safety concerns.

As the defamation case against Nyakundi proceeds, observers will watch closely to see whether he can substantiate his claims or if Cheruiyot will pursue additional legal remedies.

For now, the court’s ruling ensures that this important conversation will continue in the public sphere, unimpeded by prior restraint.

May 20, 2025
Oscar Sudi Sues Morara Kebaso For Defamation Over X Post

Kapsaret Member of Parliament, Oscar Sudi, has taken legal action against political activist Morara Kebaso, filing a defamation lawsuit in the Chief Magistrate’s Court in Eldoret. The suit stems from an allegedly defamatory post made by Kebaso on the social media platform X (formerly known as Twitter) on December 22, 2024.

In the contentious post, Kebaso shared a photo of MP Sudi greeting a youth activist renowned from the Gen Z protests of June 2023. Accompanying the image was a caption that criticized the youth activist for associating with Sudi, suggesting that he should have started a business instead, which would have garnered “tremendous support from Kenyans.”

According to the legal filing, Sudi argues that the post implied he was involved in the deaths of young protesters (referred to as “Gen Zs”), describing him as a “heartless profiteer” who benefited financially from criminal activities. Sudi claims this has led to severe reputational damage, emotional distress, and public humiliation, impacting his standing both within his constituency and in broader political circles.

Despite sending a demand letter to Kebaso on December 28, 2024, requesting the withdrawal of the post and an apology, Sudi alleges that Kebaso not only ignored this request but further escalated the situation. On December 29, 2024, Kebaso allegedly posted, “Oscar Kipchumba Sudi wants an apology,” followed by three laughing emojis, which Sudi interprets as public mockery of his demand for justice.

The suit seeks to address what Sudi describes as Kebaso’s “malice and disdain for the truth,” aiming for both retraction of the statement and a formal apology. If Kebaso does not appear before the Eldoret court by January 31, 2025, either in person or represented by an advocate, the court has warned that proceedings may continue in his absence, potentially leading to a judgment without his defense.

This legal battle highlights the increasing tension between public figures and activists on social media platforms, where statements can quickly escalate into legal disputes.

January 16, 2025
Kenyans Gang Up Against Sakaja As He Sues Activist For Sh100M Over Alleged Defamation

A section of Kenyans have turned their backs on Nairobi governor Johnson Sakaja and accused him of being intolerant towards fair criticism after suing Human Rights activist Jerotich Seii for alleged defamation.

Coming hot on their heels, the Nairobi boss is being criticized for not having a hard shell to deal with criticism from his voters.

The governor has moved to court seeking Sh100 million in damages from the activist and Standard Media Group for defamatory remarks she allegedly made during an interview with Spice FM.

The suit doesn’t come as a surprise as Seii has in the recent past put up a sustained campaign against the governor especially on social media stemming from illegal structures suffocating the city.

The Suit

In the court document, Sakaja asserts that on January 26, Jerotich Seii appeared as a guest on the program, where she insinuated collusion between him and real estate developers to erect high-rise buildings exceeding legal height limits.

“On the 26th day of January 2024, the 2nd Defendant/Respondent herein, in a morning show programme dubbed ‘The Situation Room’ that was aired by one of its radio stations by the name Spice FM, hosted the 1st Defendant as the guest speaker where alongside the programme hosts namely Mr. Eric Latiff, Ms. Ndu Okoh and Mr. Charles T Muga, went on a discourse of discussing the guest’s views about the recent unveiled Chinese Property Developers Association,” the statement read in part.

According to Sakaja, the program hosts failed to moderate the guest’s remarks, which he claims have tarnished his reputation and undermined his status as a reputable citizen, as enshrined in Chapter Six of the Constitution.

The lawsuit specifically highlights statements attributed to Jerotich, implying that the Governor and developers knowingly violated the law.

“The community are organised, they do public participation informing the developers that you are not going to construct here and send them away somehow, these guys end up getting permission/permits that they require and finally after launching the association and going to visit the Governor Sakaja in his office, the following day all permits were issued and they are excavating as we speak,”Jerotich had purportedly stated.

Through his lawyers Okatch & Partners, the governor accuses the activist of defaming him by linking him to a Chinese cartel behind the controversial buildings in the capital.

“She alluded to the fact that the Governor had “gotten to bed” with the Chinese Property Developers and thus neglected the voters who have elected him into his office, to add salt to the injury she vehemently stated that the Governor Johnson Sakaja had left the groups whatsapp in order to avoid accountability and she vehemently stated that:”….Governor Sakaja, left all the Kilimani Foundation whatsapp groups quietly in the dead if the night on the 27th day of December, shortly after that, the Chinese are in his office thereafter, he is launching the Chinese property Developers Association, Immediately after permissions are issued to this company called Alina on Likoni Lane and the MD of Alina is the vice chair of the Chinese property Developers Association. If this is not cartel what is?” Part of the document reads.

Moreover, the remarks have been framed as an attack on his qualifications to hold office as stipulated by Chapter Six of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010.

The governor seeks not only a financial settlement but also an unqualified apology from the defendants, along with a permanent injunction to prevent further defamatory publications.

[pdf-embedder url=”https://cms.kenyainsights.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/HCCCE0322024-HON-SAKAJA-V-STANDARD-GROUP-PLC-JEROTICH-SEII.pdf” title=”HCCCE0322024-HON SAKAJA V STANDARD GROUP PLC & JEROTICH SEII”]

Reactions from Kenyans

Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna called out the governor over his decision, “This is a cowardly attempt to silence critics. We need involved citizens like you to keep the elected honest. The beauty is that Nairobi has 5 million of us. Sakaja cannot sue us all.” He write on X.

Taking to X to express their disgust with the suit, a number have marked it as a SLAPP aimed at silencing Seii and potential ‘defamers’. “This looks suspiciously like a SLAPP suit. Unfortunately these are becoming all too common,” John Allan Namu, renowned investigative journalist pointed out.

“The primary goal of a SLAPP is not to win the case, but rather to use the legal process itself to inflict financial and emotional strain on the defendant. Defamation suits are a common SLAPP tactic,” Lawyer Stephen Mallowah explained.

He continued, “high damage awards in defamation suits can create a chilling effect, making individuals or groups hesitant to speak out on matters of public interest for fear of expensive and lengthy court battles. on matters of public interest for fear of expensive and lengthy court battles. The plaintiff is often a wealthy individual, corporation, or government entity with greater resources than the defendant. The allegedly defamatory statements address issues of public concern, such as criticizing business practices or government actions.“

Some senior lawyers also dismissed the suit as a joke, former Law Society of Kenya (LSK) President Nelson Havi belittled it sarcastically terming it ‘Obtaining fees through false presences’.

Another lawyer Mr Ndong termed it as a suit in futility, accusing the lawyer who drafted if for misleading the governor, “Sometimes I do think some of my Learned Friends mislead Clients in Defamation suits. Definitely won’t succeed.”

Renowned activists also joined to stand in solidarity with Seii and in calling out Sakaja for his move, “You fight out of pain or passion. What’s important is that when Jerotich wins, the public wins. She is fighting for all Nairobi residents.” Boniface Mwangi said.

“We cannot allow criminals and dishonest politicians like Sakaja who are drunk with power to use the courts to intimidate citizens for exercising their rights!” Said Wanjeri Nderu, “Human Rights Defenders and Active citizens have a right to demand for services and accountability from elected officials. Defamation lawsuits are a tactic used by those afraid of exposure to silence critics we must speak up. This is madness!” She added.

Seii has relentlessly criticized the county government and the governor himself for overseeing rising constructions of alleged dangerous buildings in the capital mostly done by the Chinese contractors that she alleges have pocketed the governor.

March 21, 2024
Explainer: The Difference Between Defamation Suits and SLAPP Litigation

SLAPP stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. SLAPPs are lawsuits intended to silence or intimidate critics by burdening them with legal costs and the threat of further litigation.

The primary goal of a SLAPP is not to win the case, but rather to use the legal process itself to inflict financial and emotional strain on the defendant. Defamation suits are a common SLAPP tactic. Why?

Defamation suits are a common SLAPP tactic because:

The burden of proof: the burden of proof in defamation cases often rests on the defendant who has to prove the statements were true, substantially true, or protected as opinion – which can be time-consuming & expensive.

High damage awards in defamation suits can create a chilling effect, making individuals or groups hesitant to speak out on matters of public interest for fear of expensive and lengthy court battles. on matters of public interest for fear of expensive and lengthy court battles.

Defamation-based SLAPPs often target those who engage in public debate, protest, or criticism of powerful individuals or corporations. The goal is to discourage criticism by making it too risky. How can you tell if a defamation suit is a SLAPP?

The plaintiff is often a wealthy individual, corporation, or government entity with greater resources than the defendant. The allegedly defamatory statements address issues of public concern, such as criticizing business practices or government actions.

Courts play a crucial role in protecting free speech and public participation by identifying and dismissing SLAPP suits. These actions not only safeguard individual defendants but also deter future attempts to silence critics through abusive litigation.

A good example of SLAPP is that between Kakuzi and human rights organizations.

In March 2021, Kakuzi Limited took two lobby groups to court seeking to lift the lid on investigations into rape, killings, and abuses in its expansive farm in Makuyu.

Kenya National Human Rights Commission (KHRC) and Ndula Resource Center (NRC) are said to have investigated the alleged atrocities by Kakuzi guards and which led to a case in the United Kingdom against Camellia PLC, Kakuzi’s parent company.

Although Camellia paid Sh696 million as compensation, Kakuzi in its case says that KHRC’s claims on what allegedly transpired is untrue and should be forced to produce the report of its investigations to the police, or before a magistrate.

Kakuzi says in its case filed before the High Court that it wrote to KHRC and NRC demanding that they either report to the authorities or be forced to admit that they had no evidence to support the claims by 85 people and delete an article published in KHRC’s website.

March 20, 2024
Ahmednasir Hits Ex-CJ Maraga Hard

When former Chief Justice David Maraga sued Senior Counsel Ahmednasir Abdullahi for defamation in February this year, he may not have anticipated that he was getting into pigsty fight.

And that is where the wealthy, flamboyant lawyer has taken Maraga in a vicious counter attack.

Nassir has spared no efforts in dragging Maraga right into the middle of the mud, in an affidavit sworn on November 1.

The lawyer has not only reiterated accusations that former CJ condoned corruption in the Judiciary, he claims on several occasions Maraga solicited for favours directly from him, when he (Nassir) served as LSK chairman and a Commissioner the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

As a show stopper, Nassir drags Maraga’s children into the mucky waters, in his endeavor to prove that the former CJ gave his family a lifestyle that was beyond his means as state officer.

Maraga filed the defamation at the High Court in Nairobi in February claiming Nasir had defamed him by accusing him of shielded a Supreme Court judge who allegedly received a Sh220 million bribe to make a favorable judgement.

The lawyer is said to have defamed Maraga in a tweet he posted on January 12, 2021 in his Twitter account with over one million followers.

The tweet was posted only days after Maraga retired as CJ on 12th January 2021.

The tweet read, “If CJ Maraga is a decent and honest Kenyan, he should come clean on the issue of the SENIOR judge of the SUPREME COURT who took Sh220 million BRIBE. Me and CJ Maraga know the judge… intelligent Kenyans must read A LOT on Maraga’s astute silence on this matter!”

The tweet attracted 565 comments, 381 retweets and 2,500 likes from his followers, said Maraga’s lawyer.

The retired CJ argued that the post had caused him anxiety, painted his name in bad light having worked in the Judiciary as a judge of High Court, Court of Appeal, and Chief Justice and President of the Supreme Court.

Nasir has responded with an 8-page affidavit, containing 48 paragraphs of averments. It’s an affidavit that goes way beyond what lawyers would describe as a conventional affidavit. It’s more like submissions or a defence statement intended to completely vanquish Maraga’s allegations.

Nasir says after the unnamed Supreme Court judge had received the Ksh220 million bribe, the judge took a draft judgement to the bribing party and promised a favorable judgement which he (Nasir) has seen and read.

The judge then shared the money with two other Supreme Court judges at a house in Karen, Nairobi.
The judge however ruled against the party that had given the bribe and the briber demanded a refund.

“He initially refused to refund unless the other two judges paid their share but eventually he agreed to pay. To date he refuses to pay back the bribe and continues giving excuses,” the lawyer says, indicating the culprit was a male judge.

Nasir Says the judge agreed to sell a farm he owns in Nyandarua which he is presently disposing of for Ksh330 million. He has paid 10% to his lawyers who have offices at I&M Building.
“To date he has not repaid the Ksh220 million,” he adds.

Nasir says in 2020 he posted many twits about the Ksh220 bribery and even tagged Maraga for necessary action but the CJ never took action.

The Plaintiff had a constitutional and statutory obligation to investigate the matter that I numerously tweeted about. In his capacity as CJ he was required to play vital role in the fight against corruption.

If CJ Maraga is a decent and honest Kenyan, he should come clean on the issue of the SENIOR judge of the SUPREME COURT who took Kshs 220 million BRIBE. Me and CJ Maraga know the judge…intelligent Kenyans must read A LOT on Maraga's astute silence on this matter!

— Ahmednasir Abdullahi SC (@ahmednasirlaw) January 12, 2021

Going personal on the former CJ, Nasir says Maraga loves a lavish and expensive lifestyle well beyond his financial means. His salary as a public officer did not reflect his lifestyle.

“I am aware that the Plaintiff (Maraga) has schooled his children in college and universities both in Kenya and in the United Kingdom”

Nasir says, “It’s questionable how he, a public officer could afford to educate his children at St Andrews Tori (IGCSE, AS and A level), Aston University (Bachelor’s Degree in Business Management), University of Warwick (Business School), Masters Degree in Msc Management, Strathmore University, University of Kent (Bachelor’s Degree in Actuarial Science) and the University of Glasgow. I am also well informed that the plaintiff has properties in Rift Valley, Othaya Road, Lovington and other areas in Nairobi”.

The lawyer then attached over 30 pages of fees structure for all the institutions attended by Maraga’s children.

Nasir says Maraga has a history of soliciting favours. He says when he (Nasir) was elected LSK chairman in 2003, he and other council members visited Nakuru and met Maraga who was in private practice there.

That was the time when radical surgery in the judiciary was at the peak. “Following his strong solicitation and constant lobbying we included him in a list of 35 lawyers and was appointed Judge of the High Court in 2004,”

Nassir says during the vetting of judges in 2011 Maraga called him at mid night to save his skin.

“The plaintiff called me out of the blue in the middle of the night following his vetting by the Vetting Board, crying loudly. I remember the plaintiff was literally shouting: “please help me my brother, my career is over, I am finished, please Nasir…” The plaintiff then begged me to lobby Commissioner Abdullahi”

Nasir does not stop there. He says, “When the Plaintiff applied for promotion to be appointed judge of Appeal, I met him while I was in the company of my wife. He pleaded with me to look into his application favorably. After the Plaintiff was appointed, he made lunch for me and another commissioner and served us a mean of chicken, Ugali and Sukuma at his home in Karen”

Nasir says though he posted the controversial tweet, the same was published by Twitter Inc, a company headquartered in San Francisco, California, USA

He says the company enjoys immunity against libel suits in America and Europe hence Maraga cannot maintain his claim against him since he is not the publisher.

Nasir says Maraga is too thin-skinned and has a history of being haunted by allegations of corruption during his career in the judiciary. He is continuously overly sensitive to fair comments and innocent criticism about him as judge in particular and the judiciary in general.

November 10, 2021