The High Court in Kisii has temporarily restrained Kisii Senator Richard Onyonka from repeating or publishing allegations that Governor Paul Simba Arati uses goons, violence and criminality to deal with issues in Kisii County.
Justice Prof. Nixon Sifuna issued the temporary injunction in a defamation case filed by Arati against Onyonka over a press statement issued in June 2025.
In the statement, Onyonka accused Arati of hiring goons and criminals to attack a Senate team that had visited Kisii County to audit and oversee its books and expenditure.
Arati sued the senator, arguing that the allegations portrayed him as violent, incompetent, corrupt and unfit to hold public office, thereby damaging his reputation.
In his ruling, Justice Sifuna found that Arati had established an arguable case warranting protection at the interlocutory stage.
“From the ordinary meaning of the words and phrases used in it and without any context, the impugned Press Statement is ex facie defamatory,” the judge ruled.
The judge said the statement was capable of portraying Arati as a governor who was incompetent, lacked integrity and “thrives on violence, goons, and criminality.”
Justice Sifuna also considered another portion of the statement in which Onyonka described Kisii County as chaotic due to a lack of basic education and accused its leadership of incompetence.
According to the judge, the words could portray Arati as “uneducated”, incompetent and someone who uses violence to address issues.
“These are obviously undesirable qualities to be attributed to the Plaintiff, the Defendant himself, anyone holding an office of honour, or a holder of a public office,” Justice Sifuna said.
The judge, however, stressed that the ruling was not a final determination that Arati had been defamed.
“The question whether the Statement has actually defamed the Plaintiff or not, shall be gone into later at hearing the suit itself. Not on this Application,” he said.
Justice Sifuna said the court was required to balance Arati’s right to reputation against Onyonka’s freedom of expression, cautioning that interlocutory proceedings should not determine the substantive dispute before a full hearing.
He directed the parties to approach the matter cautiously and impartially to avoid prejudicing either side before the trial.
The court consequently barred Onyonka, pending determination of the suit, from making the same or substantially similar allegations against Arati in public meetings, rallies, media briefings, press statements, social media platforms or other public forums.
The order, however, does not restrict Onyonka from carrying out his constitutional duties as a senator.
Justice Sifuna specifically limited the injunction to statements made to the general public and in public spaces, leaving Onyonka free to raise issues in Parliament, Senate committees and other parliamentary structures while exercising his oversight mandate.
The judge declined Arati’s request for an order compelling the removal or deletion of the disputed press statement from social media platforms.
He said deleting the material could undermine the trial because the disputed statement could be required as evidence.
“That is tantamount to deletion of the very evidence required at trial,” Justice Sifuna said.
The court therefore granted Arati’s application in part by issuing the prohibitory injunction but declined to grant the mandatory order seeking removal of the disputed material.
Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.
The defamation suit will now proceed to full hearing, where the court will determine whether the statements amounted to defamation and whether Onyonka can rely on his parliamentary oversight role as a legal defence for statements made outside Parliament.
Email your news TIPS to Editor@Kahawatungu.com — this is our only official communication channel
