John Maina Muthoni was employed as a driver of a PSV by the Sacco by November 19, 2021, when he claimed to be summarily dismissed from work without lawful justification where he added issued verbal threats by the chairman of the sacco John Kahiro that they would make sure that he will never drive a Public Vehicle.
According to Muthoni, the Sacco claimed that his actions brought embarrassment to them.
The issue began on November 17, 2021, when he (Muthoni) was transporting students from Karatina to Ruai.
In his plaint, he charged each of the student’s Sh 400 and surrendered the entire sum to the Sacco a fact which was denied by the Sacco and the owner of the vehicle.
Along the way, Muthoni realized that the students he was ferrying were smoking bhang and drinking beer and made an initiative to call the Sacco offices to be guided on what to do.
He was directed to take the vehicle to the nearest police station where he made it to Sagana Police Station but the students fled before he could record a statement with the police over the incident.
In his statement, he explained the whole ordeal and clarified that he was taking the students to Nairobi.
According to the statements produced in court by the defendant, Muthoni had an issue with the non-remittance of funds with the owner of the vehicle which had been paid and unremitted.
The fare to transport the students to Nairobi was Sh 400 and for that, Ruai was Sh 250 whereas Muthoni retained Sh 150 from every student claiming he was taking them to Ruai.
When he was confronted about the issue for rectification, he argued with the stage controller promoting his summon to the board for clarification where he appeared and committed to go and clear with his employer after which he would resume his duties.
The sacco denied firing him saying that “the case in point has nothing to do with him not being at work since we take care of the employee and the employer.”
Muthoni took action and posted a post on his Facebook account alleging that he had been unfairly terminated by Sacco.
In the post, he gave the background information leading to what he claimed was unfair termination without mentioning the real issue of non-remittance of funds to his boss.
Finding the post, the Sacco posted on their Facebook account clarification details of what transpired describing the “steps taken to resolve the issue with the owner of the vehicle before resuming his duties.”
They were later approached by a media house praying to interview them about the issue where the interview proceeded and the video of the same was uploaded on YouTube.
In his case, Muthoni prayed for judgment against Sacco for what he termed as defamation.
He stated that the Facebook publications and the video “depicts him as an untrustworthy and dishonest person, a criminal who lacks integrity, unruly, and a rumor monger.”
He prayed the court to be compensated for general damages for defamation and a mandatory injunction order for the defendants to take down the impugned publications and for a public apology indicating that the publication was false.
In determining the case, Nyeri magistrate Mary Gituma states that “in my view the statements posted on Facebook and the video uploaded on YouTube are not defamatory, they simply sought to clarify the complainant contention that he was summarily terminated,” she stated.
She also noted that the complainant admitted that he was the first to make Facebook publications that prompted the defendant to make his post giving the background information leading to what the complainant termed as unfair termination.
She found that the defendant’s post was not intentionally made while knowing it to be false and the words do not suggest any ill on the part of the defendant.
“Having found that the statements were not defamatory, damages cannot be awarded to the plaintiff,” Gituma ruled.
The defendant further made an application in court requesting Muthoni’s arrest and committal to jail in the execution of the decree of this case.
The notice was given by the court requiring him to appear on August 28, 2024, in court personally or his lawyer to show why execution should not be granted,
“Your presence will be dispensed with Sh 233,000 being the balance of the certificate of costs together with interest of execution,” read part of the notice.