KAMPALA – Daily Monitor publications will have to pay a sum of UGX450 million in damages to the Permanent Secretary to the Judiciary, Pius Bigirimana over defamation.
This comes after the Court of Appeal maintained an order by High Court in 2021 to the newspaper to pay Bigirimana the said amount as compensatory damages for defaming him in a series of news articles published on several dates between 2012 and 2015.
Some of them include Auditors target Bigirimana in cash probe, a publication of 14th October 2012, MPs order Government to remove Bigirimana, a publication of 2nd November 2012; Bigirimana contradicts himself on purchase of Ministers’ cars; a publication of 30th November 2012. Bigirimana’s wife acquires UGX250 million Mercedes Benz, and Corruption Ledger, a publication of 10th March 2013 among others.
Mr Bigirimana, who at the time served as the Permanent Secretary to the Office of the Prime Minister before he was transferred to the Gender Ministry in the same capacity noted all these publications were untrue with an intent to tarnish his name.
The High Court Judge Musa Sekana in his ruling on December 10, 2021, reduced Bigirimana’s request of one billion shillings, awarding him UGX450 million. Bigirimana had also sought exemplary damages of UGX900 million.
In addition, he had sought an order compelling the defendants to publish an apology in the sold newspapers and online news channels and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their agents, editors and publishers from making, publishing and circulating any further defamatory stories about him.
“A man’s reputation is his property and perhaps more valuable than any other property Indeed. If we reflect on the degree of suffering occasioned by a loss of character and compare it with that occasioned by the loss of property, the amount of injury by defamation exceeds that loss of property, Sekana ruled in 2021.
In their judgment delivered on Thursday, 5th January 2023 by the court’s Deputy Registrar, the Court of Appeal agreed with Judge Sekana that the right to reputation is acknowledged as an inherent personal right of every person.
Court of Appeal’s Lady Justice Elizabeth Musake noted, “The claim, in that case, concerned one defamatory publication while the present case concerns 15 different defamatory publications, published over a space of 3 years. The sum of UGX350,000,000/= was therefore adequate and I would maintain it. I would not enhance the amount awarded as in my view, the sum is substantial enough to vindicate the respondent’s damaged reputation. I would also not interfere with the award of UGX 100,000,000/=, exemplary damages.”
“In conclusion, all grounds of appeal having failed, I would dismiss the appeal and uphold the judgment and orders of the learned trial Judge save the order for the 1st defendant in appellant to publish an apology to the respondent, which is set cross-appeal I would award them aside I would also dismiss the appeal with % of the total of costs of the appeal, less the costs of the cross-appeal. Since only Gashirabake, JA agrees, the Court, by majority decision (Kibeedi, JA dissenting in part), dismisses the appeal but modifies one of the orders made by the learned trial Judge in the manner stated in this judgment,” she ruled.
