Joho's father, brother take Mombasa activist to court for defamation

Mr Abdulmajid Ali Al Busayyid alias Dr Amkenie at the Mombasa Law Court. He is facing several criminal charges relating to publication of false information on his social media pages.   

Photo credit: Brian Ocharo

Two relatives of former Mombasa Governor Hassan Joho have sued controversial London-based political activist Al Busayyid Abdulmajid alias Dr Amkeni for defamation.

The former governor’s brother Aboubakar Joho and his father Ali Joho Ali want the court to enter judgment in their favour for both aggravated and punitive damages for defamation, libel and slander against Mr Abdulmajid.

In their case at the High Court in Mombasa, the plaintiffs argue that on diverse dates between July last year and January 2023, Mr Abdulmajid made and disseminated libellous and slanderous statements on social media and other places concerning them, which they claim were false.

Mr Aboubakar and his father also say the statements are made out of malice and have the effect of lowering or destroying their standing and esteem before right-thinking members of the society.

“The conduct of the defendant complained has damaged the plaintiffs' personal esteem and reputation before the society. Their reputation has seriously been disparaged, all these statements in various forms, which have been uttered, disseminated, published and circulated by the defendant are defamatory of and concerning the plaintiffs,” argue the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs say the defendant has Kenyan and UK passports that bear different names.

They further say that on his UK passport, the defendant is identified as Luqman Qassim Issac while according to the Kenyan passport he is identified as Al Busayyid Abdulmajid.

“An accusation (redacted) portrays him as a dishonest person whose conscience of such action is not morally upright, thereby lowering his esteem and standing in the society,” the plaintiffs argue.

Mr Aboubakar and his father accuse Mr Abdulmajid of breaching Article 33 of the Constitution by not respecting their rights and reputation.

“The plaintiffs have come to this court for redress against the transgressions committed by the defendant. They are therefore entitled to injunction orders to restrain the defendant from continued breach of the rights under the Constitution,” argue the plaintiffs.

In his witness statement, Mr Aboubakar says that he has never provoked Mr Abdulmajid and that the only conclusion he can reach is that the defendant is actuated by malice to have uttered, published and circulated the words against him.

“As a result of all these unfounded, false and baseless allegations against me, many of my friends have asked me about them. It has been difficult responding to all inquiries I am receiving on these matters,” said Mr Aboubakar.

The plaintiffs also seek an order that pending the hearing and determination of the case, the defendant be ordered to deposit in court both his passports.

They want an injunction issued restraining the defendant from deliberating on the merits or otherwise of the case on social media or in any other forum with the intention of either vexing or disparaging them until the hearing and determination of the case.

They are also seeking general damages for defamation, libel and slander.