The High Court has directed that a defamation case filed by former Cabinet Secretary Richard Echesa against Seth Panyako be heard on January 22, 2026.
Echesa is seeking injunctive orders over what he terms defamatory statements allegedly made and circulated against him, which he claims have severely damaged his reputation.
In court documents, the former CS argues that statements published and broadcast by the respondents were presented as facts rather than opinion and were calculated to portray him as a murderer, arsonist, violent criminal and a threat to public safety.
He contends that the allegations amount to defamatory material as they impute the commission of serious criminal offences, exposing him to hatred, ridicule, contempt and public odium.
Echesa has categorically denied all the allegations, describing them as false, malicious, reckless and without any factual or legal basis.
He maintains that he has never led, commanded or participated in any violent group or criminal activity, nor has he ever been involved in arson, homicide or any unlawful conduct as alleged.
The former CS further states that no criminal charges have ever been preferred against him in relation to the claims.
He has also faulted the YouTube channels and media houses named as the second and third defendants, including Obinna TV, accusing them of exercising full editorial and operational control over the broadcasts while failing to verify the allegations, seek his response, or take down the content even after a formal demand.
According to Echesa, this failure renders the media platforms jointly and severally liable for the alleged defamation.
Court papers indicate that the former CS says the publications subjected him to intense public ridicule, hostility and distress, including alarming calls and messages from colleagues, family members and members of the public.
He adds that his reputation as a former Cabinet Secretary and current chairperson of a national statutory body has been gravely damaged, eroding public confidence in his leadership and adversely affecting his ability to effectively discharge his duties.
Through his advocates, Kimani & Company Advocates, Echesa states that he issued a demand for retraction and an apology on December 5, 2025, but claims the defendants ignored or declined to comply an action he cites as evidence of malice and reckless disregard for the truth.
Among the remedies sought, Echesa wants the court to declare the statements defamatory, issue a permanent injunction restraining further publication, compel an unqualified retraction and unconditional apology to be published on a full page of a daily newspaper, and award general and aggravated damages, alongside costs and interest.
In interim directions, the High Court ordered that the application be served upon the respondents and scheduled the matter for an inter-partes hearing on January 22, 2026.
