The High Court in Kampala has temporary stopped former Ethics Minister Miria Matembe from verbally attacking Inspector General of Government (IGG) Beti Kamya.
While issuing the temporary injunction on October 14, Deputy Registrar Jameson Karemani reasoned that the continued attacks on Ms Kamya by Ms Matembe would negatively affect her work.
“Applicant (IGG) has established the continued danger of the continued publication of the matters complained of. It is my considered view that if the respondent is not restrained and continues to publish statements about the applicant which are later found defamatory, she would be prejudiced,” Mr Karemani ruled.
“On the contrary, the respondent (Ms Matembe) stands to lose nothing by not publishing the statements about the applicant (IGG) since she has not claimed any. The balance of convenience favours the applicant who is disturbed by the respondent’s statements as compared to the respondent who claims to be making true, honest and justified statements of opinions and belief,” he added.
The interim inunction has been put in place to preserve the status quo of the main law suit.
Core to the main defamatory case now pending hearing before the same court, the IGG claimed that when she was appointed as the ombudsman, Ms Matembe allegedly character-assassinated her personality for not being worthy to occupy the same office.
The IGG claimed that due to the said defamatory statements made against her, she has since suffered inconvenience, anxiety, mental anguish and disturbance.
Justification
Ms Kamya sought a temporary injunction stopping the former minister from further making alleged defamatory statements against her until the main case is determined.
Through her lawyers of Ivan Okuda of Anguria & Co. Advocates, the IGG had asked court to take judicial notice of the fact that Ms Matembe is a prominent public figure and a career politician who is regularly hosted on various media platforms and that it was necessary to issue a temporary injunction against her from further making alleged defamatory statements against her.
“That the IGG will suffer irreparable loss and damage against her reputation in case this application is not granted considering that the respondent is determined to continue with her malicious disinformation and misinformation campaign against the sole intention of destroying her public image among the right thinking members of the public,” the ombudsman stated.
Counsel Okuda had further argued that court owes a duty of care to his client (IGG), the general public and the government to protect the integrity of the state institutions when they are under attack from alleged malicious utterances.
