A simmering legal battle is brewing between National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula and prominent city lawyer Peter Wanyama after the latter dismissed allegations of defamation contained in a demand letter served earlier this week.
In his response, Wanyama denied making any defamatory remarks, insisting that his statements constituted fair comment, truth, or honest opinion—all of which, he argued, are shielded by the Constitution. He faulted Wetang’ula’s legal team for what he described as a vague and unfounded claim.
“Without clear particulars, the allegations are baseless,” Wanyama declared, pointing out that the letter had failed to specify which words were defamatory, where they were published, or how they allegedly damaged the Speaker’s reputation.
The demand letter, dated September 3, 2025, accused unnamed publishers of spreading damaging claims that could tarnish Wetang’ula’s public image. His legal team demanded the immediate removal of the material, a public apology, and payment of compensation, warning that a defamation suit would follow if their conditions were not met.
But Wanyama countered that attempts to intimidate the media or silence criticism would not stand unchallenged. He anchored his position on Articles 33 and 34 of the Constitution, which safeguard freedom of expression and the press.
“Public figures, especially those holding high political office, must accept scrutiny and criticism as part of public life,” he said.
Even so, Wanyama struck a conciliatory note, offering Wetang’ula a right of reply that could be published alongside the original story. He, however, stood firm that such an offer was not an admission of wrongdoing.
