Kenya Court of Appeal Halts BBC Defamation Case Linked to BAT Bribery Documentary

Key Points

• Court of Appeal suspends Wetang’ula’s defamation case against the BBC.
• Dispute stems from a 2015 BBC documentary alleging BAT offered unlawful benefits to Wetang’ula.
• BBC sought a stay of proceedings pending assistance from UK courts to obtain evidence.
• High Court previously rejected multiple applications filed by the BBC.
• Appellate court found the BBC’s appeal arguable and granted a stay.

2Firsts, December 2, 2025 — According to The Weekly Vision, Kenya’s Court of Appeal has suspended the defamation case filed by National Assembly Speaker Moses Wetang’ula against the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). Wetang’ula seeks to stop the BBC from publishing the allegations and is claiming general and aggravated damages, costs, and interest.

The case arises from BBC broadcasts aired on November 30 and December 4, 2015, under the title Panorama: The Secret Bribes of Big Tobacco. The documentary alleged that British American Tobacco (BAT) provided bribes to several individuals, including Wetang’ula, who was then the Senator for Bungoma.

The BBC previously asked the High Court to issue a Letter of Request to enable it to seek witness statements and documents from UK courts, and to stay the proceedings pending the outcome. Wetang’ula opposed the application, arguing it was excessively delayed, insufficiently supported, and vague. The High Court dismissed the BBC’s application in October 2023, and further applications for a stay were also rejected.

The BBC subsequently filed a fresh application before the Court of Appeal, arguing that allowing the High Court case to proceed would render its appeal nugatory and prevent it from obtaining crucial evidence. In response, Wetang’ula stated in an affidavit that the BBC was attempting to gather evidence many years after the documentary was broadcast and that its application was procedurally flawed and unfounded.

The appellate court held that Rule 5(2)(b) grants it original and discretionary jurisdiction to issue a stay. The judges found that the BBC’s appeal raised an arguable point and that the delay was not excessive. The court added that the right to a fair trial under Article 25(c) of the Constitution cannot be limited, and that failing to first determine whether the BBC may seek the requested evidence could compromise that right.

The Court of Appeal ultimately allowed the BBC’s application and ordered a stay of further High Court proceedings until the appeal is heard and determined. Costs will follow the outcome of the appeal.

Caption of the cover image:Moses Wetang’ula | Image: The Weekly Vision