IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF NYAMAGANA
(NYAMAGANA DISTRICT)
AT MWANZA
CIVIL CASE No.___ OF 2017
SICHELEWESHI __________________________________________ PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
CHELEWA _______________________________________________ DEFENDANT
FINAL SUBMISION OF DEFENCE
Your honour if it may please you, before this honourable court we are the counsel
representing the defendant, and this is our written submission replying to the plaintiff’s
written submission.
Your honour(s), hereunder is the brief facts of the case.
You’re Honour(s), It is alleged by the prosecution side that last Friday evening, one
Chelewa who had a cocktail of highly intoxicating local spirit at Mnyama pub in malimbe
uttered defamatory words to Sicheleweshi who was dancing with Tausi. Chelewa uttered,
“Vipi mrembo, njoo kwangu achana na huyo mwanaharamu. Tena jihadhari naye. Watu
wote wa kijiweni wana kaswende” which translate to ‘‘hey beautiful come to me, and leave
alone that bastard. And be careful because all people from kijiweni have syphilis.
Your honour in addressing this matter before this Honourable Court the following
Authorities have been referred to;-
STATUTES
The media service Act of 2016.
BOOKS
Page | 1
Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004) , Page 456
CASE LAWS
Hamisi vs Akilimali (1971) HCD No. 111,
Emerson vs crimsby time etc co ltd [1926]28 CAL 552,
Knupffer VS London express newspaper,
parvathi v mannar I.L.R (1885) 8 mad.175,180
Your honour, hereunder is the issue raised for determination before this Honourable Court;-
1. Whether the statement made is defamatory.
Your honour(s), on responding to the issue raised by the plaintiff side on whether the
statement uttered by the defendant was of defamatory,
Your honour, Defamation as defined under section 32(1) of the Media Service Act of 2016,
means any matter which, if published, is likely to injure a reputation of any person by
exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or likely to damage any person in his profession
or trade by an injury to his reputation is a defamatory matter.alo in the case of Hamisi vs
Akilimali (1971) HCD No. 111, under this case the court held that, “ defamation is
communicating to the mind of another, matter which are untrue and likely in the natural
cause of things substantively to disparage the reputation of the third person’s’’.
Your honour(s), in the case Emerson vs crimsby time etc co ltd [1926]28 CAL 552, in
this case the court said that ,words which merely injure the feelings or cause annoyance, but
which in no way reflect on character or reputation or tend to cause one to be shunned or
avoided are not libellous ,mere vulgar abuse and villuparative epithets if intended as mere
abuse and so understood by those who hear those words only hurt a man`s pride such words
are not considered defamatory as they do not injure the reputation.
Your honour; on responding to the matter of the statement was published, according to
common law system, for the defamatory statement to be published it must come to the
knowledge of the third party, From the facts given, the plaintiff and the defendant were in
the pub, where there were loud music and they were highly intoxicated, it’s impossible in
such circumstances for the words spoken by the defendant to be heard by other drinking
binges and as for Tausi being used as the third part who hear those words but there is
nowhere in the scenario shows that Tausi understood the meaning of those to whom the
Page | 2
plaintiff alleged were defamatory words therefore there were no publication and as if there is
no publication no defamation.
Your honour on responding to the statement made referred to the plaintiff, when
the words referred to the group of individuals or a class of persons, no member of that group
or class can sue unless he can prove that the words could reasonably be considered to be
referring to him, the plaintiff`s name is Sicheleweshi and not “Bastard” so the words did not
refer the plaintiff. As the meaning of a word bastard according to Black's Law Dictionary
(8th ed. 2004) , Page 456 means illegitimate child, A child born to a married woman whose
husband could not be or is otherwise proved not to be the father.
Your Honour from the scenario, the defendant did not mention the name of the plaintiff rather
he just shouted achana na huyo mwanaharamu, njoo kwangu, watu wote wa kijiweni wana
kaswende.,as reffered in the case of Knuppfer VS London express newspaper ltd (1944),
the court held that, there can be no law that a defamatory statement made to a firm or trustee,
the tenants of a particular building is not actionable.
Your honour on responding the matter of Right thinking of members of the society.the
plaintiff fails to show on how the defendants lower the reputation of the plantiff as said
earlier that the words uttered by the defendant were merely expression and did not intend to
lower the reputation of the plaintiff has it was also said in the case of parvathi v mannar
I.L.R (1885) 8 mad.175,180 the court said “mere expression spoken in anger or vulgar
abuse to which no hearer would attribute any set purpose to injure character would not be
actionable”. Therefore the word spoken by the defendant did not amount
Your honour(s), for the foreign reasons we respectfully request before this honourable court
to find in favour of our clients.
Dated at Mwanza this,…… Day of……. 2017.
We humbly submit
……………………..……………………………….
Advocate for the accused person.
Presented for filing this ………….. day ……………………………., 2017.
Page | 3
………………….
Court clerk
Prepared and filed by:
.......................... (Advocates),
SAUT MWANJONDE, 2nd Floor,
Saut Campus/Malimbe Street,
P.O. Box 7642,
MWANZA.
Copy to be served upon:
THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
MWANZA.
Page | 4
