Cartoons can ridicule and lampoon, but readers, and the law, have the last word

Lady Justice Kalpana Rawal. William Kabogo, now Kiambu governor, sued The Standard for publishing a cartoon titled “Madd Madd World – Drugs, How it Works”, whose contents, Justice Rawal agreed, were highly defamatory. FILE NATION MEDIA GROUP 

In Summary

• She ordered the newspaper on September 8, 2011, not to publish any derogatory words and cartoons in respect of Mr Kabogo and drug trafficking “based on the facts existing as of this present”.
• But there are clear limits. Cartoonists and their newspapers can be sued for defamation and invasion of privacy. They cannot turn around and say they were being satirical or only joking.
• It said the cartoon was not meant to disparage religion and when it was realised that the subject might be deemed offensive to religious sensibilities, the cartoon was removed).

By PETER MWAURA
More by this Author

When I searched the official Kenya Law Reports, only three cases came up of people who have sued a newspaper for cartooning them.

William Kabogo, now Kiambu governor, sued The Standard for publishing a cartoon titled “Madd Madd World – Drugs, How it Works”, whose contents, Justice Kalpana Rawal agreed, were highly defamatory.

She ordered the newspaper on September 8, 2011, not to publish any derogatory words and cartoons in respect of Mr Kabogo and drug trafficking “based on the facts existing as of this present”.

Marsden Madoka, former Wundanyi MP, and Francis Oyatsi, former deputy general manager of Mumias Sugar Company, have also successfully sued the same newspaper for publishing derogatory cartoons and words about them. Mr Madoka was awarded damages of Sh1.5 million and Mr Oyatsi Sh3.5 million.

The paucity of court cases involving cartoons is not peculiar to Kenya. In England, it is the same story. As Jonathan Barnes explains in “Cartoons and the law of libel”, published in Media World (June 2002), it must be a reflection of the fact that in many instances, the audience will take a cartoon as a piece of satire dramatising or ridiculing a prominent public person for the purpose of making a serious comment.

“The audience will not take the truth of what appears in the cartoon at ‘face value’, and they will decide for themselves whether or not they agree with the underlying comment. Public persons, for their part, will recognise that by volunteering themselves into public life they expose themselves to the scrutiny of comment and the flourish of the cartoonist’s pen.”

But there are clear limits. Cartoonists and their newspapers can be sued for defamation and invasion of privacy. They cannot turn around and say they were being satirical or only joking.

All the same, editorial cartoonists are given wide latitude to express their opinions on political and social issues. They can, and often do, use satire, humour, caricatures, and grotesque representations of persons and things to express opinions and lampoon public figures.

They enjoy poetic licence to use hyperbole, exaggeration, even to distort facts, but they have no licence to convey inaccurate information. They have no licence to offend good taste. Many a newspaper has had to apologise for running cartoons that offended readers.

The NMG policy is against publishing “anything that is obscene, vulgar, or offensive to public good taste”. A cartoon of questionable taste, “should have significant news value to justify its usage”.

People read cartoons differently. A given cartoon may not be a cup of tea for all readers. Here are reactions, edited for brevity and clarity, from some readers on the Nation’s current crop of cartoons:

HENRY MWORIA

“I am a keen reader of Daily Nation. My concern is the new face of the editorial cartoon. Of late the cartoons are stale and irrelevant to topical news. Take for instance today’s cartoon (April 1, 2015), I find no relevance to topical news. Where is Gado?”
SAM KAJIRO

“The cartoon today (April 29) is below standard. Dark and sketchy. He should improve.”

ABU AYMAN ABUSUFIAN

“Today’s cartoon (April 5) by Gathara is totally in bad taste and insensitive to Muslims. The words Allah Akbar (God is Great) are synonymous with Muslims and the drawing, with the words and a bomb detonator, links Islam to violence...” (Editor’s note: The Nation apologised for the cartoon, carried in the early edition of the Sunday Nation of April 5, which was distributed mainly at the Coast.

It said the cartoon was not meant to disparage religion and when it was realised that the subject might be deemed offensive to religious sensibilities, the cartoon was removed).

P. WAINAINA

This is to relay my dismay at the cartoon published in the Daily Nation of January 14, 2015. I have held consultative meetings with myself, engaging myself on whether there is something I am missing on your intent, or whether the raw feeling of lack of decency and invasion of my privacy by the cartoon was real... I think it’s abhorrent for a family newspaper to have published such a distasteful cartoon.”

Send your concerns or comments to publiceditor@ke.nationmedia.com. You can also call or send text messages to mobile 0721989264, call 3288000 or visit the public editor at Nation Centre in Nairobi.