DNK International The Court Reporters Association of Kenya (CRAK) has strongly condemned remarks made by Robert Alai accusing court journalists of soliciting bribes and deliberately publishing negative reports about litigants who fail to offer them money.
Alai made the remarks shortly after emerging from a court session in a defamation case involving veteran media personality Fred Obachi Machoka. In a social media post, the Kileleshwa MCA alleged that some journalists stationed at courtrooms, particularly at Milimani Law Courts, manipulate reports and edit videos to pressure litigants into providing them with “lunch” or other favors.
“Journalists in court are a bunch of hungry dogs. If you are a litigant in court and you don’t bribe them, they will write anything negative about your case and misedit your videos to force you to buy them lunch next time,” Alai wrote, further claiming that some of the worst offenders are based at Milimani Law Courts.
Responding to the allegations, CRAK termed the claims reckless, unsubstantiated, and damaging to the reputation of journalists and the profession as a whole.
In a statement signed by Secretary General Sam Kiplagat, the association emphasized that court reporting is based on facts presented in open court and matters that form part of the public record. It noted that journalists do not manufacture proceedings but report them as they occur, adding that there are established channels through which anyone who believes a report is inaccurate can seek correction or clarification.
CRAK further stated that making blanket accusations of bribery, bias, or deliberate misrepresentation without credible evidence amounts to an attempt to discredit the media for carrying out its constitutional mandate.
“Such claims not only undermine individual journalists but also threaten the vital role of a free and independent press in promoting transparency, accountability and public access to information,” the association said.
The association defended court reporters, noting that they often work under immense pressure to ensure the public is accurately informed about judicial proceedings. It maintained that any allegations of misconduct should be supported by evidence and pursued through appropriate legal and professional channels rather than through sweeping condemnation of an entire profession.
“The public deserves facts, not unfounded accusations,” the statement concluded.
The exchange has sparked debate over the relationship between litigants and the media, as well as the role of court reporters in ensuring public access to information on judicial proceedings.
