Complaint
The article referred to a court case in which a guard at Kakuzi farm in Kenya had been accused of rape.Β A reader with knowledge of the case complained that it did not reflect the fact that the guard had been acquitted on the charge of rape, and that the article had not been sufficiently corrected after he had pointed this out.Β He also complained that the articleβs statement that Kakuzi farm βseeks to sue Kenyan human rights groups over what it says are false allegations of abuseβ was inaccurate.Β The ECU considered the complaint in the light of the ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔβs editorial standards of due accuracy.
Outcome
The article in its original form did not reflect the fact that the guard had been acquitted of rape (though convicted of assault).Β The author of the article acknowledged that this information was contained in the court papers provided by to her by Kakuzi, but explained confusion had arisen as a result of witness testimony having been translated from local dialect into Swahili and thence into English.Β A correction had been appended to the article but, as it did not make the nature of the error clear, in the ECUβs view it did not suffice to resolve the issue, and this aspect of the complaint was upheld.Β In relation to the particular statement complained of, the ECU judged it an accurate summary of the position as set out in the article, and this aspect of the complaint was not upheld.
Further action
A further correction was added to the article, and the finding was reported to the Board of ΒιΆΉΤΌΕΔ News and discussed with the journalist concerned.