About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2016
>>
[2016] ZAGPPHC 606
|
|
Helen Suzman Foundation v South African Broadcasting Corporation Soc Ltd and Others (52160/16) [2016] ZAGPPHC 606 (20 July 2016)
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
(GAUTENG
DIVISION, PRETORIA)
Case
No: 52160/16
BEFORE
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MURPHY
PRETORIA,
20 JULY 2016
HELEN
SUZMAN
FOUNDATION Applicant
And
THE
SOUTH AFRICAN BROADCASTING
CORPORATION
SOC
LTD
1
st
Respondent
HLAUDI
MOTSOENENG: CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
OF
THE SOUTH AFRICAN BROADCASTING
CORPORATION
SOC
LIMITED 2
nd
Respondent
MINISTER
OF
COMMUNICATIONS 3
rd
Respondent
PROF
MBULAHENI OBERT
MAGUVHE 4
th
Respondent
LEAH
THABISILE
KHUMALO 5
th
Respondent
VUSIMUZI
GOODMAN MOSES
MAVUSO 6
th
Respondent
KRISH
NAIDOO 7
th
Respondent
DR.
NDIVHONISWANI AARON
TSHIDZUMBA 8
th
Respondent
NOMVUYO
MEMORY
MHLAKAZA 9
th
Respondent
JAMES
ROGERS
AGUMA 10
th
Respondent
FRANS
LEKOAPA
MATLALA 11
th
Respondent
ORDER
PART
A
IT
IS
ORDERED
THAT
1.
Pending the final determination of Part
B of this application, including any appeal of the review proceedings
under Part B:
1.1.
each of the respondents is interdicted
from giving effect to, implementing or enforcing the censorship
decision, as defined in paragraph
9 of the founding affidavit of
Francis Antonie
(“the founding
affidavit”);
1.2.
the first and second respondents are
required to exercise their editorial discretion in accordance with
the Constitution, the
Broadcasting Act, 1999
, and the Broadcasting
Complaints Commission of South Africa Free- To-Air Code of Conduct
for Broadcasting Service Licensees, 2009,
and in accordance with the
following order
:
1.2.1.
the first, second and fourth to eleventh
respondents are interdicted from adopting or giving effect to any
decision, policy, guidelines
or instruction which would require the
events in 1.2.1.1 to 1.2.1.9 below not to be broadcast, reported
upon, covered, publicised,
disseminated to the public, or afforded
media coverage (“
the relevant
decisions
”). For the avoidance
of doubt, this includes any policy, guideline or instruction which
would result in partial coverage
without visuals, or preclude
coverage, by the first respondent of the following:
1.2.1.1.
any peaceful protest or demonstration;
1.2.1.2.
any violent protest or demonstration;
1.2.1.3.
any peaceful or violent protest or
demonstration against service delivery;
1.2.1.4.
any peaceful or violent protest or
demonstration against the Policy (as defined in paragraph·92
of the founding affidavit);
1.2.1.5.
any peaceful or violent protest or
·
demonstration
against government or a public body, at any level (local, municipal,
provincial, regional or national);
1.2.1.6.
any protest, demonstration, commentary
or news piece which portrays, or has the potential to portray:
1.2.1.6.1.
government (at any level); or
1.2.1.6.2.
any political leader or government
employee or officer, including a member of the National Executive
in a negative light;
1.2.1.7.
any
politically motivated protest or demonstration (whether violent or
peaceful);
1.2.1.8.
any events or actions (including violent
or peaceful protest or demonstration) that reflects, or may reflect,
any political party
or politician in a negative light; and/or
1.2.1.9.
any events or actions (including violent
or peaceful protest or demonstration) that reflect, or may reflect,
negatively upon the
President of the Republic of South Africa;
2.
the first respondent is liable to pay
the cost of the application for Part A relief on the scale as between
attorney and client,
including the costs of two counsel.
_________________
pp
REGISTRAR