In two separate cases in the Johannesburg high court this week, judges blocked attempts to stifle media coverage of apparent wrongdoing, affirming the importance of a free press.
In one of the cases, judge Alex Pullinger struck from the roll an urgent application by businessman Collen Mashawana for an interdict against Daily Maverick and its journalist Pieter-Louis Myburgh.
According to Daily Maverick, Myburgh’s reporting “detailed payments from Mashawana toward a luxury house linked to suspended Independent Development Trust CEO Tebogo Malaka, alongside an expanded public works programme contract worth tens of millions for the Collen Mashawana Foundation and a trail of unpaid workers”.
The Daily Maverick’s lawyer argued “the horse had already bolted in that the allegations were already out in the public domain. The relief sought would do nothing to repair Mashawana’s reputation in the face of the number of other media reports that have already been published,” the paper said.
Pullinger, in his ruling on Wednesday, said he would publish reasons for his decision later.
Also on Wednesday, judge Leonie Windell struck from the roll a case that was brought against the Sunday Times by Malusi Shezi, CEO of the construction education & training authority (Ceta).
Shezi had taken exception to reports about an ongoing audit of Ceta by the auditor-general, which has revealed irregularities in procurement totalling tens of millions of rand. These include:
- the procurement of a building for R54m that was found to be irregular;
- a R124m contract awarded to a company, Ditlou, that falsified its bid information;
- millions of rand paid for an IT system that did not exist; and
- improper recruitment processes for a senior executive at the Ceta.
All the irregularities happened on Shezi’s watch.
Over the past two months Ceta CEO attacked the Sunday Times in various forums before bringing his court application in August. He asserted in court papers that the reporting, which included allegations that he misled MPs, was false and defamatory. He asked that the newspaper be ordered to apologise, to remove the articles and to halt its reporting on the audit and its findings.
In her judgment Windell called the interdict application “misconceived”, saying it “purports to regulate both past and future speech”.
As the judge noted, it is impossible to interdict an event that has already happened; so it would appear Shezi either received bad legal advice or was merely intent on trying to intimidate the Sunday Times
As the judge noted, it is impossible to interdict an event that has already happened; so it would appear Shezi either received bad legal advice or was merely intent on trying to intimidate the Sunday Times.
Shezi has also been embroiled in a war of words with officials from the AG’s office who made findings that raise questions about expenditure at the Ceta.
He has lodged a formal complaint that is now being investigated, and has threatened to report the auditors to various professional bodies.
Internally, he has been purging staff who get on the wrong side of him.
The latest victim was the acting head of HR at the Ceta, Brian Tyebileyo, who was frogmarched out of the entity’s offices by police last month. The dramatic termination of his services was based on the accusation that he had failed to find a permanent person to head the HR department, and that when his contract expired two years ago, his tenure had been extended unlawfully.
The question is: if Tyebileyo’s employment has been unlawful, why did Shezi approve salary increases for him and approve a study bursary?
It is not the kind of question Shezi has addressed in his public attacks on the Sunday Times. Instead, he portrays himself as a corruption buster whose no-nonsense approach has ruffled feathers.
If he is so scrupulous, why did he initially fail to act when his management team were informed of the problems with a R124m skills development contract awarded to a Limpopo company, Ditlou Suppliers? The company allegedly falsified bid documents.
Shezi only took action on the Ditlou affair three weeks ago, when the AG identified the same irregularities.
Shezi’s strategy of refusing to explain himself to those, such as the Sunday Times, who try to hold him to account is a well-worn one. The phenomenon of civil servants refusing to accept the findings of the AG also has precedent — and it is increasingly becoming a cause for concern.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.