Mail & Guardian: Uncensored

At times the members of the Fourth Estate do shoot themselves (and us, the public) in the foot. I was horrified this morning when I listened to Nic Dawes (Mail &Guardian Editor-in-Chief) on the Xolani Gwala Show on SAFM trying to justify why he intended to break the law by publishing material from a Section 28 inquiry that was illegally obtained.

We woke up today to a funny looking M&G with black blocks covering what would have been a story on Mac Maharaj’s apparent lies when he gave evidence to a Section 28 Inquiry in 2003. The headline read dramatically: “censored”.

On closer inspection of the story around it one finds that the claim of censorship of the M&G by Maharaj is a blatant lie by a very reputable newspaper. This lie seeks to mislead the public into thinking that media freedom in South Africa is threatened.

Indeed, it is clear that Maharaj is trying to keep his evidence to that inquiry under wraps and unfortunately the law is on his side. In fact, I would really like to know what was presented as evidence at that inquiry. My issue though is with the M&G feeling they have a right to break the law in our interest.

The procedure is clear really. They needed to apply to the Director of Public Prosecutions for permission to view and publish such material as provided for under the National Prosecutions Act. They did not do that which can only mean they got possession of the material illegally.

The claim of censorship by Maharaj is ridiculous and mischievous at best. It seems from the letter from Maharaj’s lawyer (published on the M&G website) that they were simply reminded that they were in illegal possession of the material and any publication of such material will constitute further contravention of the law and they will be liable to criminal prosecution. As to how that can be classified as censorship and threat of criminal prosecution is beyond any reason. Nic Dawes and company should actually be thanking old Mac from saving them from a possible 15 year jail term.

Nic Dawes claims that section 28 of the national prosecutions act is unconstitutional. That may well be so and I also think it is, but Nic and I are not the constitutional court and can not on our own decide which laws are constitutional and which ones are not. This is scandalous! In his defense he also goes on about how Maharaj is trying to keep the truth from the public. Of course Maharaj is trying to keep whatever is contained in his Section 28 evidence from us and of course we want to know.

It is these sensational crusades by some in the media that create space and ammunition for the proponents of the media tribunal and POIB. It also brings into question the public interest clause that so many are fighting for (rightly so, i believe). That it could be misused by cowboy, sensationalist publications to the detriment of both the state and the public. 

We deserve to know the truth as the public but we can’t go breaking the laws in pursuit of that truth. If we justly  feel that any law is unfair and unconstitutional we must challenge it in court otherwise we risk descending into an anarchical and lawless society.

Ethical and responsible journalism needs to be protected and advanced in law by all means. Unethical and irresponsible practices in the name of media freedom need to be dealt with harshly. No one, including the media, is above the law.