“We view the decision as highly regrettable in that it does not give sufficient weight to the massive public interest in the matter. The CCC has failed to uphold the critical role played by the regulator in regulating broadcasting in the public interest and to ensure fairness, impartiality and the dissemination of unbiased information to the public,” says Moore.
She says it is “critical to note that the CCC's finding does not in any way exonerate the conduct of SABC in the blacklisting controversy”. She also says that the CCC did not find that the SABC did not blacklist certain political commentators. In fact, Moore says, the CCC “went so far as to state that blacklisting is, in itself, deplorable”.
Moore says that during 2008 the FXI lodged a complaint ICASA against the SABC, the essence of the complaint being the fact that the SABC news management manipulated its news and current affairs in the pursuit of a political agenda, and when this manipulation was exposed, SABC management dishonestly tried to tried to cover it up; and, thirdly, that the SABC Board did not take any remedial action when its own enquiry into these matters found that its news management had been guilty of serious misconduct.
Moore says their complaint was prompted by “the SABC's failure to implement the recommendations of the Sisulu Commission of Enquiry (Commission) into blacklisting of certain political commentators, and related matters, at the SABC. The Commission found that certain commentators ‘had been excluded from news and current affairs programmes on grounds that that were not objectively defensible'”.
She says that it believes the CCC erred in a number of respects: “The CCC has refused to deal with and pronounce upon the merits of the matter placed before it. In holding that it does not have jurisdiction over internal journalistic matters, the CCC has misconstrued its powers and interpreted such powers in an overly narrow fashion. In so doing, they have neatly avoided pronouncing on a controversial issue that falls squarely within their mandate and jurisdiction”. Moore says in following this route the CCC has abdicated their duties in respect of the public broadcaster, and that in itself is “deplorable”.
She adds that in addition to the above, the CCC failed to deal with the evidence that the FXI placed before it, and says that that evidence remains the only uncontroverted evidence placed before the CCC - it was not disputed, and the broadcaster failed to submit any admissible evidence before the CCC to refute the FXI allegations and evidence.
“We are amazed at the CCC's contention that the contamination of the preparation of programmes does not affect the end product. If the ingredients are contaminated, it goes without saying that you cannot have an honest and fair end product for consumption by the public,” says Moore.
“What is equally astounding is the CCC's view that there is no legal duty on the SABC to provide the public with internal information or reports on journalistic malpractice, or to inform the public on how it reacts to contraventions of its code. What the CCC forgets is that the SABC's ultimate shareholder is the public and that the public has a constitutional right of access to all information held by the SABC.
“The clandestine manner in which SABC has operated has in our view been central to the current crises in which it now finds itself. ICASA has not moved robustly and vigorously to address these issues which are central to the right to act as a public broadcaster. ICASA's failure to address the root causes of the problem raises serious questions about the efficacy of ICASA's policing of the industry and its commitment to constitutional principles,” says Moore, who added that the FXI is considering its legal options in respect of the ICASA's ruling.
