SABC – Once again the Human Rigths Commission failed  

26 July 2016

It is almost a month after our complaint (29 June 2016) to the South African Human Rights Commission concerning the SABC and the policies of the SABC as well as the subsequent suspension of the SABC journalists. (The SAHRC acknowledged receipt of our complaint on the same date. – Copy of Letter below)   

We said in our letter (29 June 2016) that with the local government elections scheduled for 3 August 2016, the current SABC crisis and clampdown on news broadcasting and the suspension of journalists must be a cause for concern for anyone who upholds the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and who promotes the constitutional democracy.

This was since confirmed by the ICASA ruling as well as the settlement between the SABC and the Helen Suzman Fundation before the case was due to be heard in the Pretoria High Court and by the Labour Court ruling this morning.

Glaring in its absence and with continued silence amidst the continuous crisis at the SABC, is the South African Human Rights Commission.  The SAHRC in effect acts as the guardian and custodian of the Bill of Rights as contained in the Constitution. It derives its mandate   from Section 184 of the Constitution and must “promote respect for human rights and a culture of human rights; promote the protection, development and attainment of human rights; and must monitor and assess the observance of human rights in the Republic”  including Freedom of Speech. Elected public representatives in every sphere, political parties and its leaders as well as State Owned Enterprises are not exempt.

All of the above functions and the powers of the SAHRC must equally apply towards the SABC and its management. We requested the South African Human Rights Commission for a ruling a month ago as we believed that a ruling by the South African Human Rights Commission on the SABC matter, is in national interest and in the interest of upcoming free and fair elections on 3 August 2016.

During the past few years, the Human Rights Commission clearly demonstrated that this constitutional institution is unable to fulfil its constitutional duties and enforce human rights for all. In some cases, the Human Rights Commission very quickly ruled on matters where rights were violated, but when it is politically risky, individuals toyed with the Human Rights Commission. In a society that is supposed to be equal, it seems as if the Human Rights Commission, regards the rights of some, more important than others. This now includes the SABC management.  The South African Human Rights Commission disappointed us once again.

Issued by Jan Bosman, Chief Secretary of the Afrikanerbond, 26 July 2016 

LETTER TO SAHRC – 29 JUNE 2016

ADV LAWRENCE MUSHWANA

CHAIRPERSON: SA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Dear Adv Mushwana

SOUTH AFRICAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION SHOULD ACT URGENTLY IN RESPECT OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS BY THE PUBLIC BROADCASTER  (SABC)

With the local government elections scheduled for 3 August 2016, the current SABC crisis and clampdown on news broadcasting and the suspension of journalists must be a cause for concern for anyone who upholds the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and who promotes the constitutional democracy.

The South African Human Rights Commission must be aware of the “corrosive atmosphere” as indicated in the letter of resignation by former acting CEO Mr Jimi Matthews. Decisions by management and consequent edicts by SABC management to news staff must have a severe impact on editorial integrity and independence.

The South African Constitution is clear that the state, including the SABC “must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights”. Events in the last couple of months indicate that exactly the opposite is happening at the SABC.

Current SABC editorial policies on the website of the SABC refer to the following:

“The SABC is governed by the Charter of the Corporation, which enshrines the journalistic, creative and programming independence of the staff of the Corporation, and the constitutionally protected freedom of expression.”

“We resolutely uphold the principle of journalistic freedom and see the protection of a journalist's sources as an important part of this principle.”

It is clear that decisions by some individuals at the SABC are not in line with its own editorial policy nor is it in line with Section 16 of the Bill of Rights which guarantee Freedom of expression:  

“Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes –

(a) freedom of the press and other media;

(b) freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;

(c) freedom of artistic creativity; and

(d) academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.”

Editorial policies and decisions decreed by the SABC management must be tested against the Bill of Rights and cannot be moulded to any one person or sycophant’s opinion.

In terms of Section 184 which establishes the functions of the South African Human Rights Commission

(1) The South African Human Rights Commission must –

(a) promote respect for human rights and a culture of human rights;

(b) promote the protection, development and attainment of human rights; and

(c) monitor and assess the observance of human rights in the Republic.

(2) The South African Human Rights Commission has the powers, as regulated by national legislation, necessary to perform its functions, including the power –

(a) to investigate and to report on the observance of human rights;

(b) to take steps to secure appropriate redress where human rights have been violated.

All of the above functions and the powers of the SAHRC must equally apply towards the SABC and its management. We believe that an urgent investigation and ruling by the South African Human Rights Commission on this matter is in national interest and in the interest of upcoming free and fair elections.

Serious reflection is required on the role of the SABC as the public broadcaster and its functioning within the South African Constitution and the Bill of Rights. There are major problems at the SABC and political meddling is but one of them. An urgent investigation and ruling by the South African Human Rights Commission will, in our opinion begin a process to hold the SABC and its management responsible and accountable, especially with a view to the upcoming local government elections.

It is of the utmost importance that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights once again take their rightful place as the supreme law against which editorial policies and decrees at the SABC can be tested. 

Sincerely yours

Jan Bosman

Chief Secretary