Publications
Partners
Advocate JP Broster. Picture: Siyanda Mayeza
Pietermaritzburg High Court Judge Piet Koen has reserved judgment
in an application by several media houses for access to the disciplinary
hearings of public works department officials charged for their role in the
Nkandlagate scandal.
The application had been brought by lawyers acting jointly for
Media24, Times Media Group and M&G Media, who want reporters to be allowed
to sit in on the hearings of the officials who were fingered in the Special
Investigation Unit (SIU) report into the R248 million security upgrade on
President Jacob Zuma’s Nkandla home.
The hearings – being chaired by external chairpersons brought in by
the public works department – have been suspended pending the outcome of today’s
application.
In heads of argument presented to the court, Andrea Gabriel SC, for
the media houses, said they wanted access to the hearings for four reporters and
not for broadcast.
Reporters would abide by any ruling by the chairpersons and would
not interfere with the proceedings.
Gabriel asked the court to uphold the ruling by chairperson Nozuko
Nxusani in the hearing of Jean Rindel that the media should have access to cover
the proceedings.
She said the public service code was unclear as to whether the
hearings should be public or private and argued that the fact that large amounts
of taxpayers’ money was involved in this case set the hearing apart from those
dealing with direct industrial relations matters.
“Moreover, the allegations which form the subject of the
disciplinary proceedings (including the identity of the officials who are
accused of improper conduct) are already in the public sphere. The very public
nature of the Nkandla scandal demands that the public is given the full facts in
order to make informed political choices, including whether or not the
disciplinary hearings instigated against the employees are without foundation,’’
Nxusani said.
She said the employees are “employees whose salaries are paid for
by the taxpayer and who are accountable to the taxpayer for their conduct, much
like they NPA.”
“They are constitutionally bound to ensure that there is no
misappropriation of funds and to ensure that taxpayer’s money is properly
spent,’’ she said.
Counsel for the employees, advocate JP Broster, argued that a
disciplinary hearing was “a private contractual hearing aking to a private
commercial arbitration to which the media is not entitled to access.’’
Broster said that media access would undermine this contractual
right to privacy whether the employee worked for government or a bank. Public
interest in the hearing could be satisfied by media coverage of appeals at
bargaining council or CCMA level should there be a dismissal of any of the
employees and was not necessary at this level.
The department of public works has not opposed the
application.
