MMA has a record of advocacy and, where appropriate, litigation in the furtherance of the promotion and protection of ethical and fair journalism. This role includes in its mandate, the promotion of freedom of expression and the legitimate limitation of the right in respect of hate speech. As such, MMAs standing to intervene in the present proceedings as an Amicus curiae is clear insofar as it seeks to introduce argument before this court on where an appropriate balance may be struck between the protection of media freedom and the prevention of intimidation and harassment of the media on the one hand and legitimate, robust political rhetoric on the other hand.

Read below MMA Heads of Argument

MMA- Heads of Argument

MMA and SOS Demand Timetable

In February 2019, Media Monitoring Africa and SOS: Support Public Broadcasting Coalition have written a letter to the Presidency and Parliament demanding a timetable reflecting the appointment process for the new SABC Board members. Read the letter here.

This letter remains unanswered and on April 2 a follow up was sent: 2 April follow up letter. 

Another letter was sent on 10 April.

For more information contact,

William Bird (williamb@mma.org.za)

Duduetsang Makuse (duduetsang@soscoalition.org.za)

MMA and SOS Demand Timetable

Search & Seizure Warrant – Jacques Pauw

The legal document detailing the reason for search at  Jacques Pauw’s home, Cape Town on 28/02/2018.




Media Monitoring Africa’s request in relation to State Capture Inquiry Regulations

Regulations for the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture,
Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State

Media Monitoring Africa is a non-profit organisation which promotes ethical and fair journalism that supports democracy and human rights. MMA seeks to protect the constitutional right to freedom of expression and the media and
advocates for the free flow of information to the public on matters of public interest.

MMA is aware that the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector Including Organs of State (“the State Capture Commission”) is due to begin imminently. MMA is deeply concerned by certain clauses in the Regulations for the State Capture Commission published in Government Gazette 41436 of 9 February 2018 (“the Regulations”), which appear to limit media freedom, the right to freedom of expression and the right to access information.

Read MMA’s letter to the President, and the response, below.

Letter from WW to President of the Republic of South Africa 20180227

Letter to The President of the Republic of South Africa
Letter of Reply from the Presidency of the Republic

Judgement on Ministerial Appointments at the SABC

Judgement was handed down today regarding the appointment powers of the executive positions at the SABC. The judgement is a massive win for transparency, accountability and good governance at the SABC.

Among others, one of the key elements of the judgement is found in paragraph 3 of the order, stating that “the executive members of the Board are to be appointed solely by the non-executive members of the Board without any requirement of approval by the Minster”.

Find the full judgement below.

Judgment in the case of the powers of the Minster and appointments of SABC executive

Media Monitoring Africa and SOS Coalition // President of RSA and Others

The following case concerns the President’s failure to appoint non-executive Directors to the Board of the SABC. MMA and SOS believe that the delay in the appointment of these crucial positions further exacerbates the crisis at the SABC. MMA and SOS have therefor submitted a legal application for these appointments to be made.

Founding Affidavit_October2017
Notice of Motion_October2017

MMA and Sanef: Hate Speech Appeal Heads of Argument

The argument proposes a three question test approach to determining Hate Speech.
This includes:
1. Does the piece amount to advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion? If not, the complaint must be rejected.
2. If so, does the piece constitutes incitement to cause harm? If not, the complaint must be rejected.
3. If so, is there some overarching public interest that justified the publication of the piece? If so, the complaint must be rejected.
We are currently awaiting ruling on the appeal case.

Van Breda // Media 24 and Others

On the 18th May, 2017, Media Monitoring Africa appeared in court as Amicus to the Van Breda/Media 24 and Others case. The case dealt with the issue of live streaming the murder trial of Henry Van Breda.

In mid August, the National Director of Public Prosecutions gave note that it was filing for application for leave to appeal in terms of rule 19. Download papers below.

On the 8th November, 2017, the Constitutional Court dismissed the leave to appeal application by the National Director of Public Prosecutions. See added document (order) attached below.

NDPP Leave to Appeal Dismissed by Constitutional Court
NDPP and Media24: Henry Van Breda - Application for leave to appeal
Media Monitoring Africa Heads of Argument
Van Breda Head of Argument
NDPP Heads of Argument
Media 24 Heads of Argument

The Media 24 Case: Centre for Child Law and 4 Others v Media 24 Limited and 13 Others (Part B)

In early 2015, there was a story in the media about a child victim known as Zephany Nurse, although this is not her real name. A woman had allegedly kidnapped her from the hospital in which she was born and subsequently raised her as her own child. It was only once Zephany was 17 years and 9 months of age that her biological parents found her and that DNA tests proved she was their child.

The facts of the story were unusual and as such, the media wanted to publish all the information about it, including the identity of the child concerned. However, the child did not want her identity to be made public.There is a law that protects the identity of children who are witnesses in criminal matters. The law does not specifically say that the law applies to children who are victims in criminal matters. It is important to establish whether a child who is a victim of a crime is protected by this law or not.

For several decades, this law was interpreted to mean that the protection of the child’s identity lasts after they turn 18 years of age. More recently, however, the media has begun to interpret the law to mean that when children turn 18 years of age, they are no longer protected by that law and their identity can be made public. Journalists were threatening to make Zephany’s identity public once she turned 18 years old. She obtained the services of lawyers at the Centre for Child Law, a law clinic. On 21 April 2015, the court gave an order which prohibited the media from publishing her identity. This protection continues, pending a court hearing which will determine the ambit of the law. The hearing occurs in the Pretoria High Court on Thursday 9 January 2017 and Friday 10 January 2017.

Heads of Argument
Additional information including relevant law, main arguments, resources, FAQ's and contacts
Heads of argument from the 7 September 2018 hearing
mended Heads of Argument for the 7 September 2018 hearing

MMA, SOS and FXI case against SABC Coverage of Violent Protest Ban

Media Monitoring Africa (MMA), the SOS Support Public Broadcasting Coalition (SOSA) and the Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) lodged papers with the Complaints Compliance Committee of ICASA over the SABC’s decision to ban coverage of violent protests/destruction of public property.

We believe the decision to be unlawful and in clear violation of the Broadcasting Act, the SABC’s licence conditions and the SABC’s revised editorial policies. The SABC seem dead set against the possibility of changing their mind (See: http://www.thenewage.co.za/sabc-wont-back-down-on-decision/) which is why we have opted to go the route of a legal challenge to the Complaints Compliance Committee.

William Bird, Director of MMA said, “The decision has clear negative implications, for media freedom and yet we have been given no indication that the decision followed due process. Given the gravity of the issue, we would have hoped for a clearly argued principle backed up by strong supporting evidence, instead we have hubris and confusion.“

Supporting the complaint, SOS Coordinator, Sekoetlane Phamodi, said, “We are really disappointed that one of the first acts drawing on the Revised Editorial Policies see the SABC undermine its own independence and inject a culture of self-censorship within our national public broadcaster. Indeed, we believe the Revised Editorial Policies themselves need to be struck down.”

“As the FXI, we too are concerned about the impact the decision will have for ordinary South Africans and their right to freedom of expression and access to information. Not only does the banning take us back to an SABC of the 80’s, it is also afundamentally flawed reasoning.” Sheniece Linderboom Head of the FXI Law Clinic.

As the decision has been taken with immediate effect we have asked that the matter be heard on an urgent basis.

Complaint to CCC FINAL
SABC Reply
CCC Ruling
Letter to SABC
Council Resolution