“Gunned down in his yard” (Sowetan, 14/03/2011, p.2) neglected the rights of a 17-year-old child witness by naming him. The article further indirectly identified the child by naming the school he attends. It receives a MAD for ignoring the rights of the child and consequently placing him in danger.

The article reported that a police officer shot and killed a Grade 12 pupil who was driving with his 17-year-old schoolmate. A murder case has reportedly been opened against the policeman.

The 17-year-old who survived the alleged incident was named and interviewed in the article. Interviewing the child who is not only a witness to a crime but also the death of his schoolmate is problematic as it is unclear whether a counsellor was present at the time of the interview or whether he received any counselling prior to the interview. This is necessary as the child may be subjected to secondary trauma from retelling and therefore reliving the experience.

Another major aspect of the article, which qualifies it as a MAD, results from the journalist quoting a section of the Criminal Procedure Act. The journalist quoted Section 49 of the Act but ignored and in fact, contravened Section 154(3) which states that: “no person shall publish in any manner whatever information which reveals or may reveal the identity of the accused under the age of 18 years or of a witness at criminal proceedings who is under the age of 18 years”.

Media Monitoring Africa’s Editorial Guidelines and Principles for Reporting on Children in the Media also state that: “in all stories in which a child has been involved in a crime, as a witness, victim or perpetrator, unless exceptional circumstances prevail and then only if there is informed consent from the child involved and the child’s caregiver, the child’s identity will not be revealed either directly or indirectly”. These are ethical guidelines which should also be considered when reporting on child witnesses. They are in place to protect these children from possible danger and intimidation which may result from people who have an interest in ensuring that the perpetrator is not convicted.

Journalists and editors need to adhere to legal and ethical obligations to protect the rights of children. In this specific case, Sowetan did not adhere to these obligations and this resulted in the violation of a child’s human rights.