Quote of the week

It is clear that no legitimate objective is advanced by excluding domestic workers from COIDA.  If anything, their exclusion has a significant stigmatising effect which entrenches patterns of disadvantage based on race, sex and gender…. In considering those who are most vulnerable or most in need, a court should take cognisance of those who fall at the intersection of compounded vulnerabilities due to intersecting oppression based on race, sex, gender, class and other grounds.  To allow this form of state-sanctioned inequity goes against the values of our newly constituted society namely human dignity, the achievement of equality and ubuntu.  To exclude this category of individuals from the social security scheme established by COIDA is manifestly unreasonable.

Victor AJ
Mahlangu and Another v Minister of Labour and Others (CCT306/19) [2020] ZACC 24 (19 November 2020)
21 February 2007

Paris is sleeping…..

The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) on Tuesday laid a 20 page complaint against the SABC with the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa). The complaint argues that the SABC violated the Broadcasting Act 11 times, its licence conditions five times and the Constitution three times.

According to the Mail & Guardian:

An allegation that Zikalala showed a Special Assignment programme to the Presidency prior to broadcast is especially grave, as it opens the SABC up to editorial influence in violation of the Act and its own code of editorial practice.

The FXI further argues in its complaint that the denial of the existence of a blacklist in June last year had misled the public — a violation of the Act, the SABC code of practice and Icasa’s code of conduct for broadcasters.

The complaint also points to possible violations of the freedom-of-expression clause found in the Constitution. These include an attempt to force the Mail & Guardian Online to remove a copy of the blacklisting report, and the alleged screening of the Special Assignment show to the Presidency.

Having not seen the complaint and not being an expert on Icasa (after reading the various acts governing Icasa’s work I felt like a first year law student at a Master’s seminar on Tax Law), I have no idea whether the complaint has any legal merit.

However, if even a fraction of the media reports about the shenanigans at Icasa are true, I would not hold my breath for a speedy resolution of the dispute. After all, according to his ex secretary, Paris Mashile the chair of Icasa, hardly ever did Icasa work and liked taking off his shoes and having a nap in his office.

Maybe Mr Mashile is a very hard worker and his ex-secretary was lying through her teeth about his work habits. But given the fact that Icasa is the institution that is supposed to regulate Telkom and thus is supposed to help bring down telecommunication prices, I can only say again: don’t hold your breath FXI.

SHARE:     
BACK TO TOP
2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest