Appeal Decision: Nkosinathi Mapumulo vs Sunday World
NKOSINATHI MAPUMULO APPLICANT
versus
SUNDAY WORLD RESPONDENT
Matter 17/07/2014
DECISION: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE APPEALS PANEL
[1] The Applicant is Nkosinathi Mapumulo, also known as “Black Coffee”. The Respondent is the Sunday World. The Applicant lodged a complaint against the Respondent following a story which was published by the Respondent on 22 June 2014. The headline, on the front page, read: “Love on the rocks – Black Coffee fights to save unhappy home.” The story was on page 2, with a headline “DJ’s wife feels betrayed, hurts” and “Actress Mabli Mlotshwa ‘drained’ by side chick drama.” The essence of the story was really about the unfaithfulness of the Applicant towards his wife, and that their marriage was in trouble.
[2] The complaint was that the story was false and misleading in saying that the complainant had extra-marital affairs; that his marriage was on the rocks and dissolving faster than Cremora in a hot cup of coffee. He complained that his reputation and dignity were harmed, and right of privacy infringed. Appellant further complained that the journalist relied on one source only. The Respondent’s response was to challenge the Applicant to point out any inaccuracies in the story; it maintained that the Applicant and his wife were indeed undergoing some marriage counselling. Respondent also argued that it got the information from more than one source; in fact, from three independent and reliable sources; it also stated that the headline on the front page merely suggested that the marriage was in trouble. Finally, Respondent stated that both the Applicant and his wife declined to comment, when offered the opportunity to do so; the story was balanced.
[3] In his Ruling dated 28 August 2014, the Ombudsman dismissed all the complaints; hence this application.
[4] The Ombudsman gave his reasons with which I fully agree. Briefly, he found that the Respondent went so far as to describe each of the three sources of information. He also found that the Applicant was a public figure and that although harm could come his way, the factor of public interest was overriding.
[5] In his Application for Leave to Appeal, the Applicant re-iterates right of privacy; indeed, going so far as to suggest that the extra-marital activities were a private matter into which the Applicant had never invited the Respondent. I am afraid the Applicant misses the point made by the Ombudsman: he is a public figure, and the media needed no invitation to write about his private life. As a married man and a public figure, the public interest factor weighed heavily. It is noteworthy that the Applicant does not deny the truth of the allegations; in this respect, it is important to mention that both the Applicant and his wife declined to comment when given the opportunity to do so.
[6] For the reasons given above, as also for those given by the Ombudsman, I hold that the Applicant has no reasonable prospects of success before the Appeals Panel; the application is therefore dismissed.
Dated this 31st day of October 2014
Judge B M Ngoepe: Chair; Appeals Panel
