Tuwani Mulaudzi vs. Daily Maverick

SUMMARY

The headline to the story in dispute read, Analysis: Time for Judge Hlophe to face the music (published on 13 June 2017).

This ruling by the Chair of the Appeals Panel Judge Bernard Ngoepe was based on the Press Code that was in effect before 30 September 2022.

The article was about Supreme Court of Appeal Justice Ponnan’s ruling regarding Judge John Hlophe’s “bias” in a case where he had failed to recuse himself and instead ruled in favour of his own lawyer’s client (Tuwani Mulaudzi).

Mulaudzi complained that the story incorrectly referred to him as a “crooked” businessman – while he had never been found guilty of any offence, that the article omitted several important issues, and that he had not been afforded a right of reply.

Citing a statement by Judge Ponnan, the Ombud said the use of the word “crooked” was justified. He added that the story was mainly about Judge Hlope, adding that it was not accepted journalistic practice to ask a party in a court case for comment.

The complaint was dismissed, after which Mulaudzi applied for leave to appeal.

Judge Ngoepe agreed with the Ombud and inter alia added that the:

• remarks attributed to Judge Ponnan of the SCA had implicated Mulaudzi criminally;
• circumstances under which the R43m had been paid to Mulaudzi seemed to be common cause; and
• story was based on court documents.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

THE RULING ITSELF IS CURRENTLY UNAVAILABLE