Appeal Decision: CA Swart vs Daily Dispatch

SUMMARY

The headlines to the stories in dispute read, Failed to serve – BCM names and shames councillors who fail to hold ward meetings; and, Clarity on ‘failed to serve’ (published on 4 and 6 June 2018 respectively).

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 story was about certain ward councillors in the Buffalo City Metro who had reportedly failed to hold monthly meetings with residents of their wards.  The names and photos of defaulting councillors were published, amongst them André Swart.  The articles did report, however, that the latter had said he had proof that he held the meetings in his ward.

Swart complained that the journalist had published a:

• front-page story, although he had informed the reporter that he had proof that the allegation that he had not convened a ward meeting was false, and that this item had been withdrawn from the council’s agenda; and
• photograph of him and 14 other councillors that allegedly did not convene meetings.

A DA delegation met with representatives of the newspaper soon after the story had been published.  The news editor said it was agreed that it would publish the DA’s comments – but not that the newspaper would apologise.

The Ombud said Swart was present at the meeting where the matter had been discussed, and a solution agreed upon. He said, “As far as I am concerned, the matter was finalised when the newspaper published the DA’s views on the matter.”

Swart applied for leave to appeal against this decision.

Judge Ngoepe agreed with the Ombud and dismissed the application.

THE RULING ITSELF

In the matter between:

C A SWART                                                                                                         APPLICANT

AND

1.         Daily Dispatch (“respondent”) published an article on 4 June 2018 with the headline “Failed to serve”.  The contents of the story was that certain ward councillors in the Buffalo City Metro had failed to hold monthly meetings with residents of their wards to hear their views from time to time.  The names and photos of defaulting councillors were published, amongst them Mr Andre Swart (“the applicant”).  The articles did report, however, that he said he had proof that he held the meetings in his ward.  In his Ruling dated 5 Juy 2018, the Press Ombud summarized applicant’s complaints.  He says the applicant complains that the journalist has published a:

“l     Front-page story, in spite of the fact that he had informed the reporter that he had proof that the allegation that he had not convened a ward meetig was false, and that this item had been withdrawn from the council’s agenda; and

l       Photograph of him and 14 other councillors that allegedly did not convene meetings.”

2.          In his concise Ruling dated 5 July 2018, the Ombud dismissed the appeal.  He found that subsequent to the publication of the story, the Democratic Alliance, of which the applicant was at all material times a member, had a meeting with the respondent at which the issue was resolved.  The Ruling says: “According to news Editor Mike Loewe, it was agreed that the newspaper would give the DA a right of reply – which was published shortly after the meeting”.  The Ombud went further: “The deciding factor in this regard is that Mr Swart was present at the meeting where the matter was discussed, and a solution agreed upon.  It would have been a different matter if he was not part of that deal – but he was”. There is no need for me to add anything. I agree with the Ombud that “the matter was finalised when the newspaper published the DA’s views on the matter”.

3.         I hold that the applicant has no reasonable prospects of success on appeal; the application is therefore dismissed.

Dated this 14^th day of September 2018

Judge B M Ngoepe, Chair, Appeals Panel