AfriForum vs Sunday World (3)

Complaint 32095

Ruling by the Deputy Press Ombud

Date of publication:

17 November 2024 (print)

18 November 2024 (online)

Headline of publication:

“NWC asks Ramaphosa to sign BELA Act” (online)

Link: https://sundayworld.co.za/news/nwc-asks-ramaphosa-to-sign-bela-act/

Author: Queenin Masuabi, Mawande Amashabalala

Particulars

1. A complaint was lodged on 18 November 2024 by Ernst van Zyl, the head of public relations at AfriForum, on behalf of the organisation. The complaint included a copy of the statement quoted in the report. It was issued by Kallie Kriel, CEO of AfriForum, on behalf of both his organisation and of Solidarity.
2. A response was received from the newspaper’s editor, Ngwako Malatji, on 26 November 2024.
3. AfriForum responded on 5 December.
4. I take into account the various submissions filed in this matter.

The article

5. The article reports on a decision by the National Working Committee (NWC) of the African National Congress (ANC), pressing for the implementation of the Basic Education Laws Amendment Act (BELA) if negotiations with groups opposed to aspects of the bill fail to deliver results by the president’s deadline of the end of November 2024.
6. The report provides background and quotes an unnamed “high-ranking NWC member” on the ANC’s position.
7. The elements in dispute come in the last section of the report, which quotes Kriel’s statement. In the 11^th paragraph, the article reads: “AfriForum and Solidarity have laughed off the ANC’s threats, saying the party was a small fish in the bigger scheme of things.” And a little further on, “Anything the ANC says about them, said Kriel, was an attempt by the former liberation movement to appear brave when it is toothless.”

The complaint

8. The complainants argue that the article is in breach of clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 3.3 of the Press Code.

Complaint: Misquoting Kriel

Arguments

9. The complainant argues that the two sentences in dispute misquote the statement they issued to the newspaper and are “total fabrications”. They are therefore in breach of the Press Code’s requirement to report truthfully, as expressed in clauses 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3.
10. The complainant also notes that this is the third complaint they have made against Sunday World in a short space of time, indicating “an escalation of lies” and an agenda against their organisation.
11. The respondent says the statements in dispute were not quotes attributed to Kriel, but a legitimate interpretation of the statement issued. The statements would be identified with quote marks if it was otherwise.
12. The newspaper then sets out the basis for its interpretation.  It points to parts of the statement that say processes outside the ANC that are dealing with the issue are more important than the party, that the party is responding to a need to appear strong and the call to the president to worry more about his role in government than factions in the party.  These make the point that the party is weak, sufficient for the claim they are calling it a small fish and toothless. As for the term “laughing off” the ANC’s position, the newspaper argues it simply means to dismiss which accurately reflects what AfriForum is doing.

Discussion

13. The question here is whether the statements complained about misquote the complainant or represent a legitimate interpretation of their position.
14. The newspaper is correct in their argument that the absence of quote marks indicates the statements are paraphrase or interpretation.
15. The phrasing of the first statement is such that it can be read as an interpretation of the overall intent of the statement issued. It does not seem far-fetched to say that AfriForum dismissed the ANC’s position.  And the claim they regarded the party as unimportant is a legitimate interpretation of the fact they pointed to other, more important processes dealing with the dispute about BELA.
16. The second statement includes an attribution to Kriel, and therefore should be read as paraphrase more than interpretation.
17. The organisation’s statement refers to an alleged need by the ANC to appear strong in public, contrasting this with other processes seen as more important. Rendering this as “an attempt to appear strong when it is toothless” is fairly loose but not without foundation.

Ruling

18. I find that the article did not breach clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 or 3.3 of the Press Code.
19. The complaint is dismissed.

Appeal

20. The Complaints Procedures lay down that, within seven working days of receipt of this decision, either party may apply for leave to appeal to the Chairperson of the SA Press Appeals Panel, Judge Bernard Ngoepe, fully setting out the grounds of appeal. He can be contacted at [email protected]

Franz Krüger
Deputy Press Ombud
6 January 2025