Al Jama-Ah vs. City Press

This ruling is based on the written submissions of Mr MGE Hendricks, leader of the political party Al Jama-Ah, and those of Ferial Haffajee, editor-in-chief of the City Press newspaper.

Complaint

Al Jama-Ah is complaining about a report in City Press of 12 April 2015, headlined Isis and the normal, suburban girl.

Hendricks complains that the newspaper did not do enough to protect the identity of the child as it gave a vivid description of her and her circumstances.

The text

The story was about a 15-year-old girl from the suburb of Kenwyn in Cape Town who had allegedly tried to join the Islamic State.

The complaint in more detail

Hendricks complains that the newspaper has not adequately tried to protect the identity of the child. “The newspaper gave vivid descriptions to identify who the child is and to identify her school, her place of residence, her suburb and the mosque that the family attends.” It also helped readers to identify her mother’s medical practice, he argues.

He adds the story reflected negatively on the child “[i]f it is true as many believe that Isis is an outfit outside the fold of Islam so the allegation against the girl will earn her the [wroth] of the Muslim community”.

Hendricks elaborates, stating the story said that the girl’s:

·         home was a double-storey, cream-coloured house in a street lined with picket fences, had a gate in the front yard and was flanked by surveillance cameras;

·         home was in the southern suburb of Kenwyn, “which is relatively small”;

·         school had 330 learners;

·         mother was a medical doctor in Grassy Park (home for many members of the Muslim Judicial Council) – “There are not many female doctors practicing in Grassy Park, who lives in Kenwyn”;

·         father was completing his pilot’s license – “She must be the only girl (in the area) whose father is doing that”; and

·         mother’s birthday date was disclosed.

He says that the mosque in Cape Town has declared the IS an anti-Islamic formation which violates the core principles of the Muslim faith. “In other words the girl is out of the fold of Islam because of her alleged membership.”

The story also said that she often visited Durban, and stated as fact that she had climbed out of her bedroom window so as to leave her home to join the IS. “The Children’s Act, the Child Justice Act and the children conventions that South Africa is a signatory to restrict any action of the child and reporting to such evidence to a children court held in camera.”

Hendricks demands that City Press makes a donation of R50 000 to a child advocacy NGO of its choice and write articles to reinforce the objectives of the Press Code regarding children.

The newspaper’s response

Haffajee says the newspaper took “due care” not to identify the young woman, or to play into any tropes of Islamophobia by emphasising the community-spiritedness of the family and the history of the teenager as told through people who knew her.

“[O]ur team is so aware of protecting minors that we extended deeper protection than even our code determines. In our opinion, our article is not harmful to the young woman. In our opinion, the bride recruitment tactics of the Islamic State are far more harmful to young women – perhaps that would be a better use of his energy, commitment and time.”

My considerations

The relevant sections of the Press Code (8, 8.1) read: “The Bill of Rights (Section 28.2) in the South African Constitution states: ‘A child’s best interests are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child’. The press, applying the spirit of this section, shall therefore exercise exceptional care and consideration when reporting about children. If there is any chance that coverage might cause harm of any kind to a child, he or she shall not be…identified without the consent of a legal guardian or of a similarly responsible adult and the child (taking into consideration the evolving capacity of the child), and a public interest is evident.”

I note that, in addition to what Hendricks is saying, the story also mentioned that the girl’s:

·         father was a local businessman;

·         parents had three children; and

·         parents moved from Durban to Cape Town some six years ago, and often return to Durban for visits.

Given all of the above, I have little doubt that residents in the area might have been able to identify the girl in question, based on the over-sharing of the information reported in the story. There really was no need to identify all of the above – the newspaper could just have said that its reporter visited the house.

This office has no mandate to impose fines on newspapers for transgressing the Press Code.

Finding

City Press is in breach of Section 8.1 of the Press Code, as cited above.

Hendricks’s demands that City Press makes a donation of R50 000 to a child advocacy NGO of its choice and write articles to reinforce the objectives of the Press Code regarding children is dismissed.

Seriousness of breaches

Under the headline Hierarchy of sanctions, Section 8 of our Complaints Procedures distinguishes between minor breaches (Tier 1), serious breaches (Tier 2) and serious misconduct (Tier 3).

The offence mentioned above is a Tier 2 offence.

Sanction

City Press is directed to:

·         apologise for giving too much information about the girl in question, which locals may easily have used to identify the child;

·         prepare the text and provide it to this office prior to publication;

·         publish it on the same page as the offending article; and

·         end the text with the following words: “Visit www.presscouncil.org.za for the full finding.”

Appeal

Our 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].

Johan Retief

Press Ombudsman