Opinion / Columnist
Innscor vs Rutendo Matinyarare takedown order judgement
29 Aug 2024 at 17:54hrs | Views
Yesterday, we finally received the judgment from Judge Makume, following nine days of deliberations on Innscor's court application filed on August 20th, 2024, in which they sought a court order compelling me to remove articles and videos posted after the contempt appeal.
In this judgment, the judge granted Innscor the take-down order they requested but also allowed for an automatic appeal, which effectively paused the requirement for me to remove my articles until the appeal process is complete.
Similar to the contempt hearing, we believe that Innscor has not demonstrated how my videos and articles are false or defamatory. Additionally, the judge also did not make an effort to determine whether the content he is ordering to be taken down is indeed defamatory and not of public interest. Hence, we are appealing the ruling in the Supreme Court.
From the current judgments we’ve received from the lower courts in South Africa (High Court), it appears that I am not just being prohibited from publishing lies and falsehoods about Innscor, but I’m being coerced to TOTALLY stop writing ANYTHING, even if it is factual or exposes wrongdoing by Innscor. This is a blatant violation of my journalistic rights and my constitutional right to free speech.
Interestingly, there is a relevant case - Zunaid Motti vs. Amabungane - where Zunaid Motti was awarded a gag order ex parte against Amabungane on June 1, 2023. As we have done with Innscor, the journalists appealed to the Supreme Court, and Judge Sutherland invalidated the gag order, calling it the most egregious abuse of court process and a war on journalism.
Given the similarities between the Zunaid Motti and Amabungane case and my situation with Innscor, where Innscor is attempting to gag me from exposing its internal workings and illegal activities in Zimbabwe, why hasn’t the court provided me, as a journalist, similar protection from this attack on journalism and truth?
Why hasn’t the court recognized that Innscor’s attempt to gag a journalist and whistleblower from using facts to expose their wrongdoing is an egregious abuse of court process and war on journalists?
Is it because I am a Black Zimbabwean journalist opposing a white corporation whose illegal activities in Zimbabwe primarily harm the much despised Zimbabweans and not South Africans? Or is it that some South African judges in lower courts lack the competence to navigate complex and nuanced issues such as balancing public interest in a foreign country, determining what constitutes defamation, deciding whether it’s defamation for a journalist to expose a corporation’s criminal activities, and making a determination on what South African courts have jurisdiction over?
It is starting to seem like the purpose of these rulings against me by South African High Court judges is not to protect Innscor from defamation that could irreparably damage its reputation, but rather to strip me of my journalistic rights and the right to whistleblow against Innscor’s crimes that prejudice Zimbabweans, to shield Innscor from accountability.
But why would South African judges try to silence a journalist from whistleblowing on crimes committed by a Zimbabwean company in Zimbabwe? Is this simply a case of bad judgment, or is there something more sinister at play?
Finally, by making these questionable decisions, are these judgments not effectively creating new case law that prohibits any journalist from exposing wrongdoing by white-owned corporations in Africa? Is this not neo-colonialism by gavel instead of the gun?
In this judgment, the judge granted Innscor the take-down order they requested but also allowed for an automatic appeal, which effectively paused the requirement for me to remove my articles until the appeal process is complete.
Similar to the contempt hearing, we believe that Innscor has not demonstrated how my videos and articles are false or defamatory. Additionally, the judge also did not make an effort to determine whether the content he is ordering to be taken down is indeed defamatory and not of public interest. Hence, we are appealing the ruling in the Supreme Court.
From the current judgments we’ve received from the lower courts in South Africa (High Court), it appears that I am not just being prohibited from publishing lies and falsehoods about Innscor, but I’m being coerced to TOTALLY stop writing ANYTHING, even if it is factual or exposes wrongdoing by Innscor. This is a blatant violation of my journalistic rights and my constitutional right to free speech.
Interestingly, there is a relevant case - Zunaid Motti vs. Amabungane - where Zunaid Motti was awarded a gag order ex parte against Amabungane on June 1, 2023. As we have done with Innscor, the journalists appealed to the Supreme Court, and Judge Sutherland invalidated the gag order, calling it the most egregious abuse of court process and a war on journalism.
Given the similarities between the Zunaid Motti and Amabungane case and my situation with Innscor, where Innscor is attempting to gag me from exposing its internal workings and illegal activities in Zimbabwe, why hasn’t the court provided me, as a journalist, similar protection from this attack on journalism and truth?
Why hasn’t the court recognized that Innscor’s attempt to gag a journalist and whistleblower from using facts to expose their wrongdoing is an egregious abuse of court process and war on journalists?
Is it because I am a Black Zimbabwean journalist opposing a white corporation whose illegal activities in Zimbabwe primarily harm the much despised Zimbabweans and not South Africans? Or is it that some South African judges in lower courts lack the competence to navigate complex and nuanced issues such as balancing public interest in a foreign country, determining what constitutes defamation, deciding whether it’s defamation for a journalist to expose a corporation’s criminal activities, and making a determination on what South African courts have jurisdiction over?
It is starting to seem like the purpose of these rulings against me by South African High Court judges is not to protect Innscor from defamation that could irreparably damage its reputation, but rather to strip me of my journalistic rights and the right to whistleblow against Innscor’s crimes that prejudice Zimbabweans, to shield Innscor from accountability.
But why would South African judges try to silence a journalist from whistleblowing on crimes committed by a Zimbabwean company in Zimbabwe? Is this simply a case of bad judgment, or is there something more sinister at play?
Finally, by making these questionable decisions, are these judgments not effectively creating new case law that prohibits any journalist from exposing wrongdoing by white-owned corporations in Africa? Is this not neo-colonialism by gavel instead of the gun?
Source - X
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
