Africa-Press – South-Africa. The Moti Group says it is weighing up its legal options, including approaching the Constitutional Court, following a High Court order on Monday which overturned the gag order it obtained against amaBhungane.
Businessman Zunaid Moti and the Moti Group are involved in a legal scuffle with investigative journalism unit amaBhungane over leaked documents the publication received from a source.
AmaBhungane had published a number of articles as part of its Moti Files series.
In June, the Moti Group obtained a gag order against amaBhungane, ex parte, meaning the publication did not know about the case, and the order was issued without it being afforded a chance to oppose it.
In addition to the gag order prohibiting publishing articles about the files, amaBhungane was ordered to return the trove of documents to the group.
The publication then challenged the ex parte application.
On Monday, Gauteng High Court Deputy Judge President Judge Roland Sutherland delivered judgment and overturned the order the group had obtained.
He also awarded costs to amaBhungane and its journalists.
The group said although the order was in favour of amaBhungane, it was the first round of an ongoing legal process.
It added it had studied the judgment and believed a factual finding was not made on amaBhungane’s possession of documents it said were stolen.
The group said it was considering its legal options, including an approach to the Constitutional Court, as it viewed the case as one relating to the constitutional right to privacy.
The group’s CEO, Dondo Mogajane said in a statement:
“There is no hierarchy of rights under the Constitution, and while I sincerely appreciate and support the freedom of the press, I do not believe that this can come at the expense of any person or entity’s constitutional right to privacy.
“The facts of our specific case are unique, and we strongly believe that the legal issues at play deserve further consideration out of a matter of principle.”
The group said a criminal case was still pending regarding the theft of the documents, adding it would offer its full cooperation to the police where required.
It added the ex parte application was launched in response to amaBhungane’s confirmation its journalists did not have the stolen documents, only then to attach the stolen documents to its articles.
This resulted in the High Court granting the interdict against amaBhungane.
The group maintained it was taking the issue of reputational damage seriously and was determined not to allow amaBhungane’s journalists to abuse their position as press to advance a specific narrative.
It said it had also filed a complaint with the Press Ombudsman and vowed to pursue other legal avenues.
Sutherland’s judgment included strong comments about “contraband” in the hands of journalists being a positive and necessary good for society.
He was also scathing about the issuing of the ex parte application.
AmaBhungane hailed the judgment, saying it was a vindication of investigative journalism.
It said it would need to “bolster its financial resources” to resist the group’s “onslaught”.
For More News And Analysis About South-Africa Follow Africa-Press
