Oh no we didn’t! Oh yes you did

THE Mail & Guardian newspaper has denied disregarding an interdict barring them from publishing the details of a draft internal report into alleged abuse of power at the SABC.

“We completely deny it… we have a paper trail of every step taken to comply with the order,” said M&G editor Ferial Haffajee.”I am quite convinced that we have done everything in our power to comply with the interdict.”Haffajee was responding to an SABC news report that the broadcaster’s Mafika Sihlali, who brought the interdict against the paper, said the M&G had disregarded the court ruling “in the most disgraceful manner”.Copies of the original story may have already been distributed by the time the interdict was granted.The paper was put to bed by 5.30pm, printed at 8pm and then immediately distributed.Once the interdict was granted, staff had to go back to the office, remake page one, two and three and take the new copies to distribution points to replace the interdicted copies, Haffajee said.Sihlali, the head of the SABC’s legal and business unit, sought the interdict on the grounds that he had not been given adequate time to comment on a piece the paper planned to publish.The interdict objected to the publication of the article related to an internal audit report containing a long list of allegations.These included financial irregularity, intimidation and violation of the Public Finance Management Act and SABC internal policy.Sihlali had interdicted the newspaper in his own capacity and not on behalf of the SABC.In her ruling, Judge Lettie Molopa said: “No doubt once the article is published it will definitely destroy the applicant.”The interdict would stand until the applicant had been given the opportunity to “deal with the issues properly”.Haffajee said: “We accept the court’s decision, but remain steadfastly opposed to pre-publication censorship – which is emerging as a major threat to investigative journalism in South Africa.”We remain convinced that the SABC executive was given adequate time to respond within our tight deadlines yesterday [Thursday],” Haffajee said.”The SABC was given questions by midday on Thursday; the executive was informed by his bosses shortly afterwards.”The interdict was brought by Barry Aaron & Associates on behalf of his client.The newspaper said it received the report on Thursday morning and first contacted SABC spokesman Kaizer Kganyago who, as per SABC policy, spoke on behalf of SABC employees.Kganyago then contacted Aaron’s client who contacted the M&G.The client remained silent and Aaron sent an sms an hour before print deadline saying that legal action would be taken, the M&G said.The newspaper was served unsigned papers at 7.30pm on Thursday.Said Haffajee: “The truth will out – and we hope to bring it to you in the next edition.”In the past 18 months, the M&G has faced six interdict attempts, three of them brought by the SABC.It has won four cases and was gagged twice.The return date for the matter is July 25.Nampa-Sapawe have a paper trail of every step taken to comply with the order,” said M&G editor Ferial Haffajee.”I am quite convinced that we have done everything in our power to comply with the interdict.”Haffajee was responding to an SABC news report that the broadcaster’s Mafika Sihlali, who brought the interdict against the paper, said the M&G had disregarded the court ruling “in the most disgraceful manner”.Copies of the original story may have already been distributed by the time the interdict was granted.The paper was put to bed by 5.30pm, printed at 8pm and then immediately distributed.Once the interdict was granted, staff had to go back to the office, remake page one, two and three and take the new copies to distribution points to replace the interdicted copies, Haffajee said.Sihlali, the head of the SABC’s legal and business unit, sought the interdict on the grounds that he had not been given adequate time to comment on a piece the paper planned to publish.The interdict objected to the publication of the article related to an internal audit report containing a long list of allegations.These included financial irregularity, intimidation and violation of the Public Finance Management Act and SABC internal policy.Sihlali had interdicted the newspaper in his own capacity and not on behalf of the SABC.In her ruling, Judge Lettie Molopa said: “No doubt once the article is published it will definitely destroy the applicant.”The interdict would stand until the applicant had been given the opportunity to “deal with the issues properly”.Haffajee said: “We accept the court’s decision, but remain steadfastly opposed to pre-publication censorship – which is emerging as a major threat to investigative journalism in South Africa.”We remain convinced that the SABC executive was given adequate time to respond within our tight deadlines yesterday [Thursday],” Haffajee said.”The SABC was given questions by midday on Thursday; the executive was informed by his bosses shortly afterwards.”The interdict was brought by Barry Aaron & Associates on behalf of his client.The newspaper said it received the report on Thursday morning and first contacted SABC spokesman Kaizer Kganyago who, as per SABC policy, spoke on behalf of SABC employees.Kganyago then contacted Aaron’s client who contacted the M&G.The client remained silent and Aaron sent an sms an hour before print deadline saying that legal action would be taken, the M&G said.The newspaper was served unsigned papers at 7.30pm on Thursday.Said Haffajee: “The truth will out – and we hope to bring it to you in the next edition.”In the past 18 months, the M&G has faced six interdict attempts, three of them brought by the SABC.It has won four cases and was gagged twice.The return date for the matter is July 25.Nampa-Sapa