Download - Media Institute of Southern Africa

ZIMBABWE
State of the media in Southern Africa 2002
After kicking Mauluka, Makaya
went to look for Lloyd Mudiwa, “The
Daily News” reporter who was covering
the story. Pointing at the reporter,
Makaya is reported to have said that
he wanted “to deal with the people responsible
for writing about him.”
“Don’t start troubling me. I have been
quiet all along but you are now beginning
to get on my nerves,” said
Makaya.
Makaya is appearing in the High
Court on allegations of having prejudiced
the state-owned Zimbabwe National
Oil Company of over Z$1 billion
(approx. US$18,292,000). He was
the company operations manager at the
time the alleged offence is said to have
been committed. The Zimbabwe government
has blamed among others, the
corruption at the company for the fuel
problems that the country is facing.
ALERT
DATE: 2002-05-10
PERSON(S): Andrew Meldrum,
Jan Raath, Peta Thornycroft
VIOLATION(S): Legislation
Three foreign journalists have made
an urgent application at the Supreme
Court, challenging the constitutionality
of certain sections of the Access
to Information and Protection of Privacy
Act.
In papers filed at the Supreme Court,
journalists Jan Raath, Andrew
Meldrum and Peta Thornycroft ask the
court to declare Sections 71 (1), 79 (2),
79 (6), 80 and 83 of the act unconstitutional.
The journalists argue that
these sections contravene Section 20
(1) of the Zimbabwe constitution,
which guarantees freedom of expression,
receiving and imparting information
as a right.
Alternatively, the journalists are asking
the court to suspend provisions of
Sections 79, 82, 83 and 84 (2) pending
the establishment of the Media
Commission provided for in Section
20 of the act, or the promulgation of
the prescribed qualifications for accreditation
to practice as a journalist.
In his application, Raath stated that
according to the act only citizens or
permanent residents of Zimbabwe will
be entitled to be accredited as a matter
of right. It will be entirely up to the
Media Commission’s discretion to
grant or refuse accreditation to journalists
who are neither citizens nor
permanent residents of Zimbabwe, he
argued. “Even journalists who are citizens
or permanent residents of Zimbabwe
and are qualified are not entitled
to accreditation as a matter of
right,” read the argument. “The commission
has an unfettered discretion as
to whether or not to grant accreditation
to journalists falling into that category
as well,” said Raath in his founding
affidavit.
Raath noted that the act contemplates
that for an individual to be accredited
as a journalist, one must
among other things possess the “prescribed
qualifications”. However, no
such “qualifications” are specified in
the act itself. Raath further said that
the Minister of Information and Publicity,
who is supposed to prescribe
such qualifications, had not done so
more than a month after the act became
law.
Referring to Section 80, Raath argued
that the new offence of “abuse
of journalistic privilege” created by the
act is unnecessary, unreasonable and
an undue restriction on the practice of
So This Is Democracy? 219