Former SAFA CEO and lawyer Leslie Sedibe has successfully reviewed the SABC’s report on editorial interference on behalf of SABC’s former provincial news editor, Matsobane Charles Matlou.
The former football administrator and his client Matlou had challenged Joe Tlholoe’s report at the Pretoria High court in February 2018, arguing that the commission and its report were procedurally unfair to Matlou, whom it had found was irregularly appointed by former SABC COO Hlaudi Motsoeneng.
The report had found that Matlou was appointed without any verification on his qualifications, as was alleged by Busisiwe Ntuli, a whistleblower who made submissions to the commission.
However, in their application, Sedibe and Matlou challenged the report arguing that the commission, which was led by veteran journalist, Joe Tlholoe, has made findings against Matlou while he was not invited to respond to the allegations leveled against him.
This position was also endorsed by Judge J Davis who ordered that Matlou’s name be removed from the SABC report, stating that Joe Tlholoe’s commission of inquiry had violated its own terms of reference, to establish all facts and to interview everyone implicated on any allegations made before the commission.
Judge J Davis said it offends one’s sense of fairness if an investigator were to only listen to the version of a “complainant” without considering the version of the “accused” before making a finding or recommendation.
He said it was equally worrying when an accused person hears for the first time, recommendations which adversely affect him, when they are already made.
“There are three other reasons why I find that the applicant is entitled to having references to him by name removed and they are briefly these: one of the terms of reference of the Commission requires it to interview all persons “mentioned in … allegations, grievances and/or complaints…”. The applicant was clearly a person “mentioned in allegations”, He was implicated by Ms Ntuli as a beneficiary of the improper conduct ascribed to Mr Motsoeneng. In the first instance, in not interviewing the applicant, not only was a requirement of the Commission’s terms of reference ignored, but secondly, the requirement of “keeping an open mind” was equally ignored. Thirdly, proceeding in this fashion also breached the term of reference referred to in paragraph 3.4 above, namely the requirement to establish facts as opposed to merely collating allegations,” reads the Judgement..
Sedibe said the judgement has vindicated his client because all he wanted was to clear his name.
“Our client’s contention was that the entire process was both substantively and procedurally unfair and violated his right to be heard. The Commission also misdirected itself by not complying with its terms of reference which required it to interview all SABC employees,” Sedibe said.
“It is very strange that the Commission selectively chose to invite other people that were implicated such as Mr Hlaudi Motsoeneng and yet our client was not invited. The explanation given by the Commission for its failure to interview our client is irrational and defies logic and common sense,” he added.
Sedibe further said that the commission failed to independently verify allegations against his client made by Ntuli, and he said they regards her comments as defamatory and said he holds instructions to take appropriate legal action and file a lawsuit against her and the SABC.
He said they were busy preparing court papers against all those who tarnished his clients name and reputation.
SABC spokesperson Mmoni Seapolelo said Matlou had brought an application to have the entire report of the commission reviewed and set aside in its entirety.
“The Court issued an ordered that stipulates that only reference to the Applicant should be removed from the report. Therefore the report, except for the portions that must be removed, is not affected by the judgment. Lastly, the SABC is currently studying the judgment and has no further comment”.
