Eastern Cape Premier Oscar Mabuyane’s failure to review the Horizon forensic investigation report commissioned by the University of Fort Hare to probe his registration for a master’s degree, collapsed his attempt to gag Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema from defaming him.
This emerges from a closer reading of the KuGompo City High Court ruling handed down on Tuesday, which dismissed Mabuyane’s application for the court to rule that Malema had defamed him and be interdicted from making the same statements going forward.
Malema justifies statements by Horizon report
According to the detailed judgment, Malema justified his statement alleging that Mabuyane had stolen a master’s degree from the controversial university by arguing that his (Malema’s) statement is supported by findings of the Horizon report.
And the court agreed with him, while it dismissed Mabuyane’s counter on why he had not reviewed the Horizon report.
Mabuyane told the court in the replying affidavit that he had never had sight of the complete Horizon report prior to it being attached as evidence in Malema’s responding affidavit in this defamation lawsuit.
The court did not buy his story, which it believes does not align with his founding affidavit.
Although the court held that Malema’s statement, made outside KuGompo City following his sentencing in the firearm discharge case, was defamatory on its face, it continued that the statements qualified as true and in the public interest if the Horizon report that Mabuyane has not reviewed is factored into the equation.
What the Horizon report says
The report found that Mabuyane, after being admitted for the master’s degree in 2018 at Fort Hare, “had neglected to register timeously” in 2019, which triggered several irregular moves by Professor Edwin Ijeoma and his personal assistant.
The premier’s personal assistant is said to have prepared a motivation letter for his late submission for signing by Ijeoma, which was followed by a “course addition form” that made reference to a PhD.
Horizon concluded that this insinuated that Mabuyane had already obtained a master’s degree in public administration.
“Mr Malema said that the report had not been taken on review, and he contended that these findings must be accepted as true unless and until they are set aside on review,” reads the judgment.
“He said that the report findings corroborate the truth of his statements, and for them as being in the public interest. He argued that they justified the conclusion that Mr Mabuyane had sought to fraudulently and unlawfully acquire a master’s degree from the UFH in that he had passed off the work of ghostwriters as his own for his master’s proposal, and that he had purported to apply for PhD study by representing that he had already acquired a master’s degree.”
Blunder in not engaging with report
Mabuyane’s blunder appears to have been his refusal to engage with any of the findings made by Horizon because “he did not raise a dispute” despite Malema using this report as the main source of supporting evidence for his statement.
“Instead, [Mabuyane] contented himself with the assertion that the statement made by Mr Malema that he had ‘stolen a master’s degree’ was objectively and demonstrably false because no degree was ever conferred on him. Accordingly, he said that the findings were legally irrelevant.
“Mr Mabuyane said, in his replying affidavit, that he had never seen the full Horizon report before it was attached to Mr Malema’s answering affidavit. This is difficult to reconcile with the position expounded in his founding affidavit. As I have said, he elected not to respond to the findings and said that he would scrutinise the content of the report and seek to challenge the report, ‘should there be a basis to do so’,” the judgment continues.
“Significantly, [Mabuyane] did not take issue with Mr Malema’s contention that, as long as [Horizon] findings remain unchallenged, they must be accepted to be true.”
Semantics argument
Mabuyane’s insistence that his main gripe was Malema’s insistence that he had stolen a master’s degree also did not find joy with the court.
This is because Malema’s lawyers strongly argued that he did not mean stealing in the literal sense of the word, as it was logically impossible in the context of an educational qualification.
“Once it is accepted, as a matter of logic, that an academic qualification cannot be literally stolen, it seems to me to follow that the reasonable listener of average intelligence could not have understood it in that fashion,” writes Judge Willem (Jannie) Eksteen.
“The reasonable listener would not have concluded that Mr Mabuyane was accused of having stolen a degree certificate or that he had deprived the rightful owner of possession thereof.”
Judge Johannes Eksteen held that as much as Mabuyane had established that Malema published prima facie defamatory statements against him, Malema’s defence that the unchallenged Horizon report backs up his claims gets him out of jail on the “truth and public interest” defence.
Electioneering in consideration
Consequently, Malema’s argument, compared to that of Mabuyane, on a balance of probabilities, comes out on top, especially this being an election year where politicians are bound to have a go at each other.
“As I see it, particularly in an election year, as it is, the public has a real interest in defamatory remarks that question the integrity of public office bearers appointed to represent their interests, where the factual foundation remains unchallenged.
“In consequence, I find that the justification of truth and public interest is established, on a balance of probabilities, on the papers. Once the justification is established, the defence cannot be defeated by proof of malice or improper motive on the part of the defendant.”
With that, Mabuyane’s application was dismissed with costs.
Read More: No reprieve for Premier Oscar Mabuyane as SIU probe into his UFH degrees persists
- Eastern Cape Premier Oscar Mabuyane’s failure to review the Horizon forensic investigation report commissioned by the University of Fort Hare to probe his registration for a master’s degree, collapsed his attempt to gag Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema from defaming him.
- This emerges from a closer reading of the KuGompo City High Court ruling handed down on Tuesday, which dismissed Mabuyane’s application for the court to rule that Malema had defamed him and be interdicted from making the same statements going forward.
- Malema justifies statements by Horizon report According to the detailed judgment, Malema justified his statement alleging that Mabuyane had stolen a master’s degree from the controversial university by arguing that his (Malema’s) statement is supported by findings of the Horizon report.
- And the court agreed with him, while it dismissed Mabuyane’s counter on why he had not reviewed the Horizon report.
- Mabuyane told the court in the replying affidavit that he had never had sight of the complete Horizon report prior to it being attached as evidence in Malema’s responding affidavit in this defamation lawsuit.
Eastern Cape Premier Oscar Mabuyane's failure to review the Horizon forensic investigation report commissioned by the University of Fort Hare to probe his registration for a master's degree, collapsed his attempt to gag Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema from defaming him.
Mabuyane told the court in the replying affidavit that he had never had sight of the complete Horizon report prior to it being attached as evidence in Malema's responding affidavit in this defamation lawsuit.
Horizon concluded that this insinuated that Mabuyane had already obtained a master's degree in public administration.
"Mr Malema said that the report had not been taken on review, and he contended that these findings must be accepted as true unless and until they are set aside on review," reads the judgment.
"He said that the report findings corroborate the truth of his statements, and for them as being in the public interest. He argued that they justified the conclusion that Mr Mabuyane had sought to fraudulently and unlawfully acquire a master's degree from the UFH in that he had passed off the work of ghostwriters as his own for his master's proposal, and that he had purported to apply for PhD study by representing that he had already acquired a master's degree."
Mabuyane's blunder appears to have been his refusal to engage with any of the findings made by Horizon because "he did not raise a dispute" despite Malema using this report as the main source of supporting evidence for his statement.
"Instead, [Mabuyane] contented himself with the assertion that the statement made by Mr Malema that he had 'stolen a master's degree' was objectively and demonstrably false because no degree was ever conferred on him.
"Mr Mabuyane said, in his replying affidavit, that he had never seen the full Horizon report before it was attached to Mr Malema's answering affidavit.
"Significantly, [Mabuyane] did not take issue with Mr Malema's contention that, as long as [Horizon] findings remain unchallenged, they must be accepted to be true."
Mabuyane's insistence that his main gripe was Malema's insistence that he had stolen a master's degree also did not find joy with the court.
"Once it is accepted, as a matter of logic, that an academic qualification cannot be literally stolen, it seems to me to follow that the reasonable er of average intelligence could not have understood it in that fashion," writes Judge Willem (Jannie) Eksteen.
"
Judge Johannes Eksteen held that as much as Mabuyane had established that Malema published prima facie defamatory statements against him, Malema's defence that the unchallenged Horizon report backs up his claims gets him out of jail on the "truth and public interest" defence.
Consequently, Malema's argument, compared to that of Mabuyane, on a balance of probabilities, comes out on top, especially this being an election year where politicians are bound to have a go at each other.
"As I see it, particularly in an election year, as it is, the public has a real interest in defamatory remarks that question the integrity of public office bearers appointed to represent their interests, where the factual foundation remains unchallenged.
"In consequence, I find that the justification of truth and public interest is established, on a balance of probabilities, on the papers. Once the justification is established, the defence cannot be defeated by proof of malice or improper motive on the part of the defendant."
Read More: No reprieve for Premier Oscar Mabuyane as SIU probe into his UFH degrees persists
