The South African Football Association (Safa) and its president, Danny Jordaan, have slapped the organisation’s former chief executive officer with a multi-million rand lawsuit for mumbling defamatory statements against them.
Safa and Jordaan filed a R3.5-million suit against Dennis Mumble in the Johannesburg High Court last week for defamation of character.
According to the court documents, Safa, the first applicant, and Jordaan, the second, claimed that on or around March 10, 2024, Mumble attended a television interview on Newzroom Afrika DSTV channel 405, where he made a flurry of defamatory remarks that damaged their reputations.
Among the inflammatory remarks he made, according to the papers, Mumble said the Safa constitution stipulates that only the chief executive officer, chief financial officer and general manager of the division can sign a commercial contract.
He said Jordaan had no right to sign the Fun Valley Resort contract to build the Safa National Technical Centre, saying he was not fit to be Safa president.
Mumble argued that signing the contract without conducting due diligence was incorrect.
Jordaan and Safa said the alleged defamatory remarks suggested they were involved in dishonest conduct, interference in the administration of their duties, are professionally incompetent and do not comply with the principle of separation of powers, all of which is void from the truth and inconsistent with the true nature of Safa affairs.
“The defendant’s assertion that the second plaintiff misled the South African Football Association national executive committee in his presentation of the Fun Valley project and that proper due diligence was not conducted in respect of the project is not consistent with the truth, as the project in question and the contractual agreements therein were approved and signed off by the defendant in his then capacity as the CEO of Safa.
“The defendant’s accusation that the second plaintiff constantly interfered with his duties as the then CEO of Safa and that such interference continues to be visible with the current leadership of Safa is unjustifiable and unfortunate,” read the papers.
They said in terms of the Safa constitution, the president and the chief executive officer represent Safa legally, are duly authorised to represent the organisation in any legal proceedings, and are entitled to sign for and on its behalf.
“Therefore, in view of the above-quoted article, it is unreasonable to draw the conclusion that the second plaintiff was involved in interference when he gave and continues to give effect to his constitutional mandate that requires him to be involved in all decision-making processes at Safa,” read the papers, which we have seen.
They said those who watched the interview understood Mumble to mean Safa leaders are unethical, dishonest, involved in professional interference, maladministration, corruption and lack integrity.
“The first plaintiff suffered damages in the amount of R2-million, which the defendant is liable to pay to the first plaintiff.
“The second plaintiff suffered damages in the amount of R1.5-million, which the defendant is liable to pay to the second plaintiff,” read the papers.
Before filing court papers, Safa and Jordaan said their lawyers wrote to Mumble on April 18, demanding that he apologise and retract the statements.
“Notwithstanding the demand, the defendant has failed to issue an apology to the plaintiffs and further retract the defamatory remarks that he advanced in the television interview, and as such, he is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs in the total amount of R3.5-million,” read the papers.
