×

We've got news for you.

Register on SowetanLIVE at no cost to receive newsletters, read exclusive articles & more.
Register now

Supreme court rules Parliament signal-jamming illegal

The jamming of cell phones and limiting the broadcasting of proceedings during last year’s State of the Nation Address in Parliament was unconstitutional and unlawful‚ the Supreme Court of Appeal has ruled.

The court on Thursday morning handed down its judgment in the case‚ launched by Primedia Broadcasting and the South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef)‚ the Right2Know campaign and the Open Democracy Advice Centre.

On appeal‚ the litigants claimed that the Speaker of the National Assembly Baleka Mbete and others had violated the public’s right to see and hear what was done and said in Parliament on February 12 as journalists were unable to tweet rolling coverage of events as they unfolded from their phones.

They also took issue with the fact that the parliamentary television feed was limited to the face of Mbete when a scuffle broke out between Economic Freedom Fighters members and security officials.

The State Security Agency‚ who had employed the use of the telecommunications jamming device without Mbete’s permission‚ said the signal block was accidental.

“The device was supposed to have been switched off before the session began. The technician charged with this duty had forgotten to switch the device off‚ something which his superior noticed as soon as he saw the protests of MPs and journalists on television. He issued an instruction to the technician to switch it off … and the signal was restored‚” the court said.

Despite this‚ the court held that use of the device was unlawful as it had not been specifically authorised.

The ruling applies only to the circumstances in this case‚ it said.

“This judgment must not be read to suggest‚ however‚ that the use of any device or equipment by security services to execute a legitimate policing function‚ without the permission of Parliament‚ is unlawful.”

The court also found that the manner in which proceedings in the house were broadcast on that day‚ barring the public from viewing the scuffle‚ was unlawful.

“Parliament did not show that the broadcast of disorderly conduct would in any way cause harm‚ let alone discourage further disorder.

“The justifications offered for the limitation of the right to an open Parliament do not survive scrutiny… the manner in which the SONA 2015 proceedings was broadcast was unconstitutional.”

On this issue Parliament had submitted‚ among other things‚ that it was necessary to promote the dignity of the house and discourage further ill-discipline. — TMG Digital

 

Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.