How court barred our journalist from reporting on proceedings

On Tuesday June 10, Sowetan reporter Nandi Ntini arrived at the Secunda magistrate's court to cover the fraud trial involving Adv Felani Enock Manana and former Old Mutual financial advisor Shadrack Manana. The duo is accused of defrauding 124 pensioners of over R12m through an investment scheme. However, Ntini found herself unexpectedly summoned to the dock by magistrate Graham Cupido, and faced a barrage of questions, which lasted 15 minutes, from both the accused and the prosecutor.

This is her story:

We arrived at court shortly after 9am, well before the trial commenced, and enquired about the necessary process to obtain permission to take photographs and record the trial.

The court manager provided the relevant application form which I submitted to the magistrate’s office for consideration.

After reviewing the form, the magistrate stated that he would consult with the legal representatives of both parties to determine whether there were objections. Once the court was in session, the magistrate formally asked the legal representatives if they objected to the presence of media for photography and audio-visual recording.

Initially, the prosecutor, Adv Geofrey Nkadimeng, did not object, noting that all information in the charge sheet was public.

The magistrate then invited the legal teams to question me directly. He instructed me to take the stand, and I was sworn in.

However, once I was called to the stand, Nkadimeng backtracked on his earlier stance, citing concerns that some of the victims had already testified and that media presence could affect the integrity of the case.

Accused number one, Adv Felani Enock Manana, who is representing himself in the case, also objected. He questioned my motives and asked why media coverage was necessary.

I explained that victims had reached out to me, saying they were frustrated about repeated postponements and a lack of perceived progress. I emphasised that media exposure could help accelerate justice by bringing attention to delayed cases.

He responded by arguing that the victims should not be updated through the media but rather await the court’s decision. He also raised concerns about reputational damage to the accused if their pictures were published and he were later found not guilty. I clarified that the media has a responsibility to follow up and report accurately, including issuing updates or corrections where needed.

However, he maintained his opposition, asserting that media coverage was unnecessary and invasive.

Vusmuzi Nsibande, the lawyer for accused number two, Mndeni Shadrack Manana, also objected to media presence in court, saying it will send a message to the public that his client is a criminal. He claimed that the information I had about his client’s alleged connection to Inhlanhla 1 Investments was false, and suggested that I intended to publish misleading content

I reassured the court that Sowetan adheres to journalistic ethics, does not publish unverified information, adding that we are always prepared to delay publishing stories until all facts are verified.

Nkadimeng maintained his opposition to media coverage, saying even using the term “accused” in headlines leads readers to speculate and misunderstand the legal status of those involved.

He also said we don’t have to come to court to get the information about the case but rather speak to the National Prosecuting Authority. 

He advised that if I do write the stories, they should clarify that the individuals are “still on trial”.

I responded by pointing out that standard journalistic practice is to clearly state when someone is an "accused" or a "suspect". And that we never report on guilty verdicts unless they are pronounced in court.

The magistrate also questioned my use of the term "victims", about the pensioners who lost their money, saying that it was a sign of bias on my part. I explained that I used the phrase to refer to the individuals who had come to me as sources, not out of any assumption of guilt or innocence in the case.

After about 15 minutes of questioning, the magistrate said: "I therefore object to you from reporting, taking pictures and recording the court proceeding. You can report on the plight of the victims."

SowetanLIVE