South Africa: Media Groups Launch SSA Trial Secrecy Challenge

• Media24, Daily Maverick, amaBhungane, and the Campaign for Free Expression have launched an urgent application in the Gauteng High Court.
• They are challenging the blanket secrecy imposed on the criminal trial of former SSA officials Thulani Dlomo and Patrick Mshothola.
• The trial concerns the alleged misappropriation of R12 million in State Security Agency funds.
• Applicants argue an existing October 14 order, intended to restrict evidence access, has been wrongly implemented to close the entire trial to the public.
• They contend this violates constitutional rights to open justice, freedom of expression, and access to information.

The media groups contend that the current implementation of the order effectively creates a blanket prohibition on public access, directly contravening constitutional guarantees of open justice, freedom of expression, and access to information.

A coalition of prominent South African media organizations has initiated an urgent legal challenge against the pervasive secrecy surrounding a high-profile criminal trial involving former State Security Agency (SSA) officials. Media24, Daily Maverick, amaBhungane, and the Campaign for Free Expression have jointly filed an application in the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria, seeking to ensure public and media access to proceedings. The case centers on allegations of R12 million in SSA funds misappropriation, with former officials Thulani "Silence" Dlomo and Patrick Mshothola as the accused.

The application specifically targets an order issued on October 14, which was intended to restrict access to certain evidence within the trial. However, the applicants contend that this order has been broadly interpreted and implemented as a blanket prohibition, effectively excluding the public and media entirely from the courtroom. This interpretation has already led to at least three days of trial proceedings being conducted in complete secrecy, prompting the media groups to act. Their Gauteng High Court open justice application aims to vary the existing order, ensuring that any restrictions on access are specific to sensitive evidence rather than a wholesale closure of the trial.

The move by the media groups follows an incident on Friday, October 16, involving News24 journalist Kyle Cowan, which underscored the immediate impact of the secrecy order. The ongoing South Africa SSA trial secrecy challenge highlights a critical tension between national security concerns and the constitutional imperative for transparent judicial processes, particularly when public funds are at stake. The applicants are pushing for a judicial review that upholds the principles of open justice while still allowing for necessary protections of genuinely sensitive information.

The core of the media groups' argument rests on the assertion that the blanket exclusion of the public and media from the Thulani Dlomo Patrick Mshothola trial directly contravenes fundamental constitutional guarantees. These include the rights to open justice, freedom of expression, and access to information, all cornerstones of South Africa's democratic framework. The applicants maintain that the original October 14 order, which restricted access to evidence, does not provide authorization for the entire trial to be conducted in camera.

Attorney Charl du Plessis, in the founding affidavit, explicitly states that "The present blanket exclusion of media from proceedings is therefore not sanctioned by the order itself." This legal position underscores the belief that the implementation of the order has exceeded its intended scope, transforming a targeted restriction into a comprehensive ban on public oversight. The Campaign for Free Expression court access initiative, alongside its media partners, is therefore seeking a judicial clarification that reaffirms the principle that trials, especially those involving alleged R12 million SSA funds misappropriation, should be open to public scrutiny unless specific, compelling reasons dictate otherwise for particular pieces of evidence.

This urgent application by Media24, Daily Maverick, and their partners carries significant implications for the future of South Africa national security trial transparency and the broader principle of open justice. The outcome of this challenge could establish a crucial precedent regarding the extent to which courts can impose secrecy orders, particularly in cases that involve allegations of corruption and the misuse of public resources within state security apparatuses. Ensuring public and media access to such proceedings is vital for accountability and maintaining public trust in the judicial system.

The challenge to the blanket secrecy in the R12 million SSA funds misappropriation trial serves as a critical test of the constitutional rights to open justice and freedom of expression. Should the court uphold the media's application, it would reinforce the principle that even in matters touching on national security, transparency remains paramount, with any restrictions needing to be narrowly tailored and fully justified. Conversely, a ruling that permits widespread secrecy could set a concerning precedent, potentially limiting public oversight in future high-profile cases and impacting the ability of the press to report on matters of significant public interest.

This development highlights an ongoing legal challenge to the scope of court secrecy orders in South Africa, particularly in high-profile cases involving national security and public funds. Lawyers should monitor the outcome as it could establish important precedents regarding open justice, freedom of expression, and access to information in criminal proceedings, influencing future applications for or challenges to in camera hearings.

Source: Original reporting via AllAfrica