South Africa, where free expression isn't so free

Many people like to reference, with reason, of course, the freedom of the press and general freedom of expression enshrined in the South African Constitution – those principles that remain protected.

One cannot blame them because, unlike a seemingly growing number of countries led by despotic leaders around the world, post-apartheid South Africa can pride itself for not having thrown people into jail for crimes of conscience; that is, for having expressed views that harshly criticise or disagree with those held by government and powerful politicians.

Over the years, frustrated citizens and commentators have got away with describing corrupt or incompetent politicians using terms that would get them jailed, disappeared, or even killed, in some African countries and round the world. Fortunately, not so in South Africa. We should all hope none of it ever gets there.

It has come close to this, of course, during the harsh Covid-19-related lockdowns in 2020 and early 2021, when individuals were met with arrest or even violence after being accused of defying movement restrictions by taking lonely walks on beaches, jogging, or cycling alone, or while mowing lawns outside their properties. None of these activities could reasonably de described as posing risk of Covid-19 infection for others.

It would also have come to this had the former secretary-general of the perennially unelected SA Communist Party (SACP), Blade Nzimande, got his way when he proposed an outrageous law to prosecute anyone who criticised the president.

This would have been designed to shield the notorious man from Nkandla - who was still president at the time – from criticism. It happened at the height of state capture. Fortunately, Nzimande's outrageous proposal, certainly a leaf from similar laws or practices in neighbouring Zanu-PF misruled Zimbabwe under the late Robert Mugabe, Rwanda under Kagame, and other dictatorships, never got adopted as law.

Nzimande's proposed law had been targeted at white South Africans, whom he accused of showing very little respect for blacks and their cultures. He knew that lacing such a law with generous race icing would have ensured blind support in large parts of the black community.

But anyone who observes such things would know that had such a law been promulgated, it would only have been a matter of time before everyone's freedom of speech began to be curtailed, black and white. No freedom-loving citizen should go to sleep with both eyes tightly shut in a country led by a bunch of former 'freedom fighters' who, faced with a potential electoral armageddon following many years of wanton abuses and institutional destruction, will do anything, including threats against free press and freedom of expression, to remain in power.

Other countries in Africa, South America, Eastern Europe, and parts of Asia have seen it all unfold over the years. Even the mighty USA came close but, thanks to its robust democratic institutions and fiercely independent media, all shaped and strengthened over hundreds of years, former President Donald Trump's attempt to control the narrative so that he could illegally remain in the White House after losing democratic elections, came to naught.?????

It is also thanks to South Africa's relatively independent judiciary that no one has been prosecuted and jailed for expressing views that government and powerful politicians do not like to hear. There is very little chance, if any, of such an attempt succeeding under the current Constitution, unless the targeted criticism could be shown to undermine the country's equality laws.

Quiet prosecution

What people have resorted to, instead, is "quiet prosecution".?It has been happening over the years, particularly following the arrival into office of the notorious man from Nkandla and his 'coalition of the (ethically) wounded'.

It is now on record that to be successfully, effectively, implemented, their state capture project required that countless men and women with impressive qualifications, experience, and firm ethical grounding, be removed from their positions in State Owned Enteprises (SOEs), cabinet, and government departments to be replaced with weak, malleable political deployees whose only performance indicator would be the extent to which they implement instructions from their criminal minders without question.

The expression "ethical governance" does not exist in the vocabulary of such deployees and their minders.

The list of those who ended up being shoved out of their jobs for daring to mention "Public Finance Management Act (PFMA)" and "ethical governance" is long. Many are known because they have come out and spoken about their ordeals and, in some cases, written books about them (Adv. Vusi Pikoli, Professor Themba Maseko, Amanda Goodson, Athol Williams, Masilo Mothepi, are some of them).

Journalist Mandy Wiener's book?The Whistleblowers also details the harrowing accounts of many others who suffered silencing by threats to their livelihoods.

Meanwhile News24 journalist, Karyn Maughan – a legal journalist known for breaking news on high-profile criminal and civil court cases – is currently defending herself against accusations laid against her by the notorious man from Nkandla for, reportedly, placing private information about him into the public space before it officially became public.

Other journalists have also been threatened by the extreme left-wing Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) in the past.

And where is Monwabisi Kalawe, the man who, as SAA CEO at the height of state capture, had to constantly push back against one Dudu Myeni’s autocratic and deceitful board leadership style (Myeni has since been barred for life from ever assuming board positions)? Why did he never get to testify at the Zondo Commission about what he was taken through at SAA that eventually saw him leave and suddenly, seemingly, go under the radar? The South African list of "living under the radar" must be crowded indeed, filled with eye-watering human stories yet to be told.

Many other stories remain unknown. Their reasons range from strict adherence to Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) that they agreed to sign in exchange for their silence and multimillion-rand "hand shakes" – all ensuring that the public never gets to know what really went down – to fear of reprisals.?

Some have been killed after they reported what they saw and heard or if they were planning to act as witnesses in corruption trials involving politically sensitive suspects.

Not so simple

So, it would be a big mistake, even an injustice, for anyone to simply look on the surface – for the non-existent number of people jailed for speaking out – to come to a determination that South Africa is a safe place for expressing one's views on matters that place an unfavourable spotlight on the government and powerful politicians.

The absence of effective protection for whistleblowers and others who silently sabotage attempts at criminal acts – in the name of public interest - by, e.g., refusing to authorise payments or to sign documents that would lead to unexplainable funds outflow from the coffers of SOEs and other government institutions into the hands of criminals, remains a big problem and threat to freedom of expression in South Africa. This needs attention.

Sadly, there is very little likelihood of effective whistle-blower protection and support legislation being put in place while the country continues to be run by the people against whom such whistle-blowers must be protected. It is a strange set of circumstances that many men and women who should be clearing their names in the courts of the land, or already in prison for a raft of treasonous crimes they are known to have aided, abetted, and benefitted from, continue to occupy positions of power as lawmakers. This too must change.

Until there are credible changes in this area, freedom of expression by citizens and the media in South Africa must never be taken for granted.