Whatshot

2024
June
April
2023
March
2022
2021
2020
March
February
2019
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
2018
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
2017
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2016
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2015
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2014
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2013
December
November
October
September
August
July
June
May
April
March
February
January
2012
December
November
October
September
August
July
1900

Legal Talk

Legal Talk

Author: Fawzia Khan
Date: 2019-06-07

Defamatory Tweets can hurt your pocket

Be careful about posting defamatory statements on Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms, as it can cost you severely. Defamation is the wrongful and intentional publication of a defamatory statement concerning a person. In law if a statement is found to be true and in the public interest, it's considered a complete defence to a defamation claim.

In May 2019 Trevor Manuel, the ex- minister of finance brought an urgent interdict against the EFF, including Ndlozi, and Julius Malema, declaring their tweet about him to be defamatory and demanded they remove it and issue an unconditional retraction and apology to him.

The tweet accused Manuel of conducting a nepotistic, corrupt and clandestine process when Kieswetter was appointed SARS Commissioner. The court needed to rule on what the tweet meant and whether it defamed Manuel. In the tweet, Manuel was accused of grave allegations of corruption and nepotism. Allegations of dishonesty and immoral or dishonourable conduct are defamatory.

Dignity is not only a value fundamental to the Constitution, but it is also a justiciable and enforceable right that must be respected and protected. The EFF on the other hand denied it's conduct was defamatory, but said if it is found to be defamatory, then the impugned statement was either substantially true, fair comment or in the public interest.

This what the court said about postings on social media platforms, "Ordinary members of society now have publishing capacities capable of reaching beyond that which the print and broadcast media can.

"Twitter users follow news in general on the service worldwide. When there is breaking news, they become even more participatory, commenting, posting their opinions and retweeting. Statements are debated and challenged, and people can make up their minds on the issue.

"The difference between an ordinary person communicating matters of public interest or concern to the general public on social media, and a journalist publishing the same statement in a newspaper, is that in the case of the former, the communication is capable of reaching millions more instantaneously than, for example, printed copies of newspapers".

The court held that an individual's reputation is central to his or her sense of self-worth and dignity but that the importance of freedom of expression cannot however, be overstated. Freedom of expression is a fundamental freedom protected in the Constitution and the right to human dignity is equally a foundational part of our Constitution.

The court found the tweet, to be per sedefamatory and that Manuel's reputation and dignity had been tarnished. It also found that the appointment of the SARS Commissioner was not done in secret but was made publicly available from the outset.

The EFF admitted that they lacked proper facts because they were not provided with meaningful information and were unable to prove that the sting of the statement was true. Malema replied in a further tweet Manuel'can go to hell, we are not scared of him'.

Because of their refusal to retract, apologise or remove the impugned statement from their social media platforms under circumstances when they knew they should, the court said this was indicative of malice to hurt Manuel personally and professionally, through the widespread dissemination of the defamatory statement.

The EFF was then ordered not only to remove the defamatory tweets within 24 hours but also issue an unconditional public apology and pay Manuel R500 000,00 for injury to his reputation and pay costs of the action.

Know your rights. The Law Desk of Fawzia Khan and Associates. Giving YOU the Power of Attorney.

Email [email protected] or call 031 - 502 5670 for legal assistance at competitive rates.

2