T he roles of the judiciary and the media as pillars of a constitutional democracy were high lighted in 2005 as issues of media freedom played out in courtrooms and statutory bodies across the country. And, increasingly, both institutions have begun appealing to the public to embrace them – noting that freedom of the media and independence of the judiciary were guaranteed by the constitution. In January, MISA South Africa registered its concern about “growing intolerance” to criticism and alternative opinion exhibited by the ruling African National Congress (ANC). In its electronic newsletter, ANC Today, the party accused the South African media of propagating falsehoods about the President, the ANC and the government. This intolerance has previously been noted with the labelling as “elites” – those individuals who criticise government. MISA SA views such derision of diversity of opinion as contrary to the core values of democracy, particularly freedom of expression and freedom of the media, enshrined in South Africa’s constitution. Across the country’s borders Zimbabwean authorities refused accreditation to South Africabased radio stations 702 and 567 CapeTalk to cover the March general elections in that country. There were no official reasons given but Zimbabwean officials previously described the broadcasters as “hostile”. Intolerance reared its head again in May when South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) reporters were barred from reporting on the Lebowakgomo government’s budget vote in the Limpopo provincial legislature. Two weeks earlier, Premier Sello Moloto’s political adviser Jack Mokobi is reported to have stormed into the SABC offices in Polokwane to complain about the “harsh” manner in which politicians were interviewed. He also demanded that Thobela FM’s Willie Mosoma be removed from his post as current affairs presenter. Mokobi allegedly accused Mosoma of being biased against politicians from the ruling ANC party. The SABC subsequently met with provincial officials. It then informed MISA SA that its reporters would cover a wide range of stories in the province within the accepted journalistic principles and the public broadcaster’s editorial code. The Mail & Guardian’s investigation into the ‘Oilgate’ corruption scandal has been described as one of the year’s journalistic highlights. The weekly newspaper’s scoop revealed how Imvume Management received R11 million of taxpayers’ money from state oil company PetroSA and donated it to the ANC just before the 2004 national election. This investigation led to judicial sparring between the newspaper, the private company and a few government agencies. At stake was the company’s right to privacy versus the right to media freedom. In May, following sustained coverage by the Mail & Guardian, a Johannesburg High Court judge banned further publication details involving Imvume and the ‘Oilgate’ scandal. MISA SA and the Media Monitoring Project (MMP) expressed their deep concern that this judgment was likely to open the way for others seeking to prevent newspapers from publishing articles about their questionable or irregular conduct. This kind of legal censorship of the media is viewed by MISA SA as a pre-cursor to full curtailment of freedom of expression. In July 2005, public protector Lawrence Mushwana released a report that exonerated government and the parastatals involved. As far as government was concerned the case was closed. Commenting on the matter, government communications head Joel Netshitenzhe said, as it related to government, the issue had now been put to rest. However, Mail & Guardian editor Ferial Haffajee is not deterred and has instituted court proceeding to have the report overturned. Haffajee said: “Mushwana tried to bury important allegations unearthed by the M&G So This Is Democracy? 2005 -98- Media Institute of Southern Africa