|
Back to Index
Daily
News appeal case opens Monday
MISA-Zimbabwe
October 05, 2006
The case in
which ANZ, publishers of the banned Daily News and Daily News on
Sunday, is seeking a High Court order to be duly licensed was on
5 October 2006 postponed to next Monday at the request of the state-controlled
Media and Information Commission (MIC).
The ANZ is arguing
that it should be duly licensed because the MIC has failed to deal
with their application to be registered in terms of the Access
to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) within
a specified period.
This followed
High Court judge Justice Rita Makarau's judgment in February 2006
in which she ruled that the MIC board chaired by Dr Tafataona Mahoso
was biased against the ANZ. Justice Makarau ruled that Mahoso was
biased against ANZ, publishers of the banned Daily News and Daily
News on Sunday.
The judge said
the MIC's impartiality was tainted by the proven bias of its chairman,
Dr Tafataona Mahoso thereby barring all members of the Commission's
board from involvement.
Following the
ruling, ANZ then filed an application for a High Court order to
be duly registered arguing that the Minister of Information and
Publicity as the appointing authority, can appoint a special board
to determine its application for a licence or instruct the MIC secretariat
to issue a certificate of registration.
In his opposing
papers, the now deceased Minister of Information Dr Tichaona Jokonya,
said AIPPA did not provide for the appointment of an interim committee
to adjudicate over the ANZ's application to be licensed.
The minister
argued that he could only appoint an independent committee to adjudicate
over the ANZ application if AIPPA is duly amended.
He also opposed
ANZ's earlier application to be deemed duly registered, arguing that
the court did not have powers to grant the application. Background
On
14 March 2005 the Supreme Court referred back to the MIC the matter
in which ANZ was seeking an order allowing them to resume publication.
The ANZ duly
filed its application with the MIC. In July 2005, the MIC, however,
refused to grant the ANZ an operating licence citing its alleged
breach of sections of AIPPA, resulting in its appeal to the High
Court and Justice Makarau's subsequent judgment.
The protracted
legal battle between ANZ and the MIC goes back to Chief Justice
Chidyausiku’s earlier judgment in September 2003 in which he
ruled that the publishing company had approached the court with
"dirty hands" when it challenged the constitutionality of sections
of AIPPA.
The ANZ had
refused to be registered with the MIC pending the decision of the
Supreme Court on its constitutional challenges. It subsequently
applied to be registered following Chidyausiku's "dirty hands" judgment.
In turn, the
MIC refused to grant them the licence opening a series of appeals
and counter-appeals between ANZ and the MIC after the Administrative
Court ruled that the Commission should allow them to publish.
The Supreme
Court then consolidated the appeals and counter-appeals debacle
to be heard as one case leading to the March 2005 judgment.
However, in
his March 2005 judgment, the Chief Justice allowed the MIC's appeal
against the Administrative Court's decision for the ANZ to be allowed
to operate.
In the same
vein, he however, ruled that the MIC had erred in refusing to grant
ANZ an operating licence at the material time in question.
He then referred
the issue of the registration of ANZ back to the same Commission
which refused to license ANZ, for consideration as a fresh issue.
Visit the MISA-Zimbabwe
fact
sheet
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|
