By its story – Makhubu ǤǤǤ insists Še Šas ne˜er taen one› to ’u„lisŠ stor›
MBABANE – “I have been a journalist for 34 years and I have never taken money to publish a story about anyone.”
The Nation Magazine Editor, Bheki Makhubu, made these averments when disputing the allegations that were made by the Chief Executive Officer of Inyatsi Construction (PTY) Limited, Paul Lwiindi. In his founding affidavit, Lwiindi submitted that it was important for the court to note that at the same time the article was published, there was a loose supplement in the magazine called ‘Go Green’.
The sponsors of the supplement, according to Lwiindi, not only included ESWADE but one of the competitor of the applicant (Inyatsi Construction (PTY) Limited), Stefanutti Stocks in the same tender for ESWADE.
“In the circumstances, the applicant should have proceeded by way of action proceedings and not motion proceedings given the foreasable dispute of facts. If there is a dispute of fact, the declaration of rights must be sought by way of action. The declaratory relief sought is incompetent and cannot be granted on this ground,” contended the editor. The most salient distinction is that action proceedings envisage the presentation of facts and evidence verbally in court during a trial, whereas motion proceedings envisage the presentation of facts and evidence in affidavits that will be read by a judge before hearing arguments in court on the issues raised.
In his answering affidavit, Makhubu submitted that the form of proceedings that were being pursued by the applicant was a very fundamental issue. He said the applicant instituted a defamation claim by way of motion proceedings.
“There are disputes of facts which were had to come up with ways of protecting their property was after noting that there was no way they would be compensated for their loss.
Another source said they thought that the E1 billion Reconstruction Fund would benefit them too, but the challenge was that they first had to
“This is worrying because it tells us that the respondents (The Nation Magazine and its Editor Bheki Makhubu) were paid to run the article and scandalise the applicant so that it does not get the tender in future,” alleged the CEO.
In his answering affidavit, Makhubu said the allegations were unfounded and defamatory. He argued that it was clear that the article stated that the applicant was accused of cooking books to win the tender. According to Makhubu, that much was a fact and could not be denied because that was what the ESWADE letter said in effect.
“The allegations speak volumes about the applicant (Inyatsi Construction). The applicant assumes everyone doing their work is corrupt and can be corrupted. This is not the case,” argued Makhubu. These
foreseeable at the time the applicant instituted the proceedings. Defamation claims are, as a rule, instituted by way of action proceedings. It cannot be said that both liability and quantum suit are determined in the same proceedings. This would be a misnomer and inconsistent with our law.”
He submitted that the respondents had a valid and bona fide defense to the applicant’s claim for defamation. Makhubu argued that the respondent was entitled to prove its defence through adducing evidence at trial and this could not be done in motion proceedings.
Defamatory
The editor also mentioned that the applicant also had an open-ended interdict in which The Nation Magazine was interdicted and restrained from publishing further ‘ false’ and defamatory article.
“The interdict is cast way too wide. Its effect would infringe on the respondent’s right to freedom of expression. It would replace the property then later submit the purchase receipts, which was impossible for them.
The source said most of the officers were still paying for the cars they purchased through bank loans, therefore, they were unable to buy other vehicles while they were servicing bank loans. are allegations whose veracity is still to be tested in court.
He contended that there were people who did their work without being corrupt and he was one of them. Makhubu told the court that he was rejecting with contempt, the applicant’s insinuation that he was paid to publish the article.
“I take that the applicant may be used to such practices which is why it assumes everyone is corrupt. I repeat that the respondents are not paid not to publish stories,” contended Makhubu.
It was further his contention that, the headline did not state that ‘the applicant has cooked its books to win the mega tender’ instead the headline was ‘Inyatsi accused of cooking its financial report when tendering for the multi-million Emalangeni Mpakeni Dam’.
violate the respondent’s right to freedom of expression which includes freedom to hold opinions without interference, the freedom to receive idea and information without interference and the freedom to communicate ideas and information without inference,” submitted Makhubu.
He alleged that the interdict was couched in terms that were too wide and would apply perpetuity.
“That is to say, all media houses in the Kingdom of Eswatini would see it as affecting them too for reporting on the applicant. The applicant is one of the largest construction companies in the country and is involved in the largest projects. These projects are taxpayer funded,” contended the deponent . The matter is still pending in court and appearing for the applicant is Derrick Jele of Robinson Bertram, while Bahle Nkonyane from Magagula and HlopheAttorneysisrepresentingMakhubu and the magazine.