‘Make Myers’ disciplinary hearing public’

Knysna Ratepayers’ Association writes:

Councillor Peter Myers has been charged by the DA with various instances of misconduct. His disciplinary hearing is scheduled for 5 to 6 February. However, the DA has reportedly decided that councillor Myers is not entitled to an open, public hearing in that proceeding. Rather, they insist that the hearing be held in secret. We believe that this is fundamentally wrong.

The DA allegedly contends that this is a private matter between councillor Myers and the party, but Myers is much more than a party member. He was democratically elected by the citizens of Ward 10 to represent them on the Knysna council. If the individuals who have laid charges against Myers have their way and the panel of judges vote against him, he will almost certainly be ejected from the DA. If he is ejected from the DA, he will lose his seat as a councillor.

So the potential outcome of this proceeding is much more than an internal, party matter. Instead, it will constitute a reversal of the will of the people who cast their votes for Myers in an open, democratic election. How can a proceeding that thwarts the democratically expressed will of the people, be held in secret? How can the citizens who voted for Myers be denied the right to witness his trial, and make up their own minds about the fairness of the proceedings and the outcome, whatever that may be?

It is no accident that the Bill of Rights in our country guarantees every accused person “the right to a fair trial, which includes the right- (…) (c) to a public trial…”. The right to a public trial is a core component of due process, enshrined in constitutions the world over. Secret trials are the hallmark of despotic regimes, not open democracies. What sort of regime does the DA want for South Africa?

A public trial is perhaps the most fundamental safeguard against judicial injustice, as was recognised by Enlightenment philosopher Jeremy Bentham, when he said: “In the darkness of secrecy, sinister interest and evil in every shape have full swing. Only in proportion as publicity has place, can any of the checks applicable to judicial injustice operate. Where there is no publicity there is no justice. Publicity is the very soul of justice.”

But there are other compelling considerations as well. It is no accident that section 16(a) of the Bill of Rights guarantees “freedom of the press, and other media”. For without freedom of the press, no democracy can survive.

Where trials of political figures are held in secret, the press cannot do its job of witnessing the administration of justice, and reporting on the proceedings to the public. The press plays a vital role as the conduit through which the public receives information regarding the operation of public institutions. If councillor Myers’ hearing is held in secret, the press will have to rely on hearsay for its reports on the proceedings, and for its assessment of whether justice has been done.

For all of these reasons, the Knysna Ratepayers’ Association believes that if justice is to be seen to be done in this case, councillor Myers’ disciplinary hearing must be open to the public, and to the press. We strongly urge that the ruling denying him an open hearing, be reversed.

The DA responds:

DA constituency head Jaco Londt said the Knysna-Plett Herald request for comment had been referred to the chairperson of the federal executive of the DA, James Selfe.

“The chairperson of the FLC has sent the request for an open hearing, to the panel dealing with this matter. They need to make a decision as the FLC hearings are ordinarily closed as they are internal disciplinary matters. The ratepayers’ association will be advised as soon as the FLC panel has made a decision,” Londt said in his response.