| The best Zimbabwe news site on the world wide web |  |
| NEWS |
| FORUMS |
| NEWS ANALYSIS |
| READERS' FORUM |
Mugabe's spokesman 'lied to Supreme Court'
By Lebo Nkatazo
PRESIDENT Robert Mugabe’s press secretary George Charamba lied under oath regarding the crafting of the country’s broadcasting laws, a former minister told the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
In a sworn affidavit opposing an application by Manala Private Limited which is challenging the state-run Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation’s monopoly of the airwaves, Charamba charged that Harare lawyer Terrence Hussein should be barred from representing the applicants in the matter.
Mugabe’s spokesman claimed Hussein was breaching client-attorney privilege as he was involved in the formulation and drafting of the Broadcasting Services Act (BSA).
Manala’s constitutional challenge was postponed indefinitely after Charamba, who was not one of the respondents, requested to be made a party in the matter.
Charamba claimed in his affidavit that Hussein had helped craft the BSA and should, therefore, recuse himself from the constitutional case.
"It is surprising that Hussein, for reasons best known to him(self), has decided to exploit the information given to him in confidence and such a thing should not be allowed as it gives rise to a conflict of interest of a serious nature," said Charamba.
Charamba further claimed: “He (Hussein) shared his legal expertise with the then Honourable Minister of Information and Publicity, Professor Jonathan Moyo, and myself in a series of meetings, some of which included an officer then with the Attorney General’s Office Miss Jennifer Tanyanyiwa. These meetings were held in the then Minister’s office, in Munhumutapa Building.”
But in a dramatic intervention on Wednesday, Professor Moyo weighed in on Hussein’s side – exposing Charamba to a possible perjury charge.
Moyo, now an independent MP for Tsholotsho, said Charamba had lied to judges.
Moyo said: “At no time during his brief...did Mr Hussein receive in writing or otherwise from me or from anyone else in my office any protected or confidential information or official secret.
“Also, at no time during the same period did Mr Hussein attend a meeting with Mr George Charamba and Ms Jennifer Tanyanyiwa, who was then a drafting officer in the office of the Attorney General, over the drafting of the Broadcasting Services Bill.”
He added that it was only himself and Tanyanyiwa who presented the broadcasting law’s draft to cabinet.
“Mr Hussein did not, therefore, attend the crucial meeting of the cabinet committee on legislation which refined the draft Broadcasting Services Bill from the Attorney General’s Office for onward transmission to cabinet and parliament respectively.”
Hussein has already written to Charamba and the Attorney General, threatening to sue for defamation.
"The allegations in our view are seriously defamatory and we give you (the Attorney General) and your client (Charamba) due notice that unless they are fully substantiated, we will institute a damages claim," Hussein said in his letter.
Journalists, human rights groups and potential investors in the electronic media cite Section 38 as one of the key impediments to the liberalisation of airwaves that was supposed to have taken place when the Supreme Court nullified ZBC’s monopoly in 2000.
The Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe chief executive Obert Mugunyura last month told a parliamentary committee on transport and communications that the authority could not license new players in the broadcasting sector because of restrictions imposed by the Act.
Hussein is representing Ndabenhle Mabhena and his company, Manala (Pvt) Ltd, in the Supreme Court case in which the applicant is taking on the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC), the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe (BAZ) and Transmedia.
Manala is seeking an order declaring that Section 38 of the BSA is inconsistent with Section 20 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. Section 38 of the BSA states that all frequencies allocated immediately before the date of the commencement of the BSA would continue to be operational exclusively to ZBC.
In Zimbabwe, there are only two VHF (Very High Frequency) television channels and both of them are held by ZBC. There are also three other available television channels known as UHF (Ultra High Frequency).
Manala (Pvt) Ltd is arguing that essentially, what it means is that when one wants to start a television station they would have to set up UHF transmission systems parallel to the one held by Transmedia for VHF television.
Manala further argues that it is not an option to go on UHF due to the funds involved while ZBC is sitting on two VHF channels and using only one.
The applicants also contend that ZBC is now a private limited company and there is no justification for it to tax the public in the form of licence fees. They argue that collecting licence fees from the public is a ploy to perpetuate and fund the monopoly ZBC currently enjoys.
In response, the government argues that the other VHF channel has been reserved for National Television which the applicants argue has not taken off the ground.
The Ministry of Information in its response is arguing that the retention of frequencies was not unconstitutional because they were providing a public service.
Supreme Court Justices
Vernada Ziyambi, Misheck Cheda, Luke Malaba, Paddington Garwe and Elizabeth
Gwaunza are hearing Manala’s application and will make a ruling
on Hussein’s suitability to represent the company. - Additional
reporting Zimbabwe Independent
JOIN
THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
newsdesk@newzimbabwe.com
All material copyright newzimbabwe.com
Material may be published or reproduced in any form with appropriate credit to this website