By Ziyah News Reporter
Alpha Media Holdings (AMH)’s Heart and Soul TV (HSTV) has been arraigned before the court, accused of transmitting data carrying incitement messages.
The charges against the online broadcaster stem from the station’s coverage of a press conference held by war veteran Blessed Geza.
The company representative, Olga Muteiwa, appeared before Harare magistrate Learnmore Mapiye. Despite protestations from the company’s lawyer, Beatrice Mtetwa, Mapiye placed HSTV on remand.
HSTV challenged its placement on remand, arguing that the facts of the offence do not disclose a criminal offence. The State, however, insisted that HSTV was correctly charged, and the court ruled in its favour.
Following the ruling, Mtetwa gave notice to file an application for direct access to the Constitutional Court on Wednesday.
In challenging the placement on remand, Mtetwa referenced a similar scenario during the 2017 military coup era, noting that AMH and its reporter Blessed Mhlanga, who is currently facing similar allegations, were not arrested at that time.
Mtetwa also emphasized the rights of the media, stating they should be protected by law and the courts and not intimidated for performing their duties freely as provided by law.
“The said statements that are said to have constituted an offence relate to comments supplied in a peaceful manner,” Mtetwa told the court.
“The accused person is a duly registered company and conducts its business in terms of articles of memorandum of association and in terms of the law in particular section 61 of the Constitution, it is obliged to disseminate information in a free fair balanced manner, it must give voice to all political opinion and this is inalienable rights confined in Constitution and the court cannot place accused on remand for exercising a constitutional right,” Mtetwa submitted.
She further argued that placing the company on remand would infringe upon the rights of the Zimbabwean people.
“There is no doubt that the freedom of expression is coupled with right to be free. It is recognised and entrenched in every international regional human rights instrument,” she stated.
“The press should be in fact allowed, particularly by the court, to report with a balance, fair, objective and factual reporting of what is going on in society. The public has the right to information and dissemination can be done without the company,” she said.
Referencing the 2017 incident, Mtetwa stated that Mhlanga disseminated similar information on November 9, 2017, regarding then-President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s dismissal.
The journalist who covers a story at ZBC similar to this one as Blessed Mhlanga and the information published by NewsDay on 9 November 2017, that Emmerson has just been fired and fled the country and is in South Africa, he made very clear what he was doing to report what was happening.
He also wrote that Mnangagwa said he was going nowhere and that he further said Mugabe will leave Zanu PF within two weeks. Mnangagwa was speaking to the Zimbabweans, the same way Blessed Geza was speaking to the Zimbabweans through HSTV and Blessed Mhlanga. Mhlanga was not prosecuted for disseminating what Mnangagwa said during that time and the NewsDay was not prosecuted for publishing what Mnangagwa said because section 61 of the Constitution is clear on freedom of the media. …But now they are calling for the same to be prosecuted,” she said.
Mtetwa maintained that HSTV simply conveyed the views of interviewed individuals and should not face prosecution.
“What was disseminated by the accused company consists of topical political discourse that the people of Zimbabwe are entitled to know in the same way they were entitled to receive similar political discourse of Mnangagwa on November 2017. For these reasons, we have absolutely no reason to place the accused company on remand for observing its duty. Journalists, with respect your worship, would immediately be in self-censorship in fear of prosecution, and also media companies will also fear to publish opposing material in fear of prosecution. Journalism is not different from practice of law; they can disseminate information that they cannot agree with, just like a lawyer represents an accused whose actions they may not agree with,” Mtetwa concluded.
Chirenje, for the State, maintained that several aspects were not disputed by the defence – that Mhlanga is an employee of HSTV and that they disseminated the statements made by Blessed Geza.
“Now, reasonable suspicion is already there, and nothing has been said against these issues. We also have evidence that links the accused to the commission of the offence, so if reasonable suspicion is there to satisfy the State, the company should be placed on remand. Section 61 does not in any way exonerate the accused in court. There are limitations on section 61, and nothing was said on the limitations. Transmission of data messages of incitement does not in any way favour him in light of the limitations in section 61,” Chirenje said.