Journalist Charlene Smith shed a tear as she told the Johannesburg High Court she would hate to do anything that brought harm to anyone.
She was being cross-examined in a civil case brought by three women who complained that their HIV-positive status was disclosed without their consent in Smith’s book on politician Patricia de Lille.
Lawyer Daniel Berger, acting for the Aids Law Project, put it to Smith that when she disclosed their private facts to the world without their consent, ”you caused them in calculable pain and trampled their dignity”.
Smith replied: ”If I had believed these people hadn’t given consent, I wouldn’t have used their names.”
Smith said she had acted within journalistic practice when she wrote about a report about clinical trials held under the auspices of the University of Pretoria.
”If I received documents from reputable organisations that mentioned their names, I accept that bona fides of that organisation.
”If we then have to track them down … we create an impossible situation for journalists and for people to speak out openly about their HIV status,” she said.
Berger challenged Smith on why she had not followed her usual practice of erring on the side of caution by not using their names.
The three women, whom the court has ordered be identified only as NM, SM and LH, are claming R200 000 each from De Lille, Smith and publisher New Africa Books.
Judge Ivor Schwartzman postponed the hearing to Thursday. — Sapa