/ 2 May 2007

Nuclear trial: No decision on blanket media ban

Judgement was reserved in an application by the state for a blanket media ban on the trial of two foreign businessmen accused of involvement in an international nuclear-smuggling ring in the late 1990s.

Judge Joop Labuschagne reserved judgement on the heatedly debated application, which pitted two of South Africa’s foremost senior advocates against each other — Wim Trengove SC for the state, and Gilbert Marcus SC for the Freedom of Expression Institute, Mail & Guardian, Media Institute of Southern Africa and the South African National Editors’ Forum.

Trengove argued that what amounted to a blanket ban on any publication of information surrounding the nuclear-arms charges against Swiss engineer Daniel Geiges, German businessman Gerhard Wisser and Krisch Engineering was in the interest of national and international security.

The men were allegedly involved in importing and exporting nuclear-related equipment, and the production and possession of components associated with a centrifuge-enrichment plant without the necessary authorisation.

They allegedly intended to help the Libyan government’s now-abandoned nuclear-weapons programme and formed part of an international nuclear-smuggling network linked to Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan.

Trengove argued that any information on the nuclear technology made public could fall into rogue hands, which directly affected the interest of the public.

The state wanted to preserve its nuclear secrets — as required by international non-proliferation treaties — and to conceal the names of United States and South African nuclear experts who testify, in order to prevent them being recruited by rogues.

He stressed that the accused did not oppose the application and that an in-camera hearing would not affect the trial’s fairness.

Marcus stressed the principal of open justice.

He said the state’s over-broad and generalised application was an unprecedented request for a secret trial, which other courts described as a ”menace to liberty”.

He could not find any South African ruling allowing an entire trial to be secret, and said the order requested would even exclude the accused’s families from attending the trial.

Marcus said the media recognised that aspects of the trial would inevitably have to be in camera, but that the state had not provided enough support for a blanket media ban and urged the court to choose the least restrictive way.

He accused the state of relying on hearsay assertions and not even saying how many experts would be called. — Sapa