The Constitutional Court ruled in favour of the Mail & Guardian on Thursday, saying 30-days was too short a time limit to lodge a court challenge after a failed application for information for a story it was working on.
Handing down judgement, Judge Sandile Ngcobo said by unanimous decision the court decided to replace the 30-day limit set down in the Promotion of Access to Information Act with 180 days.
This would stay in place as an interim measure until Parliament corrected section 78,2 of the Act, which set down that time period.
M&G journalist Stefaans Brümmer had sought information from the Department of Social Development regarding the Oilgate scandal.
Brümmer had requested information regarding communication between former social development minister Dr Zola Skweyiya, a consortium called IT Lynx and the finance minister.
He had wanted to establish whether Skweyiya had knowledge that Imvume Management head Sandi Majali or one of his companies was part of IT Lynx, which had demanded the implementation of a tender in the belief it had been awarded to it.
The M&G reported in 2005 how state oil company PetroSA irregularly paid R15-million to Imvume Management, which had close ties to the African National Congress. About R11-million of this public money allegedly found its way into the ANC’s 2004 election fund.
After the publication of these reports, IT Lynx launched an action in the Pretoria High Court against the State Information and Technology Agency (Sita) and the minister.
It was intended to force them to implement a tender awarded to IT Lynx, or to pay damages amounting to almost R150-million, plus interest and costs.
Brümmer approached the court to gain access to the information on July 25 2007 after being denied the information on December 22 2006, well after a 30-day period to launch such an application had expired.
The court ordered that ’30 days†in Section 78,2 was inconsistent with the Constitution and was declared invalid.
They were replaced with the words ‘180 days†from when a requester receives notice of a decision, as an interim measure until Parliament changes it.
And, that Section 77,5, which refers to two time periods of 30 days and 60 days, also be altered to 180 days.
Ngcobo said access to information was crucial to accurate reporting and that the limitation of 30 days was not justifiable.
One of the friends of the court, the SA Archives Trust, had told the court that the 30-day limit was almost impossible to comply with and it inevitably led to additional costs when applying for condonation of filing outside this period.
Ngcobo said the 30-days limited the right to access to court and the right to access to information.
Vital public interest
M&G editor Nic Dawes said on Thursday the Promotion of Access to Information Act is a critical tool for ensuring that the constitutional principles of open democracy and accountability are upheld.
”Unfortunately its edge has been blunted by unreasonable time limits, and narrow, bureaucratic interpretation, and the expense of attempting to force compliance.
”Stefaans Brümmer’s victory in the Constitutional court will aid his long battle to tell a story of vital public interest. It should also help restore the cutting edge to the act, and thus aid journalists, civil society organisations, and individuals in the far wider effort to hold both public and private sector bodies to account.
”Coming on the heels of the Mail & Guardian‘s successful court challenge to the Public Protector’s report on the Oilgate affair, and our victory together with other newspapers in opening the hearings of the Judicial Service Commission into Judge Hlophe to the public, the constitutional court ruling is further evidence of the crucial role of the media in ensuring that constitutional principles are given the fullest possible expression.”