Concern over Open Secrets gag order
Twenty-three civil society and media organisations have written to Chief Justice Mandisa Maya, expressing concern over a seemingly arbitrary gag order imposed on Open Secrets.
The nonprofit that reports private sector economic crime and human rights abuses – earlier this week announced that it had been served with a gagging order relating to ‘a matter of significant importance’.
News24 reports that the order allegedly prohibits it from providing any information about the matter, including the court that heard it, the date, and the judge who issued the order.
‘What we can say is simple: efforts to muzzle public-interest journalism endanger everyone’s right to know,’ the organisation said.
The order prompted 20 organisations to pen a letter to Maya, warning that the order undermines the constitutional commitment to open justice and the public’s right to information.
The organisations expressed grave concern over the dangers such orders pose to to constitutional principles of open justice and freedom of expression.
‘But there can be no mistaking its breadth: Open Secrets is effectively silenced, not only prevented from reporting, but from even explaining why it cannot do so,’ the letter read.
News24 notes that Open Secrets said it intended to challenge the order through its attorneys at PowerLaw Africa.
If successful, ‘you will be the first to know what we have uncovered’.
‘SA’s Constitution protects freedom of expression and media freedom. We assert our right – and duty – to publish fair, fact-based investigations in the public interest.’
‘Public interest media, investigative journalists, whistle-blowers and civil society must be safe from surveillance, intimidation, doxxing, arbitrary arrest, and physical harm. Strategic lawsuits against public participation, gagging orders, and abusive prosecutions curtail media freedom and must be rejected by courts, regulators, and the public,’ it added.
Article disclaimer: While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide final legal advice as facts and situations will differ from case to case, and therefore specific legal advice should be sought with a lawyer.





