Islamic Unity Convention v Independent Broadcasting Authority and Others (CCT36/01) [2002] ZACC 3; 2002 (4) SA 294; 2002 (5) BCLR 433 (11 April 2002)

Islamic Unity Convention v Independent Broadcasting Authority and Others (CCT36/01) [2002] ZACC 3; 2002 (4) SA 294; 2002 (5) BCLR 433 (11 April 2002)

The Constitutional Court held that the relevant portion of clause 2(a) of the Code of Conduct for Broadcasting Services, which prohibits the broadcasting of material 'likely to prejudice relations between sections of the population', constitutes a limitation of the right to freedom of expression under section 16(1) of the Constitution. The Court found that this prohibition is vague, overbroad, and not sufficiently tailored to the categories of unprotected speech set out in section 16(2). The limitation is not justified under section 36(1), as it is too extensive, lacks clear standards, and unduly restricts both broadcasters and audiences from imparting and receiving information. The Court...

Citation
[2002] ZACC 3
Parties
Applicant: Islamic Unity Convention; Respondent: Independent Broadcasting Authority; Respondent: Head: Monitoring and Complaints Unit of the Independent Broadcasting Authority; Respondent: Chairperson of the Broadcasting Monitoring and Complaints Committee; Respondent: South African Jewish Board of Deputies; Respondent: Minister of Communications
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 April 2002
Case Number
CCT 36/01
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Directly to the Constitutional Court; Constitutional Challenge to Broadcasting Code Provision
Outcome
Appeal upheld; clause 2(a) declared unconstitutional to the extent indicated.
Judges
Langa DCJ, Chaskalson CJ, Ackermann J, Kriegler J, Madala J, Mokgoro J, O'Regan J, Sachs J, Yacoob J, Du Plessis AJ, Skweyiya AJ
Legal Topics
Freedom of Expression, Broadcasting Regulation, Limitations Clause, Hate Speech, Constitutional Invalidity, Just and Equitable Relief
Constitutional Law Telecoms and Media Freedom of Expression Broadcasting Regulation Limitations Clause Hate Speech Constitutional Invalidity Just and Equitable Relief

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Islamic Unity Convention

Applicant

Independent Broadcasting Authority

Respondent

Head: Monitoring and Complaints Unit of the Independent Broadcasting Authority

Respondent

Chairperson of the Broadcasting Monitoring and Complaints Committee

Respondent

South African Jewish Board of Deputies

Respondent

Minister of Communications

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Directly to the Constitutional Court; Constitutional Challenge to Broadcasting Code Provision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 2(a) of the Code of Conduct for Broadcasting Services, prohibiting material 'likely to prejudice relations between sections of the population', is inconsistent with section 16 of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in declining to decide the constitutional validity of clause 2(a).
  3. 3 Whether the limitation imposed by clause 2(a) is justifiable under section 36(1) of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court held that the relevant portion of clause 2(a) of the Code of Conduct for Broadcasting Services, which prohibits the broadcasting of material 'likely to prejudice relations between sections of the population', constitutes a limitation of the right to freedom of expression under section 16(1) of the Constitution. The Court found that this prohibition is vague, overbroad, and not sufficiently tailored to the categories of unprotected speech set out in section 16(2). The limitation is not justified under section 36(1), as it is too extensive, lacks clear standards, and unduly restricts both broadcasters and audiences from imparting and receiving information. The Court...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; clause 2(a) declared unconstitutional to the extent indicated.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal directly to the Constitutional Court is granted.
  • The appeal is upheld.