According to the FXI, Ginwala's ruling effectively means that if neither of the parties to the proceedings, namely the Government or Pikoli, oppose ad hoc applications for certain evidence to be heard in camera, which the chairperson indicated she would entertain, the hearing of such evidence will be held behind closed doors. The media, as a third party, will not be given a hearing in this regard, which may well result in the suppression of information which is of fundamental public importance.
“We believe that the public has an overriding right to know about matters of such fundamental significance and that third party intervention in order to oppose segments of the hearing being held in camera should be heard,” said the FXI's Melissa Moore, Law Clinic head, in a media statement.
“While we are aware that the Chairperson's mandate is limited to the gathering of information in this matter, we believe that the exposure of all information relevant to the enquiry should be open to the scrutiny of the public. The public has a right to know whether the President and/or the Minister of Justice were intervening in order to protect the Commissioner of Police, particularly since subsequent revelations have indicated that there is a possibility that the Commissioner has at least a prima facie case to answer.
“Given the extent and the fundamental importance of the key positions which Adv Pikoli and his adversaries hold, the public is entitled to know the full details. The suppression of this kind of information will inevitability lead to an increased climate of distrust in the probity of the actions of the President, the Minister of Justice and Adv Pikoli.
Concluded Moore, “It is imperative that the media come together to oppose the exclusionary attitude that the Enquiry has adopted towards reasonable and legitimate third party interests in the proceedings.”
