Complaint by one individual an 26 Afrikaner Organizations against broadcast by Radio702 in which the 
host satirized and joked about the Voortrekker Monument and the irony of a planned rock concert in its amphitheatre. The full English text appears in the judgment and need not be repeated here.
The Complainants argued that the Monument, which was built between 1938 and 1948, symbolized the Afrikaner heritage in that it was built to honour the efforts of the Afrikaner Trekkers during the 19th Century in opening up the northern territories of the Country. Since the Trekkers also believed that God had helped them in their efforts and the Monument also symbolizes this for many Afrikaners, the broadcast was not only offensive to the feelings of the Afrikaner but also to the religious feelings of a section of the South African nation, in this case the substantial number of Afrikaners who still honoured the heritage as symbolized by the Monument. What would happen, Complainant 2 argued, if a similar broadcast were to be directed at a monument in honour of a Jewish or Black hero?
The Commission held:
- That “feelings” of a section were not protected as such by the Code. Even if such feelings were protected, the broadcast was not so scathing as to amount to being “offensive” in law. “Offensive” has a narrow meaning in law and does not include material which is merely displeasing or annoying. The broadcast was, in the view of the Commission, annoying but not so annoying that it became repugnant and accordingly “offensive”.
- That since there had been no encroachment upon religious convictions or feelings, but only on what for some people would amount to religious sentiment, the broadcast was not “offensive to religious convictions or feelings.”
- Since the BCCSA has a legal duty to take certain steps (e.g. reprimand a broadcaster or even fine a broadcaster) when a broadcaster acts in conflict with the Code, it is also bound to interpret its Code in the light of the Fundamental Rights Chapter of the Constitution of the RSA. Accordingly section 16(2), as an exception to the guarantee of freedom for the media and the arts, should be considered. This subsection inter alia provides that speech which advocates hatred based on race, ethnicity, religion or gender and which constitutes incitement to harm, is prohibited. This provision is a particularly narrow one and the requirements for what is often called “hate speech” are accordingly very open minded and freedom of speech orientated. The Commission concluded that the broadcast, judged as a whole, was not calculated to further hostility between sections of the Community. The words spoken were meant to provoke debate and were in line with the kind of material one often finds on Radio 702: provocative, satyrical, ironical, lighthearted.
Conversely, it is also clear that the words were regarded as particularly disrespectful and stinging by a substantial number of Afrikaners. Yet, it is the opinion of the Commission that so as to ensure that the inestimable benefits of free speech remain intact as far as possible, the present broadcast, despite its questionable nature for many, did not go so far as to place relations at risk.
The comparisons referred to by second complainant were not of much assistance: each case must be judged on its own merits and much depends on the context and the history and characteristics of a particular section. One cannot simply transpose the present broadcast to another section and then revert to the present matter and apply the conclusion reached on that matter.
The Complaints were accordingly dismissed.
OBSERVATION: that, given the wide reaction to the broadcast, whether broadcasters should not in any case take note of the fact that observations of this nature(e.g. touching upon cultural heritage of sections of the community, whether they be Afrikaners or other sections of the community) have touched upon a particularly sensitive subject for many. Some may argue that it is necessary to write and talk these subjects ‘open’; others may argue that it is unreasonable to use the airwaves for these kind of observations without granting the persons involved an opportunity to respond, especially within the sensitive transitional climate within which South Africans find themselves.