The Complainant argued that a documentary dealing with a decade in the life of children after the 
1992 World Summit at Rio should have included reference to the efforts of the apartheid government of the past in South Africa at bettering the position of Black People.
BCCSA holding that, given this kind of documentary, past efforts at development were not of “public importance” in terms of the Code. Balance, accordingly, not required.
In ensuring that material which addresses issues of public importance is balanced and fair in terms of clause 3 of the Broadcasting Code, the Commission must be realistic. Balance and fairness, in terms of the Code, are only required in regard to matters of “public importance”. What happened in the past or in other countries is often not of public importance, since this is not relevant, or is not relevant to the present South African situation. Each case will be judged on its own facts and context, so as to establish whether it concerns a matter of “public importance”.
The Commission held that the Broadcaster, in this instance, had no duty to ensure fairness insofar as the past is concerned. It is, simply, not of public importance to refer to efforts at development that took place in the past; Apartheid overshadows these from a public importance perspective. What is relevant, within the context of a documentary such as the one under consideration, are the iniquities of the past and what is done to address them. Judged within this context, the documentary is balanced.