CASE NUMBER: 29/2006 – JASSON VS SABC1 – VIOLENCE

A viewer filed a complaint with the Registrar in regard to the broadcast of a film, “Land of Weeping” which deals with racial injustices of the past. Freedom of expression is guaranteed by the Constitution. Of course, when material which is broadcast incites to harm in terms of clause 16.3 of the Code, then the freedom of expression guarantee falls away. On the other hand drama is exempted by clause 17 from the operation of clause 16.3 if it is bona fide. “Bona fide” within this context means drama which objectively seeks to qualify as drama. Views would differ as to what bona fide drama is. Ultimately it would amount to a value judgment which is brought to bear on the material. At times drama would convey the offensive and within reasonable limits this is acceptable, according to the Constitutional Court. Some viewers are inclined to believe, as does the complainant in this matter, that the screening  of interracial violence is likely to give rise to feelings of hate and  lead to more violence by those who identify with the oppressed. However, if this were to be the test, then drama of this nature, which has a clear message of reconciliation will never be permitted to be screened. Drama and documentary often deal with real life. “A Place of weeping” is a docu-drama. The film was screened well past the 21:00 watershed and the material is of such a nature that it was likely to have drawn the more sophisticated, intellectual viewer. This viewer would understand the film for what it is and not be incited to action.  In the result the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the broadcast of the film was not likely to have incited to violence or contributed to violence. The complaint is not upheld.