South Africa's government has resumed its battle to keep a controversial report on Zimbabwe's elections hidden, launching a fresh angle of defence for the secrecy of the document.
?
The Mail & Guardian newspaper in South Africa has been trying to have the report released since 2008, amid widespread speculation that it contained evidence showing that the 2002 disputed election in Zimbabwe was not free or fair.
?
The then South African President Thabo Mbeki had commissioned two judges to visit Zimbabwe and report back on the state of the election. This report was handed over to Mbeki but never made public, although the former President insisted the electoral process in Zimbabwe was completely democratic.
?
The newspaper's efforts to access the details of the report were repeatedly denied, leaving it little choice but to seek the intervention of the High Court. The government, now under President Jacob Zuma's leadership, was then ordered more than a year ago to release the report.
?
But a lengthy appeals process was launched by President Zuma and the case eventually ended up in the Constitutional Court.
?
That court late last year referred the case back to its starting point in the High Court, saying that court needed to invoke its rights to see the report and then make a decision on whether it could be released.
?
High Court Judge Joseph Raulinga has since had his 'judicial peek' into the document, and the case resumed in court this week.
?
Nic Dawes, the editor in chief of the Mail & Guardian, told SW Radio Africa on Tuesday that the SA government is sticking to its argument that there is no reason why the report should be made public.
?
He explained that the government has also introduced new evidence, in the form of affidavits signed by Mbeki and Zuma, stating that the information in the report has been and is still used to formulate policy, and therefore can't be released.
?
“They still have not released any details of the report to support this argument. And in any case, if the judges were co-opted into policy-making, then it violates the separation of the powers of the executive and judicial arms of government,” Dawes said.
?
Zuma's affidavit stated the report continues to be relevant to his policy-driven interventions in Zimbabwe and held that the “premature and piecemeal disclosure of information” could have a serious and negative impact on South Africa's relationship with Zimbabwe.
?
Zuma is still the regionally appointed mediator in Zimbabwe's political crisis and has been trying steer the fragile unity government towards a free and fair election.
?
Dawes however said that Zuma's argument is questionable, considering that “the situation is much changed in Zimbabwe since the report was released a decade ago.”
?
“I doubt the report is still being used to inform policy ten years down the line,” Dawes said.
?
Judge Raulinga has reserved judgment on the matter. But Dawes said that even if the Judge rules in their favour, the newspaper “is in for a long fight to see the details of the report”
