US embassy cable - 04HARARE223

UNCLAS HARARE 000223 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR AF/S - S. DELISI, L. AROIAN, M. RAYNOR 
AF/PD FOR D. FOLEY, C. DALTON 
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR J. FRAZER 
LONDON FOR C. GURNEY 
PARIS FOR C. NEARY 
NAIROBI FOR T. PFLAUMER 
 
E. O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM, PGOV, KPAO, PREL, ZI, Media and Communications 
SUBJECT:  SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS AIPPA'S CONSTITUTIONALITY, 
RESERVES JUDGMENT ON DAILY NEWS 
 
REF: (A) HARARE 174 (B) HARARE 128 and previous 
 
1.  (U) The Supreme Court on February 5 upheld the 
constitutionality of the Access to Information and 
Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA).  In a long-running case 
brought by the Independent Journalists Association of 
Zimbabwe (IJAZ) filed soon after AIPPA was enacted, the 
ruled that AIPPA sections 79 (requiring registration of 
journalists), 83 (prohibition of practice by unaccredited 
journalists), and 85 (the right of the Media and Information 
Commission (MIC) to establish a code of conduct for 
journalists) did not violate the constitution.  It found 
that Section 80 (criminalizing the publication of 
falsehoods) did violate the Constitution; however, 
responding to a lower court ruling to that effect, the GOZ 
amended AIPPA recently to address the purported inadequacy. 
 
2.   (U) The Court also heard on February 5 the MIC's 
application to have The Daily News cease publication pending 
hearing of the consolidated TDN-related appeals, including 
some that hinge on AIPPA (ref A).  According to TDN lawyers, 
Chief Justice Chidyausiku conceded that, as an appellate 
judge, he lacked jurisdiction to entertain the MIC's 
original motion but nonetheless reserved judgment on the 
application.  According to the lawyers, the action 
effectively permits TDN to publish for now, subject to a 
contrary decision at any time.  The consolidated appeal of 
TDN cases is still scheduled for February 18 but when a 
decision would be rendered on that hearing is uncertain. 
 
3.  (SBU) COMMENT: Taken together, the decisions say 
something about the current state of Zimbabwe's Supreme 
Court.  AIPPA is central to the GOZ's concerted campaign to 
bring the independent press to heel; its invalidation by the 
politically sensitive Supreme Court therefore was unlikely. 
The second decision, or rather non-decision, conforms to an 
increasingly popular practice by courts generally when the 
letter of the law conflicts with the political imperatives 
of prominent GOZ principals: they "reserve judgment." 
 
4.  (SBU) The decisions say less about the state of the 
independent press.  The AIPPA decision dealt a blow to media 
hopes but was not unexpected and does not change the de 
facto operating environment.  It undermines some but not all 
of TDN's legal arguments for its February 18 hearing, the 
decision on which may say a lot more about the fate of 
Zimbabwe's beleaguered independent press.