In a case that could have been scripted for prime-time television, Gregory John Els, a veteran corporate adviser, found himself thrust into the public spotlight in Els v eMedia Investments [2024] 25902-21 (GJ). What began as a routine business meeting turned into a dramatic confrontation, raising critical questions about privacy, public interest, and the limits of investigative journalism.
The ambush at tasha’s
On 29 October 2024, at a bustling Tashas coffee shop in Sandton, Els arrived expecting to meet a prospective client, “Hendrik Zowitsky”, for a business discussion. Instead, he was met by Devi Govender, the formidable host of The Devi Show, accompanied by a camera crew.
With cameras rolling, Govender confronted Els about allegations of financial misconduct involving his advisory firm, Praxley Corporate Solutions. Els refused to respond, walking briskly to his car as Govender followed, filming every moment. This ambush, as Els described it, became the catalyst for a fierce legal battle.
The legal challenge: Privacy versus public interest
Els wasted no time responding to this surprise encounter. After receiving an email from The Devi Show requesting his comments on the allegations, he and his legal team filed an urgent application to prevent the broadcast of the footage. The basis of their argument? The footage was obtained under false pretences, and its broadcast would violate Els’ privacy under South Africa’s Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA).
However, eMedia Investments defended its actions, asserting that the allegations against Els were a matter of significant public interest. They argued that airing the footage could encourage others to come forward and strengthen public accountability. Furthermore, they invoked POPIA’s journalistic exclusion, which protects media organisations in instances where processing personal information serves the public interest.
Judge Manoim’s verdict
On 15 November 2024, Judge Norman Manoim dismissed Els’ application, clearing the way for the broadcast.
His reasoning was rooted in the principle of balancing competing rights. While recognising the importance of privacy, the judge emphasised that freedom of expression, particularly in investigative journalism, holds a unique place in protecting democratic accountability.
Key considerations:
- Public interest: The allegations against Els, involving alleged financial misconduct, were not trivial. with multiple sources, including past clients and financial institutions, raising concerns, the court deemed the matter of significant public interest.
- Privacy limitations: Drawing on Bernstein v Bester, the court highlighted that the right to privacy diminishes as one engages in public or business activities. as a business owner serving the public, Els’ affairs were no longer confined to the private realm.
- Freedom of expression: Referring to Midi Television v Director of Public Prosecutions, the court reinforced the importance of resisting prior restraints on publication. even if the footage contained no verbal responses, Els’ actions (or lack thereof) constituted a form of non-verbal communication, relevant to the broader narrative.
A concession on safety
While the court dismissed the application, it acknowledged Els’ concerns about potential risks arising from the identification of his vehicle. eMedia was ordered to ensure that neither the licence plate nor other distinguishing features of Els’ car were visible in the broadcast.
The broader implications
This case underscores the delicate balance between privacy and public interest in South Africa’s legal landscape. It reaffirms that while individuals have the right to protect their reputation, investigative journalism plays a critical role in ensuring transparency and accountability. For professionals and businesses, it’s a stark reminder of the reputational risks posed by public scrutiny—and the importance of managing these proactively. Click the link to read the case.
How ITLawCo can help
When privacy and public interest collide, navigating the legal complexities requires a team that understands the nuances of law, technology, and public policy. ITLawCo is here to provide expert guidance for individuals and businesses facing similar challenges.
Our services include:
- Privacy and data protection compliance: ensure your organisation aligns with laws like POPIA and other international standards.
- Media and crisis management: respond effectively to investigative reports and protect your reputation.
- Reputational risk assessments: identify vulnerabilities and safeguard your public image.
- Legal remedies: pursue claims for defamation, invasion of privacy, or reputational harm.
Whether you’re preparing for potential media exposure or addressing public allegations, ITLawCo offers tailored, actionable solutions to protect your interests and align with public accountability standards.
Stay ahead of the story. Let ITLawCo help you navigate the intersection of privacy, media, and public interest with confidence and expertise. Contact us today.
