S v Mamabolo (E TV and Others Intervening)

The appellant, Russell Mamabolo, a spokesperson for the Department of Correctional Services, issued and conveyed to the media a departmental statement criticising a bail order granted by a High Court judge (Els J) in favour of Eugene Terre Blanche. A newspaper report quoted Mamabolo as stating that the judge had made a mistake and had contributed to confusion. The judge who granted bail initiated summary proceedings, called Mamabolo and the Commissioner of Correctional Services to court, conducted an enquiry, and convicted Mamabolo of contempt of court (scandalising the court), imposing a fine or imprisonment. Mamabolo appealed directly to the Constitutional Court, challenging both the constitutionality of the offence of scandalising the court and the summary procedure used.

The appeal was upheld. The conviction and sentence for contempt of court were set aside.

This case is a leading authority on freedom of expression and contempt of court in South African constitutional law. It affirmed the constitutional importance of protecting judicial authority while decisively limiting the scope of the offence of scandalising the court and curtailing the use of summary contempt procedures. It strengthened media freedom and clarified that judges are not immune from public criticism.