Jewish Leadership Welcomes Ruling Against The Star & Cape Times

The finding has confirmed that in two reports appearing on 19 and 23 November, 2015, a highly misleading account was presented in terms of how the South African authorities are dealing with the issuing by Turkey of arrest warrants against four Israeli military commanders.

The SA Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) and SA Zionist Federation (SAZF) welcome the Press Ombudsman’s finding concerning their complaint against The Star. The finding has confirmed that in two reports appearing on 19 and 23 November, 2015, a highly misleading account was presented in terms of how the South African authorities are dealing with the issuing by Turkey of arrest warrants against four Israeli military commanders. The reports, written by The Star's Foreign Editor Shannon Ebrahim, incorrectly and without persuasive evidence asserted that South Africa has undertaken to enforce these arrest warrants should the Israelis concerned enter the country.

The complaint was jointly laid by SAJBD National Chairman Jeff Katz and SAZF National Chairman Ben Swartz. On the same grounds, the Press Ombudsman also upheld a complaint for similarly misleading reports lodged by the SAZF (Western Cape) against the Cape Times.In terms of the finding, The Star was found guilty of a Tier 2 (serious) breach of Section 2.3 of the Press Code for stating its conclusions as fact, namely that:

• South Africa would enforce Turkey’s warrants of arrest should the Israeli commanders set foot in this country;

• following the arrest of any of the four charged with war crimes, South Africa would grant Turkey’s request for extradition; and

• Turkey has welcomed South Africa’s decision to enforce the arrest warrants.

  
  

 Swartz said that the finding had fully vindicated the original objections raised by the SAJBD and SAZF when the articles first appeared.The Star’s response on that occasion had been to pour scorn on their claims, but in the end, it was the newspaper that had been forced to back down.A secondary aspect of the complaint was that the articles in question displayed unwarranted anti-Israel bias. The Ombudsman took the view that his office was “in no position to decide on the merits of the contextual arguments in question” and that it would therefore be inappropriate to try to make any kind of decision on the issue. Accordingly, this aspect of the complaint was dismissed. The SAJBD and SAZF respect the Ombudsman’s reasons for adopting this approach. However, this in no way changes our original contention, namely that in addition to being grossly misleading, the two Ebrahim reports were overtly and inappropriately biased against Israel.