Newcastle Community Radio ceases all operations amidst ‘misconduct’ allegations

Following allegations of misconduct and non-compliance to Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) licensing laws and requirements, local Newcastle Community Radio (NCR) station, has ceased operations effective from August 13.

Findings by the Complaints and Compliance Committee (CCC) on the complaints, in a document dated December 7 – 2018, Case Number: 312/2018, states:

It is indeed so that the correct procedures were not followed.

Each licensee – as is the case with any representative Board – must follow the Board of the licensee and the relevant Bank’s procedures when dealing with bank accounts.

However, given the parameters of an inquiry such as the present, it would be unfair to make a finding against individuals. Explanations have been given at the hearing of this matter, which most definitely indicate that correct procedures were not followed.

The Radio Station is found to have contravened the said Regulation.

When dealing with bank accounts, the Board must follow correct procedures. No financial statements were filed, in spite of the directive on behalf of the CCC to make audited Financial Statements available.

There is, however, not sufficient evidence before the CCC that shows that the monies withdrawn were used for personal purposes.

Although the CCC has inquisitorial powers in terms of section 17B of the ICASA Act, the Constitutional Court7 has held that these powers must be exercised with fairness.

Given the vague claims placed before the CCC and the explanations given, it would indeed be unfair to delve deeper for purposes of this matter which, in the main, has a bearing on which Board, Chairperson and Station Manager fills the position presently.

If there has been theft or fraud, that would, in any case, resort with a criminal court where the Prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

This inquiry cannot and should not replace that of a Criminal Court, with its requirement that the State must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Regulation 10A7(a), provides that “a licensee must be owned by community members with the Board of Directors as custodian of the licence.

The allegation is that there are three teams of Board Directors and there is no proper Board of Directors governing the Station.

FINDING: Whatever the position may have been in the past – before 2018 – no attempt was even made by the Respondent, through three groups which represented it, to show that this duty was complied with by the radio station in 2018.

Regulation 10A7(c) provides that a licensee must be managed by person(s) tasked by the Board of Directors to ensure the licensee’s daily operation.

However, this excludes a private company since a community television or class sound community radio is non-profit.

The allegation is that the Board of Directors has failed to task a person(s) to ensure the daily operation of the station, in that the station is constantly off air and playing jukebox music for almost three to four days.

The production of programmes entails the following: involvement of the community and local organizations in production, managing volunteers and professional relationships, ethics, news, features, current affairs, field and studio equipment use, research, writing, presenting, interviewing, editing, sound effects.

If this allegation is true, it means that the station does not have a set programme.

What is required is a detailed programming of the station, time slots and the name of presenters and their contracts with the radio station.

FINDING: Although the Station Manager, who took over the reins on 18 October 2018, gave satisfactory evidence as to the station having, after his appointment, been broadcasting regular programmes during the day, it is clear that there was a period, after the previous station manager had been suspended in April 2018, that the Radio station was in substantial omission of its broadcasting duties.

Evidence before the CCC was that since the new station manager was appointed, the station was again complying with its duties between 70 and 75% during the day.

The Respondent was, thus, in contravention of its duties, at least from when Mr Nondala was suspended as Station Manager.

The matter of the validity of the suspension of the previous station manager is not a matter for the CCC.

Such a matter would have to be filed with the appropriate authority, the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration, which is a dispute resolution body established in terms of the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995.

Read original article on the Newcastle Advertiser.