(FXI/IFEX) – The following is a 17 August 2000 FXI media statement: 17 August 2000 RE: Freelance journalist Dr. Dale T. McKinley expelled from South African Communist Party The Freedom of Expression Institute condemns the decision to expel Dr. Dale McKinley from the South African Communist Party. On 15 August, the Central Committee of the […]
(FXI/IFEX) – The following is a 17 August 2000 FXI media statement:
17 August 2000
RE: Freelance journalist Dr. Dale T. McKinley expelled from South African Communist Party
The Freedom of Expression Institute condemns the decision to expel Dr. Dale McKinley from the South African Communist Party. On 15 August, the Central Committee of the SACP informed McKinley that on the recommendation of the Disciplinary Committee, he has been expelled as
a member of the SACP. McKinley was the Chairperson of the Johannesburg branch of the SACP.
We note that the SACP, as a socialist organisation and as a part of the broad liberation movement, should set an exemplary standard with respect to the promotion of formal democracy, freedom of expression, and a culture of critical debate. It simply cannot apply one set of standards to South African society generally, and another set to its own members. This is especially so if these members have taken care to raise these very debates within organisational structures before they
are raised through the media, which was one of the charges levelled against McKinley, and for which he was found not guilty. The FXI feels that unfortunately, the SACP has failed to live up to its policies and programmes on all these counts, which has implications not only for the Party itself, but for the struggle for a genuinely transformed South African society.
We also note the questions that have been raised about the consistency with which the SACP has acted against its leaders who have also publicly criticised programmes of the ANC-SACP-COSATU alliance. We call on the SACP to respond to these accusations, as this apparent anomaly creates space for the accusation that there are two free expression standards for the organisation: one for the leadership and another for the membership.
The FXI also has serious concerns around the disciplinary procedure followed. We are disturbed to note that McKinley was denied the right to a fair hearing. Both before and during the hearing, McKinley argued that he had the right to external representation, given that the SACP constitution does not limit representation to Party members only. Not only was he denied the right to external representation by the Disciplinary Committee, but when he appealed, the Committee then insisted on proceeding with the merits of the case. Procedurally, only the appeal structure – which was in this case the Central Committee – has the right to rule on an appeal as the Disciplinary Committee cannot assess the merits of its own ruling. So the fact that the Disciplinary Committee proceeded in spite of the fact that an appeal had been lodged was unprocedural, and a violation of McKinley’s
constitutional right to administrative justice. The unprocedural nature of the hearing also severely prejudiced McKinley’s chances of defending his activities as a freelance journalist.
According to the FXI, these factors combined mean that the disciplinary action against McKinley cannot be treated simply as an internal matter, as it is bound to have a chilling effect on a culture of critical debate in the country, and the practice of democracy both within the state and civil society. The FXI feels that freedom of expression must be protected not only with respect to the state, but with respect to civil society organisations as well. This is especially so with respect to political organisations that fall within the ambit of the liberation movement, given that they claim to be the flag-bearers of a higher morality.
