Freedom Mupanedemo vs. The Mirror (July 2019)

Freedom Mupanedemo registered his complaint with the Media Complaints Committee (MCC) of the Voluntary Media Council of Zimbabwe (VMCZ) over an article published by The Mirror on 4 July 2019  headlined, “Herald Reporter appears before Land Commission”. which he feels wask an attack on his person.

Mr. Mupanedemo, who is a senior reporter with The Herald, states that The Mirror in an article on land developers penned by the newspaper’s editor, Mr. Mlambo, went on to mention his name (the complainant’s) as having been subpoenaed by the Land Commission. He argues that the article constitutes an attack on his person.

The complainant argues that he has never received any communication from the said commission whether as a witness or any other capacity and he feels that this inaccurate reportage will tarnish his image.

Mr. Mupanedemo is seeking an apology and retraction from The Mirror.

Media Complaints Committee judgment

Based on evidence collected the Media Complaints Committee dismissed the complaint lodged by Mr Mupanedemo. 

Following the dismissal of the initial complaint, Mr. Mupanedemo made further submissions as follows:

• In his additional submissions the complainant stated that his appearance before the Commission is not in dispute. He argued that what is contentious is The Mirror’s reportage of the matter. He cited the following elements that he finds disputable in the article:
  • He said he never confirmed receiving Ecocash payments from River Valley Company as reported by The Mirror.
  • He further argued that the newspaper further insinuates in a follow-up article that he (Freedom Mupanedemo) has powers to arrest land barons and accuses him of having “turned a blind eye when crime was committed”.
  • He also disputed statements by The Mirror that he drove a River Valley-branded vehicle as alleged in the newspaper article
  • In additional submissions, Mr Mupanedemo stated that The Mirror further  published falsehoods attacking him in an opinion piece without any attempt to get his side of the story. He alleged that in this opinion piece he was attacked by a “shadowy reporter who receives information from one commissioner”.
  • The complainant stated that the reporter claims and writes as if he/she was part of the Zimbabwe Land Commission but goes on to distort everything that transpired before the Commission.
  • He also argued that he appeared before the Zimbabwe Land Commission after receiving a phone call and not after being subpoenaed, as reported by The Mirror. He said that the Commission wanted to know who Lindrover is (and said that he informed the Commission that this is one of the Ecocash agent lines that he uses for his Ecocash business transactions).
  • He aded that he spent less than 20 minutes before the Commission, which duly accepted his documents, proving that he in fact is conducting business using the said ecocash details. He said this is contrary to claims by The Mirror that he could not explain the Ecocash transactions on his mobile phone.
  • The complainant stated that he finds the “attacks” abusive and very personal.

Finding

Status: Dismissed

The MCC dismissed the complaint in its entirety taking into account the following:

• The response from The Mirror reinforcing that Mr Mupanedemo indeed appeared before the Zimbabwe Lands Commission
• The MCC’s own independent investigations which confirmed that the journalist did appear and testify before the Lands Commission

The Media Complaints Committee also dismissed other allegations raised by Mr Mupanedemo on the basis that the founding complaint was flawed since Mr Mupanedemo initially denied appearing before the Zimbabwe Land Commission when in actual fact he appeared and testified before the Commission.