Icasa hears publishers’ complaints against Sapo

A group of publishers have taken the Post Office to the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa over the organisation's failure to meet its obligations to reliably distribute their post. Photo: David Ritchie

A group of publishers have taken the Post Office to the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa over the organisation's failure to meet its obligations to reliably distribute their post. Photo: David Ritchie

Published Jul 3, 2015

Share

Banele Ginindza

THE Independent Communications Authority of SA (Icasa) since yesterday heard the long-standing complaints about the failure by the SA Post Office (Sapo) to reliably distribute the post.

This hearing followed an application from a group of publishing companies that have said Sapo had put them out of pocket.

The complainants have asked Icasa’s Complaints and Compliance Committee to consider and review complaints against Sapo and the financial and other damage to the magazine publishing industry caused by Sapo’s extended failure to meet its licence conditions relating to its obligation to reliably distribute its post.

This has affected the distribution and circulation of magazines published by the complainants and entrusted to Sapo to distribute to clientele.

Sapo has been besieged by industrial action by its employees, which resulted in the post not being distributed for the better part of last year and for some months this year.

Redress

The publishers are hoping the Icasa hearing will pave the way for the businesses to seek redress for the effects of Sapo’s failure to distribute the post.

Chris Yelland of EE Publishers said earlier that his company spent about R2 million a year with Sapo to distribute magazines, many of which never get to their subscribers.

“This formal complaint… is a precursor to a possible class action” as “there are real costs involved; real damages involved” and that Sapo had “caused us great financial damage over several years”, Yelland said.

This could include punitive financial sanctions against Sapo; entertaining alternative licence applications to that of Sapo; considering additional licence applications to supplement the activities of Sapo; or even the removal of Sapo’s (currently exclusive) licence.

In a statement on Wednesday, the publishers said the start of the hearing was a breakthrough after a long process of apparent stone-walling.

The complainants are collectively represented by Bouwer Kobeli Morabe Attorneys, and include: Brooke Pattrick, Creamer Media, Crown Publications, EE Publishers, Interact Media Defined, Now Media, Technews Publishing and TE Trade Events.

In terms of the relevant legislation, Icasa is tasked with monitoring Sapo to ensure the conditions of its licence are met, and to hear and deal with complaints against the licensee where alleged breaches of licence conditions occur.

The complainants said Sapo’s answering affidavit failed to deal with any of the merits of the complaints levelled against it, and that Sapo instead raised numerous procedural and technical objections, namely prescription, impossibility of performance, vague and embarrassing allegations and a lack of factual material, which were not relevant or applicable to these proceedings.

Related Topics: