Judge dismisses application to halt the broadcast of Mzansi Magic’s Queen Modjadji

Mzansi Magic’s Queen Modjadji will air this Sunday as planned, this after the High Court ruled in favour of MultiChoice in the court case against the Balobedu Royal Council over the screening of the TV series.

On Tuesday, Queen Masalanabo Modjadji VII, the Balobedu royal family and the Balobedu Royal Council approached the Pretoria High Court on an urgent basis to interdict the broadcast of the series.

Acting judge Anthony Minnaar dismissed the application for lack of urgency. Led by Chief Gabriel Rasebotsa, the council approached the High Court in Pretoria to interdict the airing of the series.

Rasebotsa said they had approached the courts because they felt “undermined by the producer of the Queen Modjadji series and Multichoice”.

“The Balobedu Royal Council was not consulted and the Queen was not consulted. We have been undermined by the Apartheid government,” he said.

ALSO READ: ‘No factual or legal basis’: MultiChoice responds to ‘Queen Modjadji’ court challenge

In court

Speaking to The Citizen prior to the matter being heard in court, MultiChoice was confident about their chances of winning the case.

“We are confident that the court will dismiss the case and that viewers will not be deprived of the opportunity of watching this epic story, inspired by the Balobedu legendary rainmaker, the first Queen Modjadji,” said the channel.

According to a report by The Sowetan, advocate Terry Motau SC, representing both MultiChoice and Duma Ka-Ndlovu said despite knowing about the imminent broadcast of the series from March 2024, the applicants chose to launch their application on July 4.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by MzansiMagic (@mzansimagic)

In court papers, Motau said that even if a fictional drama series based over 200 years ago can be said to engage the rights of the applicants, “the applicants have set out no evidence at all that the series will cause any cognisable harm”.

“Most fundamentally, the applicants have not and cannot meet the high threshold required in order to obtain a prior restraint of speech.”

Motau argued that barring speech before it occurred was considered a significant infringement of the right to freedom of expression and labelled the council’s relief as a “fishing expedition”. 

“Requiring a broadcaster to justify its constitutionally protected speech in advance is a significant intrusion into the protection of free speech provided by the Constitution and conflicts with the authority of both the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court on this point,” he said.

Motau said there was no general principle in law that required a broadcaster to obtain permission in advance of publication or to provide a copy of a publication to a third party in advance.

The Citizen approached MultiChoice for comment and the publication is yet to receive a response. The story will be updated if and when it comes.

NOW READ: Royal family excited about ‘Queen Modjadji’ premiere