A lone applicant is challenging Afro Worldview’s DSTV dismissal
A report suggests there is an ongoing battle brewing to continue the fight for Mzwanele Manyi's right to bring you the news.
Jimmy Manyi speaks to a reporter from the Citizen at the ANN7 Offices in Midrand on 25 August 2017. Picture: Yeshiel Panchia
Lone activist Mothusi Tsineng has reportedly recently launched applications that, if successful, could see Afro Worldview given a second chance at being offered on DStv.
According to AfricaNews24-7, an alternative news website owned by controversial businessman Kenny Kunene, there is a battle brewing after Tsineng approached both the Competition Commission and the Competition Tribunal to address allegations of “market dominance abuse” after MultiChoice pulled the plug on Afro Worldview (formerly ANN7).
Tsineng has claimed MultiChoice owns 98% of the pay-TV market in South Africa, meaning that steps need to be taken to break down its monopoly in order to ensure different viewpoints on current affairs are accommodated.
[EXCLUSIVE] Go to @AfricaNews24_7 for more on this story. #NewChannel #AfroWorldView #NewsroomAfrica @DStv @MultiChoiceSA @ICASA_org @CompComSA pic.twitter.com/1tlLrfKWBF
— Sphithiphithi Evaluator (@_AfricanSoil) August 28, 2018
Africanews 24-7 reports it has seen documents from Tsineng alleging that the removal of Afro Worldview was “a violation and abuse” that has lead to there being a monopoly in the market.
The letter to the competition commission further stated there was no other available platform on which the company could air its content.
Tsineng alleges MultiChoice did not offer an essential facility to Afro Worldview, which is why the station was unable to continue broadcasting. This simple act subjected it to a bidding process, yet the SABC, whose contract had also lapsed in the same month, continues to broadcast on Channel 404 without any bidding conditions being imposed.
Tsineng is seemingly confident that Afro Worldview will be reinstated on the grounds that MultiChoice engaged in alleged anticompetitive conduct and because the removal of the channel has inconvenienced thousands of consumers and supposedly infringed on their right to freedom of choice.
