Ombudsman on Selebi report

THE Press Ombudsman has reprimanded The Times for not mentioning all the reasons why the authorities decided to release former police chief Jackie Selebi on medical parole, which resulted in reporting that was unfair to the Department of Correctional Services.

THE Press Ombudsman has reprimanded The Times for not mentioning all the reasons why the authorities decided to release former police chief Jackie Selebi on medical parole, which resulted in reporting that was unfair to the Department of Correctional Services.

The department lodged a complaint about an August 8 story headlined "MPs: medical parole a sham".

The story was about reactions to Selebi's imminent medical parole.

The main view reportedly was that his release tainted the credibility of the medical parole system.

We reported only on his kidney problems and neglected to state (as we had been officially informed) that Selebi had suffered a stroke and had had a pulmonary embolism.

Ombudsman Johan Retief said it was our right and duty to publish the views of people who were critical of Selebi's release, but we should have balanced the story with all the reasons for Selebi's release as communicated to us by government officials, so that the public could decide for itself if his release was credible or not.

Retief said: ". the worse Selebi's medical state, the more reason the authorities had to release him on medical parole. Conversely, if the public believed that he 'only' had kidney problems, of course the popular opinion would be less in favour of the credibility of the parole system."

Retief said he was not passing judgment as to the validity of Selebi's parole. "My only concern is about journalism, and I believe that the medical reason that the story presented for his release was not sufficient."

He dismissed two other parts of the complaint: that the reporting was untruthful and inaccurate, and that the story presented opinions as fact.

Visit www.presscouncil.org. za for the full finding