Angela Quintal and Natasha Prince
11 November 2008
Disciplinary charges against controversial Springbok Luke Watson were dismissed on Monday after the presiding officer ruled that he did not have the jurisdiction to hear the matter because of a conflict between the SA Rugby Union's (Saru) regulations and code of conduct.
The crack defence team of Jeremy Gauntlett SC and Matthew Blumberg argued as their first ground that the valid appointment of attorney Nape Dolamo, who presided over the 90-minute hearing, had not been established.
They argued that while Watson had been charged with contravening the code of conduct, the president's council had power to regulate the procedures of Saru, "not to create substantive rules of conduct".
"The code purports to do the latter, not the former," states Watson's heads of argument obtained by the Cape Argus.
Moreover, the defence argued that Saru's constitution did not include, as a specified basis of disciplinary action, contraventions of any code of conduct. In addition, Saru had not proved the president council's adoption of the code of conduct on which it relied.
In his statement after the proceedings, Watson said he was delighted with the result.
"I am only sorry Saru should have seen fit to obtain an unuathorised and incomplete cellphone recording from a third party, without disclosing its informant, and to seek to use this against me," the player said.
"I deplore the incompetence which has surrounded the pressing of charges, which were null and void from the outset.
"I am grateful to my family and friends and many South Africans for standing by me," Watson said.
Watson's attorney Brian Biebuyck said although theoretically charges could be reinstated against the player, practically this could not be so.
Dolamo had specifically warned Saru that it could not amend its code of conduct and regulations and then seek to reinstate charges against Watson.
The legal team had noted that clause 4.5 of the code refers to a judicial officer "appointed in terms of the regulations re disciplinary procedures and the imposition of sanctions in respect of illegal and/or foul play and misconduct and general offences".
The team had on Wednesday November 5, asked Saru to specify the provisions of the disciplinary procedure regulations pursuant to which the judicial officer was appointed.
Saru's response a day later was "to avoid the question".
The team argued that unless and until that query was satisfactorily answered "the accused cannot assess whether or not he is subject to the jurisdiction of the judicial officer".
It therefore argued that the charges against Watson ought to be dismissed.
Biebuyck said that because Dolamo had ruled that he had no authority to hear the charges, he could not rule on other aspects of the defence teams head of argument, including that Saru should pay the costs of Watson's legal counsel.
At the hearing, Watson's legal team accused Saru of acting "in-consistently, selectively and arbitrarily" by deciding to discipline him while turning a blind eye to controversial comments made by other top players, coaches and officials.
"This disparity of treatment could not be more stark," according to legal papers in his defence.
Watson, who was represented by top advocates Gauntlett and Blumberg, arrived at the Saru Newlands offices today for the start of what was planned to be a two-day hearing over alleged breaches of Saru's code of conduct.
Watson, who arrived in a black BMW M5 wearing a black suit and white shirt, was supported by members of Ubombo Rugby Club and the Transformation and Anti-Racism Rugby Committee (Tarc).
Saru was represented by advocate Jeremy Muller SC.
The defence team's heads of argument challenged the charges against Watson on technical and substantive grounds, including that they violated his constitutional right to freedom of expression.
Watson also challenged the sections of the code which he was alleged to have breached, including that he had brought rugby into disrepute or undermined its reputation, or that he had "adversely affected that game and/or Saru and/or SA Rugby (Pty) Ltd".
The charges were based on comments he is alleged to have made during a talk on transformation on October 3 at a Ubumbo Rugby Club gathering at the University of Cape Town, which he claims was private.
Saru relied on a recording of the speech, which Watson also alleged was illegally taped and a violation of his right to privacy. A transcript of the recording in-cludes the controversial statement of how, when he was included in the Bok team against then coach Jake White's wishes last year, he felt like a "political pawn" and wanted to vomit on the Springbok jersey. It does not include the "Dutchmen" statement offensive to Afrikaners, said to have been made in a question-and-answer session.
Watson's legal team argued that the provisions in the code were broad and imprecise and could lead to "arbitrary enforcement".
It was also argued that the fact that the Springbok emblem was offensive to certain sections of the population should not, and had not, discouraged those who supported it from publicly expressing their support.
"Likewise the fact that some support the emblem should not discourage those against it from expression their views"
Members of Ubombo Rugby Club and Tarc arrived at at the hearing this morning to hand over a petition initiated by the vice-chairman of the Soweto Rugby Club, Asad Bhorat, to Saru but were stopped at the reception desk.
They were later met by Saru secretary Ismail Jakoet, who accepted the petition.
The petition said the signatories believed the case against Watson "was not genuine".
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 Cape Argus. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
