Goolam Muhammed Suliman Vawda, known on social media as @goolammv, has left the country after being unmasked by Independent Media investigative journalists.
Reports indicate that Vawda has escaped South Africa and is now in Mauritius, where he is said to have fled after the first of several criminal charges against him have been laid following more than six years of using his anonymous account to defame prominent detractors of President Cyril Ramaphosa and the DA.
“Because an owner of a media house and another person that I have rightly called out have put a total of R3 million on my head, I have safely left the country. Will reach my final destination country tomorrow which I will call home for a while. I will then continue doing what I was doing. We will go back. Stronger than ever. Government of National Unity WILL take care of them,“ he tweeted at the weekend.
On Monday, IOL reported that a case was registered at the Roodepoort police station against Vawda.
The SAPS has confirmed the case.
According to sources, the charges were brought forth by a senior media editor, not affiliated with the Independent Media Group.
Speaking to The Star on Monday, Dr Jabu Mtsweni of the CSIR said the laws of this country are clear about what can be considered to be acceptable behaviour on social media, adding that people have been legally sanctioned for using what is deemed fair and acceptable behaviour on social media.
“The misuse of social media is legally prohibited in South Africa, and some of the laws that are already active include the Cybercrimes Act of 2020, which makes it illegal for one to use any form of media or technology to distribute malicious information about others, including inciting violence and similar acts. Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 (PEPUDA) is meant to prevent and prohibit unfair harassment (irrespective of where it happens) and this also includes prohibition of hate speech. So, people who misused social media can be criminally liable, and as we have seen in the past could either be fined or spend time in jail, if convicted,“ he said
On the possibility of jail time for offenders, Mtsweni said in the past, people have been charged and legally reprimanded.
“Yes, we have seen people being charged (e.g. during the social unrest) when others operated faceless and multiple accounts. Users need to be aware that even though alias accounts may be used, there are a number of ways for one to be traced online, so nothing is ‘faceless’ as malicious users may want to believe,” he added.
Mtsweni said malicious communications on social media are serious crimes in South Africa under section 13 and section 14 of the Cybercrimes Act.
This, he said, includes misinformation, revenge porn, hate speech, inciting violence and promoting discrimination online. A person if convicted of these crimes could be liable for a fine or imprisonment of up to three years or a combination.
“We have seen a number of examples where ordinary citizens’ lives have been turned upside down due to misuse of social media.”
Experts at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr said the test for defamation is an objective assessment of how an average person would interpret the statement, considering both its explicit and implied meaning.
“Differently put, the question would be whether the statement, in its ordinary sense, would likely diminish an individual or entity’s standing in the eyes of society. Defamation must, of course, be juxtaposed with the right to freedom of expression. However, this right is not without limitation. Steps are, however, being taken by the legislature to address the growing army of social media warriors who share false information on social media platforms.
“One such step is the introduction of the Prevention and Combating of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill (Act) which was assented to by President Ramaphosa on 9 May 2024. The purpose of the act is to, among other things, give effect to constitutionally enshrined rights, including human dignity, equality and the right to freedom and security,“ these experts said.
Independent commentator and analyst Edmond Phiri said: “The Independent Media and IOL editors deserve great praise for their recent exposé of the racist sock puppet, now confirmed as Goolam Muhammed Suliman Vawda.”
The Star