BSA Decisions Ngā Whakatau a te Mana Whanonga Kaipāho

Summary

On a programme prepared by the NZ Tamil Society and broadcast on Access Radio in Auckland on 11 April 1999, it was announced that Mrs Ramanathan’s nomination to the Executive Committee of the NZ Tamil Society had been rejected. Her nomination would be accepted, the reported added, when she returned some receipt books she had in her possession to the Society’s Treasurer.

Mrs Ramanathan complained to Access Community Radio Auckland Inc that the broadcast contained unfounded allegations regarding her honesty and reputation.

Access Radio upheld the complaint and arranged for the Tamil Society to broadcast a statement which retracted the allegations and apologised to Mrs Ramanathan .

Dissatisfied with the action taken after her complaint had been upheld, Mrs Ramanathan referred her complaint to the Broadcasting Standards Authority under s.8(1)(a) of the Broadcasting Act 1989.

For the reasons below, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint that the action taken by the broadcaster was insufficient.

Decision

The members of the Authority have listened to an audiotape of the items complained about, and have read transcripts and the correspondence which is listed in the Appendix. In this instance, the Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.

On behalf of the New Zealand Tamil Society, Mr Thambithurai Prabaharan broadcast a programme, Tamil Thendral, on Auckland Access Radio between 8.35 and 9.05pm on 11 April 1999. During the programme, Mrs Yasotha Ramanathan complained to the broadcaster, one of the Society’s joint secretaries, Mr Tharmalingam Tharmakumar, made some accusatory comments regarding her honesty, integrity and reputation.

A translation of part of the programme into English accompanied the complaint and it contained the statement that Mrs Yaso Ramanathan, as Chairperson of the Ladies Wing of the Executive Committee, had failed to return some receipt books to the Society’s treasurer. As a consequence, the broadcast said, her nomination as a member of the Society’s Executive Committee had been rejected, and would not be accepted until the receipt books had been returned.

When Ms Leona Bresnehan, the Station Manager for Access Radio in Auckland, acknowledged the complainant’s letter, she advised that the translation she had obtained of the programme was in effect identical to the one which accompanied the complaint. Ms Bresnehan wrote to the president of the Tamil Society and advised that the broadcast of a retraction of the allegations, and an apology to Mrs Ramanathan, were necessary.

An apology was prepared and Mrs Ramanathan was advised that the following transcript would be broadcast and read by Mr T Prabaharan who was the regular presenter. This statement read:

The recently elected Executive Committee of the New Zealand Tamil Society in Auckland wishes to extend an apology and withdrawal of remarks made during the broadcast on Sunday, 11 April 1999.

The Society acknowledges that remarks made about Mrs Yasotha Ramanathan were extreme and hurtful. Therefore the Society apologises unreservedly for those remarks and withdraws them unconditionally. The Society also wishes to express regret for any distress caused to Mrs Yasotha Ramanathan and members of her family.

The statement was broadcast by Access Radio on Sunday 13 June 1999.

Mrs Ramanathan complained to the Authority about the inadequacy of the action taken by the broadcaster. She wrote:

A simple apology will not bring the reputation of my family and me back to a the normal state. I used to take an active part in the community. I used to import various foods and spices from Sri Lanka and sell it to the local community. Mr T Tharmakumar has announced it in such a way that the broadcast will be retained in the mind of listeners and cannot be taken out from their mind by a simple apology. The broadcast about me was defamatory and breached the minimum standard required by the Code Broadcasting Practice.

In her report to the Authority on behalf of Access Radio, Ms Bresnehan enclosed all the correspondence regarding the complaint and sent the Authority an audio tape of the original broadcast and the apology, in the Tamil language.

The correspondence recorded that the Access Radio Committee of Management had upheld the complaint. Because of the election of a new Committee with the Tamil Society, it had taken some weeks to arrange a meeting between the two parties. It was finally arranged for the regular presenter to broadcast an apology. Ms Bresnehan noted that the issue of financial compensation had arisen in her telephone conversations with Mrs Ramanathan , and she had advised her to seek legal advice. After the broadcast of the apology, Ms Bresnehan recalled:

Mrs Ramanathan phoned to tell me she was dissatisfied with the action ACRA [Access Radio] had taken. She was angry that the original speaker had not made the apology. She wanted him to be punished and she wanted financial compensation. I advised her I happened to agree the original speaker should have made the apology but that wasn’t possible. In my opinion, ACRA had fulfilled the legal requirement of broadcasting an apology and it wasn’t crucial that it be by the original speaker. Mrs Ramanathan insisted the speaker be punished and she be financially compensated. I advised her I had no authority to punish him and, probably, neither did the BSA. In the matter of financial compensation, I advised her, again, to consult with her own legal adviser.

In her final comment, Mrs Ramanathan explained in some detail the circumstances surrounding the availability of Mr T Tharmakumar who was the person who had made the comment and had then declined to broadcast the apology. She also referred to the impact of the comments on her family’s reputation, and the importance of this as arranged marriages were still the practice in the community. Moreover, she wrote, the comments made in the broadcast had affected her business of importing and selling spices, and the family no longer participated in social activities in the Tamil community. Mrs Ramanathan wrote:

Now my concern is whether the New Zealand Tamil Society, Access Community Radio or the Broadcasting Standards Authority will be able to bring back the reputation and respect my family and I had in our community. Put my business back into the same [footing] as it was before the programme was broadcast. My family and I have to participate the way we were as before. I hope the Broadcasting Standards Authority will consider the damage and inconvenience my family and I are undergoing, due to the consequences of the programme broadcast on 11 April 1999 when taking a fair decision.

The Authority’s Findings

The broadcaster has provided the Authority with a translation of the broadcast on 11 April, and the Authority agrees that Access Community Radio in Auckland acted appropriately in upholding the complaint. Mrs Ramanathan is not satisfied with the subsequent action taken by the broadcaster. In view of the personal abuse contained in the broadcast, the Authority has given serious consideration to whether Access Radio, as the broadcaster, should have taken the programme made on behalf of the New Zealand Tamil Society off the air for a period. Finally, however, it has decided that this was not necessary. It considers that the action taken by the broadcaster was sufficient in the circumstances.

For the above reasons, the Authority declines to uphold the complaint that the action taken by the broadcaster was insufficient.

Signed for and on behalf of the Authority

Sam Maling
Chairperson
19 August 1999

Appendix

The following correspondence was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint:

1. Access Community Radio Auckland Inc’s (ACRA) Letter to Mrs Yasotha Ramanathan –
   13 April 1999

2 Mrs Ramanathan’s Complaint to ACRA – 19 April 1999

3. ACRA’s Letter to President, NZ Tamil Society – 30 April 1999 – plus attachments

4. ACRA’s Letter to Mrs Ramanathan – 30 April 1999

5. ACRA’s Letter to Radio Co-ordinator, NZ Tamil Society – 30 April 1999

6. NZ Tamil Society’s Response to ACRA – 8 May 1999

7. ACRA’s letter to Mr Raja Rajakumar – 21 May 1999

8. ACRA’s Formal Response to Mrs Ramanathan – 8 June 1999

9. ACRA’s Letter to Mrs Ramanathan – 24 June 1999 – plus cassette

10. Mrs Ramanathan’s Referral to Broadcasting Standards Authority – 1 July 1999

11. ACRA’s report to Authority – 20 July 1999

12. Mrs Ramanathan's Final Comment – 10 August 1999