Last Friday, I was shocked and outraged when I read a piece by investigative journalist and author Jacques Pauw, in which he told how he was brutalised by police at a top-end restaurant in Cape Town.
He wrote that on Saturday, February 6, he went to a restaurant at the posh V&A Waterfront precinct. There he ate and, by his admission, drank a lot. His bill, which was more than R1,000, came. But his card was declined by the machine.
He asked restaurant management for permission to go and withdraw cash from a nearby ATM so he could settle his bill. When he came back from the ATM, police were waiting for him. He was arrested and manhandled for theft, this charge stemming from his unpaid bill.
He was taken into custody where he spent the night. On Monday he appeared in court. On Wednesday he wrote his piece about his experiences. In the piece he also said the police not only mishandled him, but also stole R1,000 from him.
The story, which appeared in the crusading Daily Maverick newspaper, triggered a lot of angry responses. People were calling for a boycott of the restaurant in question. This inevitably got the management of the V&A Waterfront precinct drawn into the fracas. They have a reputation to protect, after all.
On Tuesday this week we received another shock. Pauw wrote a long retraction and apology for the report. He had lied about almost everything. The police did not steal from him.
Why? On the day in question he got so drunk that he could not follow what was happening around him. Apparently it was only after he had been confronted with CCTV evidence that he realised just how wrong his recollection of events was.
The editor of Daily Maverick, Branko Brkic, wrote another apology. He also said his publication would not be using Pauw’s writing in the future.
While Pauw admits that he was excessively drunk when he was arrested, my concern is that the original piece was written four days after the event. Was he still drunk four days later, or was he now writing from anger and self-righteousness: “who are they to mistreat me, the celebrated author and journalist”?
This whole saga reeks of power, privilege and, dare I say it, whiteness. When you are a combination of all the above you believe you can throw your weight around; that you are unassailable. That your word is gospel truth.
Police brutality is a reality for many South Africans, especially the underprivileged. For a powerful, privileged white person of Pauw’s stature to lie about police brutality sadly trivialises a serious problem. It undermines the efforts of those who are fighting against this scourge.
Make no mistake: Pauw is a tried and tested campaigner for truth. He is no Johnny Come Lately. At the height of apartheid, he risked his life to expose state-sanctioned murders involving the likes of Eugene de Kock, who ran a unit that killed anti-apartheid activists.
In post-apartheid SA Pauw continued his crusading work. His writings, ranging from his best-selling book The President’s Keepers to a slew of investigative reports, have helped uncover corruption at the highest levels in the state machinery.
And now this.
Pauw has not only undermined his own credibility in the public eye, but in the era of fake news he has also contributed to further erosion of trust in the media. His disgusting behaviour will be used as a weapon in the growing arsenal of those who have been opposed to investigations into state capture.
My other regret is best captured in the words of a friend of mine: “Pauw can’t hold his liquor. He has brought a noble pursuit into disrepute.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.