Директор радиостанции Jozi FM подал иск о запрете действий соперников до решения суда

Story audio is generated using AI Nearly a year after a bruising legal battle over Jozi FM, the station’s governance crisis has erupted again, with a director seeking a court order to stop a rival group from taking control pending a legal challenge to their appointments. Rapitse Peter Montsho has launched an urgent application against the Soweto Media Resource Centre NPC, which trades as Jozi FM, along with nine individuals who he claims are unlawfully portraying themselves as the station’s directors and office bearers. The Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) and the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa) have also been cited because of their regulatory oversight of the broadcaster. In papers filed in the Johannesburg high court on July 10, Montsho argues that the dispute is not about personalities or factional politics but about whether those currently running the station lawfully acquired the authority they claim to exercise. He wants the court to immediately interdict the nine from portraying themselves as Jozi FM’s lawful board, convening board meetings, implementing resolutions or making governance decisions until the substantive dispute is finally determined. The application seeks an order preventing the individuals from exercising any powers vested in the board of the broadcaster, altering its governance structures or interfering with its administration while the court considers the merits of the matter. It also asks the court to preserve the governance framework recognised in an earlier court order granted in September last year pending the outcome of the litigation. According to Montsho, the respondents continue to present themselves to regulators and third parties as Jozi FM’s lawful leadership despite what he describes as unresolved questions over the legality of their appointments. “The issue presently before this court is whether persons whose authority to govern a licensed community broadcaster is seriously disputed should be permitted to continue exercising the powers of directors while the legality of their appointments remains unresolved.” He argues that every decision taken by the disputed leadership deepens uncertainty surrounding the broadcaster’s governance and exposes Jozi FM to the risk that decisions may later be declared invalid if the appointments are ultimately found to have been unlawful. Rather than seeking an immediate declaration that the respondents are unlawfully appointed, Montsho says the urgent application is designed to preserve the status quo until a court has had an opportunity to scrutinise the constitutional documents, statutory provisions and documentary evidence underpinning the contested appointments. He contends that the respondents continue to govern the affairs of the station while relying on elections allegedly held during an AGM on February 21 this year but argues that the documentary basis for those claims has not yet been properly tested before a court. The application is part of what appears to be a prolonged governance battle stretching back several years. Montsho says the latest dispute follows extensive litigation over Jozi FM’s governance, including a September 2 2025 high court order, subsequent proceedings before another judge and regulatory processes involving Icasa’s complaints and compliance committee. He argues that the present litigation cannot be viewed in isolation because it is part of an ongoing contest over who lawfully controls one of Gauteng’s most influential community broadcasters. Montsho insists the court is not being asked to decide whether Jozi FM should have a board. Instead, he argues, the question is whether the individuals currently exercising fiduciary powers have demonstrated, through lawful constitutional processes, that they are entitled to do so. In the second part of his application, Montsho seeks far-reaching final relief. He wants the court to declare that the appointments of the second to 10th respondents as directors and office bearers are unlawful, invalid and of no force and effect. He also asks the court to declare that the governance process culminating in the disputed AGM of February 21 failed to comply with Jozi FM’s memorandum of incorporation, the Companies Act and the governance framework recognised in earlier court proceedings. If successful, the application would see all resolutions and appointments flowing from that meeting reviewed and set aside, while the CIPC would be directed to amend its records to reflect what the court determines to be Jozi FM’s lawful governance structure. Icasa would similarly be directed to recognise only the governance structure declared lawful by the court. The application also seeks an order directing that a fresh election of directors be conducted in accordance with the broadcaster’s memorandum of incorporation and the Companies Act should the court deem it necessary. The case underscores the governance challenges that can confront community broadcasters, where disputes over board appointments and corporate governance can have implications extending beyond internal administration to regulatory compliance and institutional stability. For Jozi FM, whose broadcasting licence depends on compliance with corporate governance requirements under the Companies Act and Icasa’s regulatory framework, the outcome of the litigation could determine not only who leads the station but also how its governance is recognised by regulators in future. The urgent application is expected to be heard in the Gauteng high court, where the rival factions will battle over who lawfully holds the reins of one of South Africa’s best-known community radio stations.