In a David and Goliath court battle, the emergent organisation, formed with the support of hundreds of water polo players, South Africa Water Polo (SAWP), has celebrated its court victory against the authoritative governing body for aquatic sports in the country, Swimming South Africa (SSA). 

However, the SSA said they would be consulting on their next steps following the court order in which the organisation sought interdictory relief against SAWP, which they claimed acted as if it had the authority to govern or administer the sport of water polo in South Africa.

SAWP registered their organisation during February this year and was started to address “the failure of the SSA to take water polo seriously and which, according to them, has resulted in the ‘parlous, shambolic and neglected state in which water polo currently finds itself in South Africa, with a lack of meaningful transformation, poor administration, a dearth of fundraising initiatives, and a non-existent high performance programme”. 

According to SAWP, their organisation was established as the SSA’s “focus is almost exclusively on swimming and is heavily skewed in favour of swimmers as opposed to water polo players”. 

In their arguments, SSA sought a final interdict against SAWP preventing them from: purporting to carry out the administration or governance of the sport of water polo in South Africa; and interfering with the affairs of SSA.

Among their relief sought, SSA wanted the SAWP interdicted from directing or encouraging any person or entity to boycott or avoid participating in events held under the auspices of SSA; dissuading or discouraging persons from participating in local or international water polo events where the SSA is organising, or has organized, a team to participate in “that international event”; interfering with communications by the SSA to its water polo membership. 

SSA is the national federation for purposes of the National Sport and Recreation Act (NSRA) in respect of the aquatic disciplines of diving, open water swimming, swimming, synchronised swimming, and water polo.

It is also a member of the South African Sport Confederation and Olympic Committee (Sascoc) and is currently the only national federation in South Africa that is recognized as the responsible body for, inter alia, the sport of water polo by World Aquatics, the international federation responsible for all aquatic sports.

SAWP interim CEO Robbie Taylor said the ruling was a moral victory not only for the water polo community, but for all sporting communities in South Africa that were seeking to establish independent federations for the sake of improved governance and opportunities for developing and star athletes. 

“This win is important validation of the local water polo community’s mission to restore purpose and world-class excellence to the sport we love so much… Today isn’t just a win in the pool; it’s a win for every player, coach, parent, and fan who believes in a better future for our sport. This is about standing up, standing together, breaking the shackles of inept administration and building a brighter future,” said Taylor.

SSA spokesperson, Mafata Modutoane, said: “While we respect the outcome of the judicial process, we are disappointed that our application to interdict activities which we believe compromise the structure, order, and integrity of the sport was not granted.

“Nonetheless, SSA remains steadfast in our mandate to regulate and grow aquatics responsibly and inclusively. To be absolutely clear: Water Polo South Africa is not affiliated to Swimming South Africa, nor is it authorised to organise competitions under our name.”

In the judgment, Western Cape High Court Judge Judith Cloete noted: “The applicant (SSA) cannot seriously suggest that the respondents (SAWP) do not have the constitutionally entrenched right to freedom of association contained in S 18 of the Bill of Rights, and that the same applies to any individual water polo player wishing to join the respondents.

“The Constitutional Court has made clear that freedom of association is a fundamental right which protects against coercion, enables individuals to organise around particular areas of concern, and to hold both public and private bodies to account…

“The applicant alleged in the founding affidavit that it has no suitable alternative remedy since the respondents ‘have refused to engage with the applicant and have instead allowed this fight to spill into the media, with the intent of embarrassing … (the applicant) … and seeking to promote their own interests.’

“However the evidence to which I have already referred demonstrates that from the outset the respondents have expressed the clear intention to engage with the applicant.  Furthermore, the respondents set out a number of factual examples of prior attempts by various stakeholders and role players in water polo to engage with the applicant, all apparently to no avail.” 

chevon.booysen@inl.co.za

Source link