Picture: for illustration purposes
A controversial case that unfolded in the quiet corner of Komatipoort, Mpumalanga, has brought to light the fragile line between freedom of speech and offence. World-renowned artist Wayne Barker found himself at odds with his neighbour, Arthur Flemix, a devout Christian former battalion commander who filed for a protection order against Barker due to his incessant, loud swearing, amongst other behaviours.
Barker was subsequently found guilty of violating this protection order, following a heated argument wherein he used the f-word towards Flemix, stemming from Barker's anger at a worker on his property for destroying a bee's nest. This landed him a six month prison sentence or a R3,000 fine, suspended for five years.
The artist challenged the ruling in the Mpumalanga High Court in Mbombela, appealing against the sanction with renowned lawyer Richard Spoor. They contested the definition of harassment under the Harassment Act, referencing a similar case in the United States where the Supreme Court had set aside a conviction for a similar act of freedom of speech.
In a surprising turn of events, the conviction was overturned by Judge Malefsane Kgoele. He noted the contrast in lifestyles between Barker, a self-proclaimed dyslexic artist who substituted speech for painting and enjoyed wearing sarongs with loud music, and Flemix, a conservative Christian.
The verdict hinged on the fact that Barker was not properly served with either the interim or final protection orders, thus not given a chance to present his case. This case underpins the continuing debate around freedom of speech and its potential to cross personal boundaries.