Vlogger In Hot Water, Aunty Pat Complains To IEC

Aunty Pat’s GOOD party has lodged a complaint of “disinformation” against YouTube vlogger Roman Cabanac with the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC).

“GOOD requests that IEC ensure that disinformation for political expediency is prohibited and acted against in the interests of free and fair elections,” reads part of the letter the party sent to the IEC.

The GOOD party took exception to the vlogger’s video in which a man was filmed beating a woman. The vlogger claimed the man was a member of the GOOD party.

Vlogger Cabanac, who was said to be a member of the Capitalist Party of South Africa, broadcasts his show, Morning Shot, on several media channels.

In the letter to the IEC dated 15 October, GOOD  secretary-general, Brett Herron, gives a detailed account of the complaint.

“On the 11th October 2021, Mr. Cabanac posted a number of tweets and a YouTube video alleging that a resident of Nelson Mandela Bay, Mr. Earl Pillay, is a member of GOOD,” wrote Herron.

“In the video that Mr. Cabanac shared, a person who Mr. Cabanac identifies as Mr. Pillay is seen assaulting a woman.

“In my capacity as secretary-general of GOOD I alerted Mr. Cabanac, on Twitter and by public statement, that his post was disinformation, since Mr. Pillay is not a member of GOOD.”

Herron said Earl Pillay was once a member of GOOD, but he resigned in 2019.

“Mr. Cabanac’s YouTube was banned by YouTube due to defamation, but the video has been reposted by Mr. Cabanac elsewhere,” said Herron.

He said the video was circulating on “WhatsApp and excerpts, including the untruthful statement that Mr. Pillay is ‘a member of [GOOD] in PE’ still on Mr. Cabanac’s Twitter feed”.

Herron added: “Mr. Cabanac has acknowledged the feedback from YouTube, but elected to persist with the election disinformation, including reporting the video alleging that Mr. Pillay is a member of GOOD even though I have confirmed that this is untrue.

“Mr. Cabanac’s intention is to link GOOD to an incident of violence that we have no connection with for the purpose of damaging our reputation and influencing voters to associate GOOD with this violent conduct.

“We submit that this constitutes a breach of Sec 69(2)(c) of the Municipal Electoral Act and request that the Chief Electoral Officer institute proceedings in terms of Sec 77(1) of the Act.”