DJ Ollah 7 and Mai Jeremaya in trouble over lula lula details…Thabo and Martin’s case not yet completely over!

HARARE – A recent podcast featuring social media influencer Mai Jeremaya and DJ Ollah 7 has ignited a firestorm of criticism across social media and beyond, with many Zimbabweans expressing outrage over the programme’s explicit content and what they perceive as a deeply insensitive approach to a sensitive subject. The controversy centres on Mai Jeremaya’s claims of having been raped by two men, Thabo Blessing Dube and Martin Charlie, allegations that were previously dismissed by a Harare magistrate.

Ollah 7 is facing particularly harsh criticism for his handling of the interview, with many accusing him of lacking proper journalistic skills and failing to respect judicial outcomes. Concerns have been raised about his line of questioning, which some believe dragged Mai Jeremaya into a “very dark place” and exposed a lack of understanding of how to handle interviews with alleged rape survivors.

“Do you recall when you had your first sexual encounter?”

“Was it smooth?”

“Are you having it (sex), has (JMP, Mai Jeremaya’s husband) ever asked for it after everything?”

This line of questioning has prompted concerns that the interview may have contravened media laws and ethical journalism standards, particularly those related to trauma-informed reporting. Media outlets are generally encouraged to adopt a trauma-informed approach when covering sexual assault, acknowledging the potential impact on survivors and avoiding language that could further victimise or stigmatise them.

Some observers have suggested that Mai Jeremaya may be suffering from a compulsive lying disorder, a habit that she admits began during her childhood. According to her, even a pastor had noticed this tendency and advised her to repent.

While Dube and Charlie may be off the hook for now, the decision to acquit them by Harare magistrate Letwin Rwodzi is subject to an automatic High Court review. The High Court judge will review the case based on the existing record, and it is unlikely that anything said on social media will be taken into consideration. The judge will either endorse the magistrate’s ruling or order a re-trial, which could be heard by the same court or a new one.

Ollah 7’s interview, while perhaps not legally prejudicial, has raised serious questions about media ethics and respect for judicial proceedings. Media coverage of rape trials is expected to adhere to legal guidelines, including respecting the presumption of innocence and avoiding sensationalised reporting.

Many online users have expressed concern for Mai Jeremaya’s mental well-being, while others have criticised her for agreeing to the interview in the first place. While protecting survivors is of utmost importance, the media also has a responsibility to inform the public and hold perpetrators accountable, which requires responsible and ethical reporting on sexual assault cases.

The potential impact of Mai Jeremaya’s statements on her marriage has also been a topic of discussion.

Several social media users have shared their thoughts on the matter:

PO Box Reloaded: “It is deeply disappointing to see a media personality conduct an insensitive interview with Mai J, especially at a time when she needs space and privacy to heal. Losing a rape case, due to lack of evidence, does not equate to justice being served, and it certainly doesn’t give anyone the right to exploit her pain for clicks and likes. Asking invasive questions under the guise of ‘raising awareness’ only adds to the humiliation and trauma survivors already endure. Mai J, like many others, deserves compassion, not public scrutiny, her story is not content for entertainment.”

Godwin Mapfudza: “To be honest, this same Ollah has shown a pattern of unprofessional behaviour. Back in 2022, shortly after being involved in a road traffic accident, he was quick to jump onto social media even before the police had arrived at the scene to attend to the matter. That kind of impulsive publicity, especially in serious situations, raises questions about his judgment and priorities.”

Lameck Makula: “I hear you, mukoma Bhutisi, and I deeply respect the passion behind your words. But just to clarify, it was actually Mai J who requested the interview. DJ Ola didn’t ambush her or force the conversation, he simply provided the platform she asked for. Of course, the line between storytelling and sensationalism is thin, and we must all be careful not to cross it but should DJ Ola have refused when Mai J herself wanted to speak? That’s the nuance we can’t ignore.”

An anonymous user: “Thank you, Sir for this. The questions which were being asked by Ola were very sensitive and he kept on asking and pushing her to answer some questions which were not necessary. That’s why you see many cases of GBV are not reported because of fear of shame. For God’s sake, please allow Ashley to heal. What she went through, I could not wish anyone to go through that. May we be more sensitive in our approach.”

The controversy surrounding the podcast interview serves as a stark reminder of the need for responsible and ethical journalism, particularly when dealing with sensitive issues such as sexual assault. It also highlights the importance of respecting judicial proceedings and avoiding actions that could further victimise or stigmatise survivors.