The appeal relates to the State of the Nation Address in Parliament on February 12 2015 when Economic Freedom Fighters members were forcibly removed from the chamber.

A signal jamming device was in use by the security cluster, which resulted in journalists and members of parliament not being able to use their cell phones to send information from the Chamber.

Legal counsel for Primedia Broadcasting, Steve Budlender, submitted that the public was denied the right to see for themselves events of national significance on the Parliamentary floor. He argued that all South Africans have a right to know what occurs in Parliament and to see and judge the events for themselves.

He submitted there was, on the day, no reasonable justification for preventing the broadcast of the events happening in the Chamber.

Budlender further argued that Parliament's rules on the broadcasting of 'grave disorder' are unreasonable.

He said the public will anyhow get to know the 'grave disorder', however, now only second-hand and therefore incomplete and potentially inaccurate.

Legal counsel to the Speaker of the National Assembly, Jeremy Gauntlett, argued that the Speaker did give her permission for security measures after being informed about possible security concerns at Parliament that day.

He said it would not be reasonable to expect from her to go as far as to inquire on the detail of the operation, for example, whether a signal disrupter would be used or not.

He further argued that it is a difficult question as to how future situations should be handled when there is a threat to the President or the Deputy President while in Parliament.

Legal Counsel for the Minister of State Security, Francois van Zyl, argued that the minister was correct in deploying a signal jammer outside of Parliament to safeguard the President and Deputy President.

He admitted that the jamming of signals inside the Chamber was a mistake and that it never was the intention of the security cluster deployed on the day in question.

OFM News