The media is challenging a court ban against the use of cellphones, laptops, and video and audio recordings in the corruption trial of former eThekwini mayor Zandile Gumede and 21 others.

Judge Sharmaine Balton previously gave a blanket ruling that, during the evidence of several municipal officers in the current leg of the trial, the media could only take written notes.

Reporters have to leave their laptops and cellphones in a cardboard box outside the court, where security officials, guard the devices.

A letter the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) issued to media read: "Kindly note that upon discussion with counsel and the legal representative in court on 27 July 2022, it was agreed that cameras and television recordings will not be allowed in court during the proceedings. Accordingly, no cameras and television recordings will be allowed during the proceedings."

At the time, News24 requested comment from OCJ spokesperson Lusanda Ntuli who said: "Kindly be advised that this is a directive from the judge's chambers in consultation with all affected parties, as clearly indicated in the letter. We have no further comment."

But, representing a number of broadcast media houses, Max Du Plessis, SC, lodged an opposed urgent application challenging Balton's 28 July order.

Du Plessis said it was unfair for the order to have been made without asking the media to make representations or "be part of it".

"The meeting took over two days. There was enough time to ask the media to be part of it. To deny our clients to be part of that process is unfair. We say the ruling needs to be undone. The media is the conduit for the open justice principle."

He emphasised that continuous publicity and reporting were for the public benefit.

Gumede remains a public official in the KwaZulu-Natal legislature. She is a longtime senior African National Congress member and one of the party's most popular politicians.

The case involves allegations that R320-million in public funds were siphoned out of the Durban Solid Waste (DSW) unit in the eThekwini municipality.

Du Plessis emphasised that it was an infringement on the media, which disseminates information for the public, to be limited to just handwritten notes.

"To limit journalists to this is not just an infringement on their work, but also an infringement to the public," he said.

He argued that it was not just about the rights of media houses, but the right of South Africans to know the process of the judiciary.

There is also a significant advantage to video recordings, Du Plessis argued.

"Television is the best picture. Compared to written reports it is a significant advantage. Journalists here have been denied the tools of the trade."

Du Plessis added that a blanket ruling on the current thread of witnesses did not protect them.

"Only media is muzzled but everyone in court can identify who the witness is. There is a targeted approach to the media. Whoever is in that court is not barred from identifying any witness. There are other means of securing witnesses that are less restrictive."

He added that the media didn't want to deny the right of protection for witnesses.

"My lady has a right to balance that process. That process must entail a public hearing and that was not done. The State must show demonstrable proof where the witnesses are in danger."

"Insofar as far as the trial goes, they (the State) are not custodians of information going to the public."

Legal expert, advocate Mannie Witz, previously told News24 that the media still had recourse to record and take pictures during the court proceedings.

He added despite the letter from the judge, the media could lodge a court application.