ARMS deal activist Terry Crawford-Browne says he expected the gagging order Minister of Finance Trevor Manuel has obtained against him, but that he sees it as an opportunity to reopen the debate into the arms deal.

The Cape High Court granted Manuel a temporary order restraining Crawford-Browne from publishing allegations that the minister was corrupt or had been involved in any criminal conduct in connection with the arms deal.

Crawford-Browne was ordered to remove such allegations from his website.

The order does not affect Crawford-Browne's book, Eye on the Money, about his long-running campaign to overturn the arms deal. Crawford-Browne is chair of the South African chapter of Economists Allied for Arms Reduction.

The application was in response to statements Crawford-Browne had made on his website.

When the application was heard last month, his lawyers argued that Crawford-Browne was entitled to participate in a debate that was of public importance.

In judgment handed down yesterday, Justice André le Grange said the court had to balance the constitutional rights of freedom of expression and dignity. He said it was generally accepted that cases involving an attempt to restrain publication should be approached with caution.

"Freedom of expression is fundamental to our democratic society. It is not a paramount value, however. It must be construed in the context of the other values enshrined in the constitution, particularly the value of human dignity. Under our new constitutional order, the recognition and protection of human dignity are a foundational constitutional value."

Le Grange said the minister had a right to protect his reputation and good name.

"In my view, to say a person, in particular a minister of finance, who is charged with the responsibility of the national treasury and fiscal policy of a country, is corrupt and should be prosecuted with corruption and similar offences, without providing a shred of evidence pointing to his or her involvement, is defamatory and aimed to lower such person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society."

The attack on Manuel demonstrated malice and not an intention of boisterous political discourse.

Manuel's belief that Crawford-Browne would continue to make defamatory remarks was not unfounded.

"No undertaking was given that (Crawford-Browne) would stop with the defamatory remarks pending the action," Le Grange said.

"There seems to be a well-grounded apprehension of irreparable harm. In this case it is clear that the harm cannot be remedied by the payment of damages."

The judge said the restraint was not directed at preventing Crawford-Browne from participating in the debate, but at the manner he employed.

Manuel was ordered to apply for a permanent interdict within 20 days.

With acknowledgement to Fatima Schroeder and Cape Times.