Unathi shares her own receipts in battle against Kaya FM and Sizwe Dhlomo
South African media personality Unathi Nkayi has been involved in a back and forth fight with her former employer Kaya 959 over allegations that she was ‘silenced’.
This comes after the Idols SA judge took to Instagram claiming she could not speak on what had transpired between her and the station. She has since shared screenshots of correspondence to support the claim.
She said, “I was specifically told that I cannot use my platform to share my version of events. The only matter I will address, because it is very important to me, is the theme of GBV that keeps on coming up.”
She also added that “GBV had nothing to do with the matter. I never alleged at any time that Sizwe committed any act of gender based violence against me.”
Unathi went on to say that she was leaving the matter in the hands of her lawyers.
The station has also released a statement rubbishing Unathi’s accusations.
“Kaya 959 recognizes and respects the right to freedom of speech as provisioned for by the South African constitution and for that reason, will not in any way attempt to restrict it for anyone,” said Kaya in a statement.
“Ms Nkayi is well aware of the contents of the final communication addressed to her by Kaya 959, especially where confidentiality and perpetuating a false narrative is concerned…. Ms Nkayi is free to share the details of the issue that arose between her and kaya 959 should she feel the urge to, provided what she shares reflects the true version of events.”
This fight follows after Unathi was fired from the radio station on account of being ‘untruthful’. Multiple versions of why she was axed surfaced on the internet including that she had filed a false gender based abuse report against her colleague Sizwe Dhlomo.
Unathi has also shared documentation to prove her first claim that Kaya did not want her to speak on the matter.
“I need to say something about Kaya’s claim that it ‘recognises and respects the right to freedom speech’.”
She shared a picture of her communication with the station on 17 November, which detailed the termination of her contract.
On point number 37 it read: “Naturally you remain bound by your confidentiality obligations and are warned against utilising any platform official or unofficial to perpetuate your version of events or to in any way damage the goodwill that informed the relationship prior to your breach.”