Editorial standards and the evidence rule.

Every assertion published by OUBAS must trace to a source document that is either reproduced on this platform, filed in a court record, or available on request. Where a document cannot be published for privacy or copyright reasons, the claim resting on it is either omitted or expressly marked as unverified.

A document is described by what can be demonstrated from its own four corners, and by the inference OUBAS draws — clearly labelled as an inference. In practice this means we use a tiered vocabulary:

• Observation. "The balance moves between 01 and 02 November 2015 with no corresponding transaction line." This is a fact visible on the face of the statement and is stated flatly.
• Arithmetic finding. "Interest of approximately R56m is charged against capital advanced of approximately R42m — a result the in duplum rule does not permit." This is a calculation, and the calculation is shown.
• Characterisation. "OUBAS does not accept this document as a genuine bank record, and regards it as irregular and unreliable on its face." This is our stated position and opinion, expressly attributed to OUBAS and grounded in the observations above.
• Reserved for findings. Words that describe a proven criminal act by a named person — "fraud", "forgery", "theft" — are used as OUBAS's own conclusion only where the underlying facts are set out in the same place, or as a report of a court finding where one exists.

The distinction is not timidity. An honest opinion, published with the evidence attached, is far harder to attack than a bare label. The reader reaches the conclusion with us instead of being asked to take it on trust.

Court filings, statements and certificates are published as primary records with case numbers and status. OUBAS commentary, episodes and books are published separately and clearly marked as OUBAS-authored analysis. A reader must always be able to tell which they are reading. See Court Records.

Any person or institution named in OUBAS material may submit a response. Substantive responses are published alongside the material they answer, unedited except for length and unlawful content. We do not require a person to agree with us in order to be heard on our own platform. See Right of Reply.

Where OUBAS is shown to be wrong on a fact, the correction is made promptly, dated, and left visible on the page rather than quietly deleted. Corrections do not extend to withdrawing conclusions merely because they are contested.

Publishing filed court records is lawful and OUBAS does so deliberately. Where a matter is live, OUBAS does not urge a particular outcome on a court, does not publish material subject to a sealing order, and marks the procedural status of each matter so that no reader mistakes a pending application for a decided one.