Jail time looms for ‘b^st^rds’ and ‘bl##dy’ agents
It all started with a comedic rant by young Julius Malema. On 8 April 2010 the ANC Youth League president launched an uncalled for tirade against a BBC journalist, calling him a “b^st^rd” and a “bl##dy agent” before kicking him out of the Luthuli House pr
As we enter the second half of 2010 the big media debate centres on the looming Protection of Information Bill. This Bill will eventually replace the Protection of Information Act of 1982 – and initially promised to place more information in public hands. But government – or should we say the ruling party – unhappy with the frequency and content of corruption scandals gracing the country’s daily newspapers – is having none of that. It seems they’re tailoring this legislation to counter certain media and constitutional freedoms. The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) says although the Bill “seems to pay token respect to the tenets of the Constitution” it pays lip service to the doctrines of transparency and openness and the rights of the public to freedom of expression and access to information.” The go as far as to label the legislation ‘fatally flawed’.
A return to National Party thinking
The old legislation can best be described as draconian. The FXI says it was “characterised by sweeping powers, a very wide ambit and a general disregard for human rights.” Detractors of the Bill lambaste it as a return to the National Party era, a time when the ‘organs of the state’ were protected at all costs from prying eyes. The National Party wouldn’t tolerate media scrutiny, and the African National Congress (ANC) apparently loves how they went about crushing it!
According to the FXI, the most shocking element of the Bill is the vastness of the term ‘national interest’. A minister of head of any state organisation can simply classify information as ‘secret’ based on the broadest possible definition of the term. Those in power can classify any document if they believe it satisfies the “all matters relating to the advancement of the public good” tag. The FXI laments: “This encapsulates virtually everything in contemporary society – any action taken by the State could conceivably be justified as being in the ‘national interest’ and hence classifiable.” A tender to build any manner of public infrastructure – for example a bridge in the Limpopo province – could easily be categorised in this manner.
As we trawled the Internet to piece together the full impart of the Bill we started thinking. Is government in the least bit interested in its people? Somewhere in the dark corridors of power a team is feverishly working on ways for politicians and the politically connected to implement their plans – whatever they may be – without ever being held accountable. As things stand Joe Average can’t nail a politician when he has documentary proof of gross misconduct… A decade from now, Joe Average is going to get nailed for being in possession of this proof.
Protect the information that should be secret
What information should the state ‘hide’ from us? A true democracy should strive for total transparency between government and the people. After all, nobody wants a room full of politicians sitting on life changing information as they do in Armageddon, a science fiction Hollywood Blockbuster in which politicians learn about the imminent destruction of Earth by asteroid. The FXI wants the Bill to apply to restricted matters only – those “strictly to do with the preservation of national security and matters directly related thereto!”
Columnists beware
Journalists are in for a tough time. The Bill makes absolutely no allowance for the ‘watchdog’ activities of South Africa’s publishers, editors and journalists. If you disclose classified information – which could be just about anything per the preceding paragraphs – you face up to five years imprisonment. Journalists can forget trying to protect their sources too. In its current form it would be criminal to protect informants or whistleblowers. The FXI believes this anti investigative journalist stance is “clearly indicative of an attempt to curtail criticism and investigation of wrong doings and corruption within organs of state!”
I’ve been writing prolifically since January 2007 and have questioned, criticised and ridiculed government officials and ruling party decision on numerous occasions since. Although I seldom work with so-called ‘classified’ information I’d hate to think my criticism of the ruling party could get me into trouble. But this Bill – with all the trappings of single party state dictatorship – has me really worried. And that’s why I jokingly commented to my publisher: “Ten years from now you won’t find too many of us who haven’t spent a night or two in jail.”
Editor’s thoughts: South Africans are great at pointing out the erosion of constitutional freedom – but pretty useless when it comes to preventing it. We’ve stood by as the state dismantled prosecutorial independence. We did nothing as dozens of politically connected individuals escaped justice. And today we’re going to allow government to slap a life-long gag on our collective voice. Is the new Protection of Information Act necessary in a post-Apartheid South Africa? Add your comment below, or send them to [email protected]
