At a press briefing yesterday, ANC Chief Whip Mathole Motshekga said the bill had been withdrawn for "further consideration" and intimated that there were submissions with the Speaker of Parliament that still had to be heard.

Perhaps the real reason for the bill's temporary withdrawal has much to do with the ANC itself and the caucus held yesterday.

And perhaps senior ANC leaders succeeded where media organisations and civil society failed by persuading those within the ruling party in favour of the legislation of its negative long-term consequences.

Perhaps, because it was criticism from within, rather than the vociferous, but ultimately powerless voices of civil society, that swayed the hawks within the ANC.

Some observers believe that the ANC was swayed in its determination because it realised that, in all likelihood, the bill in its current form would find it difficult to withstand Constitutional Court scrutiny and interrogation.

This, to some degree, makes sense given the two recent incidents - the Constitutional Court challenge to the extension of former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo's term in office and Terry Crawford-Browne's application to have the arms deal probe reopened. In both cases, the possibility of failure in court appeared to act as a catalyst for change.

The reprieve, however, appears to be temporary - at least if Motshekga is to be believed.

But once the public consultations are complete, will the ANC be bold enough to alter the legislation?

Hopefully, the ruling party will display courage in admitting that in protecting the state's secrets, it does not have to deny South Africans a very basic right - the freedom of speech and the access to information.