'Concourt would approve secrecy bill'
The ANC yesterday told opposition parties that it was not afraid of the Protection of State Information Bill being contested in the Constitutional Court. The ANC yesterday used its majority to push through what has become known as the secrecy bill.
The bill now needs only the National Assembly' s rubber stamp and President Jacob Zuma's signature to become law.
The vote was 34-16 in favour of the bill.
Opposition parties and pressure groups have threatened to take the matter to the Constitutional Court if Zuma signs the bill into law.
But ANC MP Sam Mazosiwe said the ruling party believed the Constitutional Court would not find fault with the bill.
"I don't think South Africans should be afraid if it goes to the Constitutional Court. The threat about taking this to the Constitutional Court will only strengthen the work of parliament," he said.
ANC MP Teboho Chaane said the party had been "very tolerant, accommodative and ridiculously fair" to critics of the bill.
"We stand here without any doubt in our minds that we have listened to the views of the people and have, to the best of our abilities, ensured that this bill passes constitutional muster," he said.
"You can go to the Constitutional Court; we are waiting for you," he said.
The bill has been widely criticised for its broad definitions of what constitutes "classified information" and who may classify or declassify it.
One of the thorniest issues is the punishment that could be doled out to whistle-blowers and journalists who possess or circulate classified or top secret information.
They could be sentenced to 25 years in jail, even if the information exposes government corruption or misconduct.
The bill has no public-interest defence clause.
Lobbyists have argued that the government could use the bill to classify information regarding municipal bills or bar reports on scandals such as Nkandlagate.


SHARE YOUR OPINION
If you have an opinion you would like to share on this article, please send us an e-mail to the Times LIVE iLIVE team. In the mean time, click here to view the Times LIVE iLIVE section.l984
Posted 175 days ago...whistle-blowers and journalists who possess or circulate classified or top secret information.. They could be sentenced to 25 years in jail, even if the information exposes government corruption or misconduct. The bill has no public-interest defence clause."
If this is the ANC being 'ridiculously fair' - I shudder to think what 'ridiculously unfair' might entail.
ChrisToit
RSA.MommaCyndi
Posted 175 days agoYou gotta give it to the ANC, they learned very well from their apartheid teachers. Proving the old adage correct - the more things change, the more they stay exactly the same. Welcome back to 1984
amaKK
Posted 175 days ago----
But of course, the concourt would approve. You assured that with the appointment of the perfect choice of CJ - Moegoe Moegoe.
Ozgood
Posted 175 days agoThey will not be in power forever but the majority of us will not be here to see them depart as we shall have departed before them.
What do they want to hide?
Let them be aware of the wikileaks, Will they jail people who look at the SA version of Wiki leaks and then diseminate the contents?
Heaven help us.
Sasha*-Fierce
Posted 175 days agoMike123
Posted 175 days agoDominic
Posted 175 days agom1si2zi3nzo4
Posted 175 days agoWhere politics and executive governance are the same, insulation of the overall objective of intelligence from political influence, without isolating it from executive governance, becomes meaningless. In a country like ours, there is no rule of law, as the law itself belongs to elite of the majority party, enforced upon the majority of the citizens. Thus a 5million+ protects its own against the 50million+ citizenry. A chosen few of its elite possess special powers, such as the ability to interfere with private property or communications of a vast majority, limiting their hard-earned human rights.
The already reduced legitimacy of security forces, a keystone of a democratic order, is now increased by the prospects of their operating outside of even the very limited control by their elite. They now cannot only interfere with anyone's right to property, communication, etc, under the guise of 'national' security, but can arbitrarily determine what is 'national' security. Where 'security' differs according to political affiliation, it is clear whose 'security' will be protected. And accountability for abuse of so much excessive powers, can be to anyone with powers to 'classify' such 'security', despite the erratic nature of a human mind, even at its highest efficiency.
m1si2zi3nzo4
Posted 175 days agoSecretVoice
Posted 175 days agoDominic
Posted 175 days agoThe best part however are the pictures of the unwashed masses, who support Zuma Inc to the last regardless of how much he f*&s and robs them blind.
jigsaww
Posted 175 days agom1si2zi3nzo4
Any reflection of the American invasion of Iraq, can give the clueless politicians a picture of what can happen, and is happening right now. In the crudest form, it means that anyone with access to any operative, can buy him to collect information on his rival, and influence the classification process. With only himself in the know, the collector can get the process classified, under the guise of 'national' security. Without anyone else being able to divulge the info, he alone - and the 'instructor' can do with it as he wishes. Even the 'instructor' has no way of verifying such information.
The biggest threat is the use of such information for illegal purposes like terrorism against the people, and other criminal activities, without the people knowing what is going on. Besides the political usage against opponents within and outside the party elite.