While State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele was suggesting that the controversial proposed Media Tribunal and the Protection of Information Bill will not suppress the media, Sunday Times journalist Mzilikazi Wa Afrika was appearing in the Nelspruit Regional Court on Wednesday where charges of fraud, forgery and uttering were withdrawn against him.
Wa Afrika had been arrested and charged based upon allegations that — at best — had local prosecutors mystified.
So too the fact that the special Hawks unit had been brought in to make the arrest in the first place.
The wrong basis at law being inflicted by the most senior police in the country.
Now the minister would suggest that an act as barbaric — no other word to describe it — and draconian as the Protection of Information Bill should not be a cause for concern.
In light of the arrest of Wa Afrika and the manner in which it was done, NewsTime editor Michael Trapido would challenge the minister to a live debate wherein he can confirm who it is that will classify documents (any head of an organ of state), the open-ended mandate the bill gives to those parties and the breathtaking sanctions involved for anyone who dares to breach it.
Armed with that act the persecutors of Wa Afrika would now have him in a dungeon as the worst criminal in South Africa’s history.
A self-created criminal whose only crime was to point out corruption at the highest levels.
The minister must tell us in real terms why we should not concern ourselves about the act.
Cwele told the SABC: “I want to emphasise that there is absolutely no intention to gag the media — that is why we are saying even those areas where we think the definitions are too broad, we will come with a proposal to narrow them, to protect what we want to protect. There is absolutely no intention on our part to limit the scope of the media.”
As I have repeatedly done in the past let me stress once again :
If we had an act which was called the “Murder of Manchester United Fans Bill” would the fact that the government is ready to debate the terminology and listen to the concerns of the public have any impact upon the fact that this bill should be set alight and used to warm vagrants in a park?
The basis for the bill itself is wrong. You can’t put lipstick on a pig.
The Protection of Information Bill is a piece of legislation designed to allow politicians and the people they designate to classify whichever documents they deem appropriate. (See our section on “Hand keys to the Treasury to politicians”.)
Section 11 tells you what is in the national interest of the republic (to classify) :
11. (1) The national interest of the Republic includes, but is not limited to—
(a) all matters relating to the advancement of the public good; and
(b) all matters relating to the protection and preservation of all things owned or
maintained for the public by the State.
It is so vague that you might as well have written :
(a) Whatever the politicians in power feel is meant to be kept hidden.
Don’t forget Section 12 says that commercial documents are also capable of classification. (Gosh I wonder why.)
Section 17 gives the “Directions for classification” :
17. (1) For the purposes of classification, classification decisions must be guided by
section 21 and the following:
(a) Secrecy exists to protect the national interest;
Read 17(1)(a) and go back to national interest. Then remember who decides which documents.
Sneak preview of decision making :
“Let me see now … the documents relating to the payments for the arms deal would that be in the interest of national security to classify?”
Yeah right!
Section 30 then tells you that the State Security Agency is responsible for monitoring the bill.
Why not just change that to read :
Section 30 : “The SSA shall tap, hack and do whatever else is necessary to ensure that no member of the media or anyone else shall ever have access to information proving corruption … oh and occasionally worry about the stuff that the other countries Intelligence agencies do.”
Call it what it is.
Then read from Section 32 onwards, which makes it better to gun down your family, their friends, and the entire population of the local swimming pool than it is to be in possession of a document which reads “Why Minister X stole R50 billion in public money”.
These sanctions are to ensure that any busybody who dares to challenge corruption will be dead by the time they get out of prison.
Section 46 : Protection of State information before courts :
46. (1) Classified information that is placed before a court may not be disclosed to
persons not authorised to receive such information unless a court, in the interests of
justice, and upon considering issues of national security, national interest of the
Republic as referred to in section 11 and any other law, orders full or limited disclosure,
with or without conditions.
(2) Unless a court orders the disclosure
So any idiot stupid enough to go to jail to expose corruption can’t even count on the public knowing about the reason why they are there. The only time the document can be released is when a court orders it.
Yeah right!
To recap — an abomination paraded as a piece of legislation, giving any head of an organ of state the right to classify anything he/she thinks is in the interests of national security (read worthy of hiding), and death in prison (might as well be) to anyone who breaches it.
Three questions :
1. In light of the fact that we have existing mechanisms to classify documents in the interests of national security could the minister tell us why we need this act? REPEAT: We have the legislation why this act?
2. Why in light of 1. above is the government obsessed with having legislation which is a danger to national security? Corruption endangers the people of this country and this act will ensure that perpetrators of the biggest examples of it are able to conceal it.
3. What part of the apartheid police state does the government think the majority of South Africans enjoyed?
No doubt terms like “ZEE” “thieving politicians” and “The ANC is turning SA into a kleptocracy” must be outlawed?
“What part of the apartheid police state does the government think the majority of South Africans enjoyed?”
If memory serves me right, the every aspect of the apartheid police was enjoyed by an overwhelming majority of whites!!!
Right up to our liberation in 1994. The fruits of apartheid were indeed sweet!
Its a pity your selective amnesia prevents you from remembering how brutal our apartheid propaganda machine was in using the media to manipulate and cling to illegitimate power, just like our media elite uses the media monopoly to spread fear, create hysteria and fabricate stories with total impunity by hiding behind our generous free speech rights.
I don’t think Minister Siyabonga Cwele will entertain you by engaging in a debate with you.
Good on ya’, Traps. I’d love to see that debate! Maybe add Pierre de Vos and Cele as well!
Thank God for some sanity. The abomination is so appalling that should it be passed, SA will no longer be a democracy. It will be a hollowed out ‘vampire state’ of a tiny elite of politicians, criminals and corrupt businessmen lording it over the rest of SA – the tiny group of sweating middle class taxpayers, and the sweating and impoverished povo. Like Colombia, only worse. A criminal state.
Actually Michael, You CAN put lipstick on a pig …. BUT it will still be a pig.
Ah, well. To all of those who fought for freedom in the 80′s, in the hopes that SA would become a Jeffersonian democracy, perhaps this has lifted the scales from our eyes, once and for all. The sobering reality is should SA again become a dictatorship, a criminal state, another Somalia, Colombia, or worse – this time there will be no ‘rescuer from elsewhere’. SA has one chance at success. If we blow it, the rest of the world will wash their hands of us. They have more important things to worry about.
Traps,
Is it not possible to sue for false arrest ? It would be interesting – if only to force people to testify who issued the original arrest demand…
Read:
http://www.diis.dk/graphics/Publications/PolicyBriefs2009/PB2009_nov_combating_illicit_flows.pdf
A Danish research organisation has concluded that for every US 10 received by the developing world for Millennium Development Goals, a staggering US 80 will find his way back to the developed world. Apart from the usual crooks (drugs and arms) a large component of that is done by international corporations through tax evasion means (a.o. internal pricing).
If druglords can openly befriend our policing system, big business can certainly do better and less visible.
One does not need nosy press guys around, do we????
With an ANC majority in Parliament, who can stop this bill from happening. Back to the good old days of the NP, just different dress code. African democracy in the making.
Traps, you were openly advocating a vote for the ANC before the last General Election. Many of us said that unless you voted for a opposition party, any one, to reduce the power of the ANC, it was headed on this kind of path. Are you willing to concede that you were mistaken in your confidence in the ANC to be the kind of organisation you believed it to be?
I said then, and still maintain, that the ANC is just a black incarnation of the old NATS (read Apartheid). Seems I may be right! ’3. What part of the apartheid police state does the government think the majority of South Africans enjoyed?’
“Murder of Manchester United Fans Bill”
Where do I sign?
I think we should air the awful thought that the ANC movement as a whole is going down the fascistic route. As we know, fascism has always arisen from the ashes of socialism. The “national interest” is is turned into populist call to protect the leaders of the “revolution” from any criticism at all, especially at the very time that they are abusing their powers so flagrantly that it is impossible to not be aware of that fact. Currently, it appears that the most enriching position one can have is to be a Presidential offspring – of course, if no-one could report on their phenomenal success, then we would be able to ignore it!!
These developments are frightening but terrifying things have been happening in RSA since JZ was fired by Mbeki and then came up for trial and we heard from Jube Jube that he would kill or die for JZ – surprisingly I think Vavi said something similar at the time. Then an outrageous, irrational thing happened – Mpshe excused JZ from prosecution on some trumped up, flimsy reasoning… then the most terrifying thing of all – JZ BECAME OUR PRESIDENT! Then we had the appointment of JZ cronies into the justice and security clusters so that appointments to those areas (and dismissals) could be manipulated to suit his needs – we have General Bheki Cwele, who cried at JZ’s trial, heading up the police force… so JZ (and his family and cronies) has become completely untouchable via normal channels. Now all he needs to do is, to all intents and purposes shut down the media and bar access to information. Then we will have no way of knowing what on earth he, his family and his buddies are up to – we will have no way of knowing about tenderpreneural skullduggery or any corrupt activities happening around the country. Interestingly I read in the Mail & Guardian that the ANC political school is being fashioned after the Chinese School. Is our country being subjected to a lot more than trade and economic colonization by China – is the ANC fashioning its outlook on media & access to information on the suppressive Chinese model? Time to fight for freedom-again!
I challenge you Traps, to actually set this public debate up and invite the Cat in the Hat (and others) to come defend or attack (or arrest…)?
@ Dave Harris
“If memory serves me right, the every aspect of the apartheid police was enjoyed by an overwhelming majority of whites!!!”
You have a poor memory Mr Harris. You also lack the authority or credentials to be able to speak on behalf of the “majority of whites.”
I am white and was working as a qualified professional during the hideous apartheid era. Not one of my colleagues, friends, associates or family even remotely enjoyed any aspect of what that regime was doing via the media. Not One!
Hyperbole is not an argument.
Micheal, I think you are sounding more and more like a conspiracy theorist everyday. You claim that ‘there is already a macheanism to classify documents in the interest of national security, why the need for this act’.
Well, in your question there is an assumption that the curreent act is sufficient to deal with the current challenges of national security. May I enlighten you that that is not the case. If anything the current act is an Apartheid legislation that is inadequate to say the least. A typical example is that the current act gives no clear guidelines or criteria on what level of authority or content can be classified. We are actually faced with a situation were government officals can classify documents willy-nilly.
I gues the basis of your argument is the assumption that the bill is aimed at ‘muzzling the press’, and it is this assumption that I think you need to correct no matter how important or special you may percieve your proffession to be. There is more in this Bill to protect SA citizen’s than you may think.
I have no doubt that the areas of the bill that infringe on any freedoms will be reviewed and ammended after the window of public debate closes. However, I do get the sense that some in the media don’t see this as satisfactory coz it would no longer give them the opportunity to attack government and the ANC.
@ Dave Harris:
“Its a pity your selective amnesia prevents you from remembering how brutal our apartheid propaganda machine was in using the media to manipulate and cling to illegitimate power”
And you want to bring this back by introducing an MAT? You’ve just shot down your own argument dummy.
“[J]ust like our media elite uses the media monopoly to spread fear, create hysteria and fabricate stories.”
Evidence (of fabricated stories) or STFU.
@ Dave Harris. It is hard to believe that you actually read what Michael had to say. You have utterly missed the point…again.
@ Michael…I would suggest that every vote in favour of the ANC is a vote in favour of this legislation
Kwame – none so blind as those who will not see!
@ Kwame : You say: “some in the media don’t see this as satisfactory coz it would no longer give them the opportunity to attack government”… MY GOD MAN don’t you SEE THE PROBLEM here? The government is protecting itself from the scrutiny of anybody, giving themselves the right to throw anybody in jail, “willy f&*cking nilly”, this is a FACIST law, Kwame, and it is NOT what we fought for: the idea, as far as i remember, was not to replace facism with facism…if you can’t see the problem here, you’re smoking too much electric spinach, my friend. I stand by Ramphele Mamphela, ALL of the worlds media – who, by the way, saved this country in the first place, and the TINY handfull of non-greedy freedom fighters that still remain.
The ANC wont ever do a live debate. They know what the outcome would be debating against anybody even with half a brain. I magine Zuma vs Zille…. He will find every excuse in the book why he should not debate with her. Just like when he demanded his day in court, and found every excuse under the sun not to have that day… Same with this Cwele. Arrogant, Nepotistic, Corrupt… Banana Republic
You can’t put lipstick on a pig? Is there a law against it? I submit to you that we’ve been doing just that for a long time — and if anyone’s out there with a cosmetic bag (AKA Dave Harris), it’s time for the Scorpions (oops, the Hawks) to be called out again. We must be a world leader in Max Factor usage. Only, don’t rub it in.
@Traps
The ANC does not do “live debates” with anyone intelligent capable of asking probing questions.
They do, however do radio interviews with compliant SABC radio reporters and anchors – every single morning.
Mr Zuma repeatedly refused live debates with De Lille, Zille, Holomisa, Lekota et al before the last election.
@Eligos & Julian Frost
Dave “not my real name” Harris does not supply facts or evidence to support any of his arguments or contentions – he merely engages in casting aspertions and ad hominen attacks.
@ Dave Harris
Where is your evidence that the overwhelming majority of whites supported apartheid?
Next you will tell me that the overwhelming majority of Germans supported the Nazis and Hitler.
The facts are that in a number of elections from 1970 onwards, the NP received less than 50% of the popular vote. Gerrymandering of constiuencies and the Westminster “first past the post” electoral system ensured a handsome parliamentary majority.
A vote for a party does also not neccessarily indicate support – it is often a vote against the alternative.
Over 14 million people were killed in the Holocaust – 6 million of them Jews.
Included in the 8 million non-Jews were German academics, communists, activists and dissidents.
Any form of active or even passive resistance often resulted in death.
It only takes a small evil well armed and fanatical minority to impose their will on the majority – history is littered with examples – Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, Nazis in Germany
Please try a few more facts and less hyperbole, “Dave”
Under this insane proposed law, the head of a local council could imprison a church minister for printing a leaflet promoting a meeting to discuss caring for orphans in the community.
Since our million+ OVC’s are a clear indication of a failing social system & endemic disease, it could be argued that talking about them is not ‘in the national interest’ as it puts the government in a poor light.
This proposed law is unconstitutional (Const. items 16 (Freedom of Expression) & 32 (Access to Information) and un-democratic.
And it’s exactly what the Nats tried to do 30 years ago – here’s the link.
http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page72308?oid=193105&sn=Marketingweb+detail&pid=90389
“Minister Alwyn Schlebusch’s proposals for a media tribunal (‘statutory press council’) to curb the abuse of press freedom:
The idea had arisen to empower the Newspaper Press Union by legislation …to issue regulations to to combat the abuse of press freedom, the Minister of Justice and the Interior, Mr Alwyn Schlebusch, said yesterday (September 18 1979).”
We need to made everyman/woman aware that this proposed law takes away everything generations have fought for – the right to protest & to free association, the right to learn, to make informed decisions, ad inf.
Thought-control starts with controlling the information. This is what the NATS wanted to do – and want the ANC want to do. And again, the oppressed have become the oppressor.
Rose, Kwame has no illusions – he understands that the media object because the whole point of the bill is that it would “no longer give [the media] the opportunity to attack government and the ANC.”
Exactly! Why can he and others like him not see that NOT being able to criticise any government, anywhere, is the fastest way to end democracy? I can only assume that either he does not understand the concept of democracy, or he doesn’t want to.
Yes Anne, you are right. What will Kwame’s (and Dave Harris’) view be of these Bills once their buddies are replaced by people they do not like or support! Will they cry foul and fight to have the Bills revoked? Could it be that they themselves have something to hide – something they don’t want the press to get hold of?
Who is ruling SA the Zuma Zuma’s or the Zama Zama’s?
Dave Harris is an ANC plant…
Just ignore him….dont respond to his inane comments..
@ Anne, I found Kwame’s coup de grace appropriate in explaining exactly why the ANC want this piece legislation.
Traps..you know it,I know it, everyone with a social conscience knows it ..your debate..is not going to happen. Noone goes into any ‘intellectual contest’ when they know they are going to have the ‘shit knocked out of them good an proper’..and be made to look like a complete moron. This bill is going to be passed. The big question is: Once it is..what are we going to do !!??
Justice must be seen to be done!!. Well if the corrupt own the cops, the NPA and the courts, justice will not be done and with the new bill, will not be seen to be done either because none of us will know anything about it. You cannot see anything when you are sitting in the dark!!
Frankly, I think you are all pissing into the wind: “They” will do as they please – with more and more abandon – and reason and ethics will not influence that course.
@daveharris. What are you saying? That because the the old Nats did it, it is okay for the ANC?
Did the ANC not promise a free and fair country, Free of things that the Old Nats did? Are you and the ANC saying that the old Nat way of doing things was not so bad after all?
One thing I have discovered over time reading your warped sense of justice is that you think like the old Nats in more ways than you care to admit. You definately would have made a GOOD NAT.
VIVA OLD NAT SOUTH AFRICA hey Dave LOL
Traps, in the unlikely event of the ANC accepting your challenge [!] please contrast the Mabuza resignation letter, allegedly in Wa Afrika’s possession and the “racist email” forgery used by the ANC in the W Cape.
Assuming Mabuza’s letter had been published (and since it wasn’t, that proves that Wa Afrika was verifying its authenticity) what damage to reputation or state security would have transpired? Mabuza could simply have laughed it off the next day, Wa Africa and S Times would look stupid.
Now contrast the use by Lynne Brown and others of a counterfeit email. It was clearly an attempt to damage the dignity of their political opponents and to regain the power their corruption lost them. Yet no-one has been charged and Simelane’s NPA and the Hawks are yet to announce an investigation.
Why did the one case merit a Gestapo-like goon squad and the other is being Arms-Dealed?
@Dave Harris: I can’t help you ignored all the points the author made about the Protection of Information Bill and Wa Afrika’s arrest. Surely if the POIB is constitutional, and Wa Afrika’s arrest was above board, you would be able to defend them without resorting to the same tired and boring lines you use in almost every comment you make?
Trap, would it not be wonderful if the ANC had enough self belief in the intellect of their leaders in order to accept a debate, this will not happen as they are not capable of debating intelligently. Also, who is Dave Harris, does he walk up right on both legs, he must be the dumbest bloke on these forums, is he also incapable of debating, his responses never address the matter under debate, he simply spews the same drivel over andover, what a sad person (sic) he must be.
@ Rose, trust me I have nothing to hide. The point I was making is that in todays world you cannot afford to look at things at facevalue no matter how much you believe in something. In this case Micheal who is a journalist and not a constitutional expert has succesfully managed to sell to his readers a particular version of the Bill.
In this regard, it is his right to raise concerns on media freedoms which I have no doubt will be reviewed in parliament. However, he goes on to suggest that the whole Bill is invalid, which is were I disagree. All you need to do is go work for a government department, and see how valuable information of the public is treated i.e medical history, pensions, ID etc You will realise that the current Bill which is of an Apartheid era is not adequate.
However, I do sense that there is no interest from the media to inform the public of the 80% of the Bill that addresses other matters that don’t infringe on media freedoms, which is selfish in my view.
Kwame – you are right, Michael is a journalist – actually an editor – however, he is also an attorney at law so I consider his opinion in the regard to be very well informed and researched.
GaryH – “this will not happen as they are not capable of debating intelligently” wow! that is a sweeping, condescending and patronizing statement. There are highly intelligent, well educated and capable people in the ANC – even in the current leadership. Take Pravin Gordhan, Trevor Manual, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Matthews Phoza, Kalima Motlanthe, Rob Davies, Barbara Hogan, Lindiwe Sisulu and others. All these are more than capable of debating intelligently. Cwele is highly qualified academically – MBchB Medical Policy from University of KwaZulu Natal (1984).
MPhil Economic Policy from University of Stellenbosch.
Degrees don’t necessarily qualify one as a good debater – that is a separate skill entirely. The point here is that even were he accomplished in the debate forum, he would find a debate on this topic with any informed and educated person very difficult because the proposed Bills are fundamentally floored and unconstitutional and well neigh impossible to defend rationally.
Michael, as usual I find your discussion fruitful and to the point. In the end it is all about covering up that which is embarrassing to the powers that be.
In our book: Tincture – passing the buck and bucking the system we discuss many abberations that kreep into a system when it is not properly managed. The whole SOE (State Owned Enterprises) and government sectore are discussed in Briefs 6 and 7 and we indicate why the whole ‘top down’ system of government is dangerous. Eventually we come to a number of conclusions in Brief 10 about the way ‘an ideal democracy’ should function. Should anybody be interested please consult the website: http://www.tincturesite.com for more information on the book. We believe that we are helping to create more Thoughtleaders in South Africa. The ‘South African mind seems to be closing down’, so let’s open it up again.
Andre Gadfly and Peter Smacker.
Andre Gadfly and Peter Smacker.