I'd like to challenge Cwele to a live debate

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Wa Afrika was appearing in the Nelspruit Regional Court on Wednesday where charges of fraud, forgery and uttering were withdrawn against him.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?