South Africa: Muzzle bill 'threat to education'

" 'Denial of freedom of expression makes a mockery of the profession of journalism' " Jacob Zuma. Dr Max Price, vice-chancellor of the University of Cape Town, said he would oppose the bill "vigorously" in its present form, because "the consequences of restricted access to information impinge profoundly on the university's ability to do research and analyse public policy".

The bill, which is undergoing an extended submissions period in parliament, replaces accepted concerns for "national security" with a need for secrecy around a much broader "national interest"; gives the heads of state organs the right to classify information, and would threaten investigative journalists, in particular, with at least five years in jail.

 

It also makes no provision for information published in the "public interest".

 

This week:

 

The General Council of the Bar of South Africa said the bill was unconstitutional, stating that all information "which genuinely requires protection from disclosure" was already fully covered by another law - and the bill would even forbid the exposure of information required to be made public under existing law;

 

Cosatu secretary-general Zwelinzima Vavi slammed the legislation as an assault on democracy and an insult to the memory of activist journalists like Ruth First;

 

Prominent authors raised their voices in support of media freedom;

 

The World Association of Newspapers appealed to President Jacob Zuma to reconsider the proposed media tribunal and the bill, arguing that its "far-reaching provisions would virtually shield the government from press scrutiny";

 

A wave of condemnation in the foreign media prompted Themba Maseko, spokesman for the presidency, to admit the government was "concerned" about negative international exposure; and:

 

In the most damning indictment of the bill to date, Ronnie Kasrils - who designed the first version of the legislation in 2008 when he was minister of intelligence - called on the government to withdraw the new, much harsher version.

 

Having at first merely suggested a government "rethink", Kasrils found, after analysis, that the bill would have the "opposite" effect to that which he had intended - to reduce the amount of unnecessarily classified information - and slammed support for the bill as "an inexplicable desire to maintain apartheid-era secrecy".

 

The University of Cape Town's concerns included that "key provisions" and "powers to delegate authority" were "overly broad"; that "review mechanisms seem inadequate"; that "there are inadequate mechanisms to counter abuse"; and that it would discourage whistle-blowers and even ordinary researchers.

 

"The Protection of Information Bill touches on issues central to the functioning of a democratic society," said Price. "The university is one of the foundation institutions in society that can, and should, speak (the) truth to power being protected by the Constitution as far as academic freedom is concerned. We therefore appeal to the government to redraft the bill, and indicate our intention to oppose it vigorously if the objections are not addressed."

 

Prominent authors, led by Nadine Gordimer and André P Brink, protested that "freedom of expression, along with the vote - universal suffrage - is the basis of democracy.

 

"Muzzling this freedom affects directly print and other media in the responsibility and necessity of their function, which is to keep citizens informed of all aspects that affect life in the country, whether by government edict, the law, economic practice or the ethical standards of individual behaviour. Denial of freedom of expression makes a mockery of the profession of journalism - the print press and the media in general."

 

The state's legal adviser, Enver Daniels, has insisted that the bill is consistent with the Constitution.

 

-August 22, 2010 by Rowan Philip

 ……………..

Source: www.timeslive.co.za/sundaytimes/article615756.ece/Muzzle-bill-threat-to-education   (accessed on 23.08.10)