Kasrils Backs Info Bill Opponents

June 2 2011 at 01:16pm

Published in Business Report

Former intelligence minister Ronnie Kasrils has sent a letter of support to those opposing the Protection of Information Bill. The letter, posted late on Wednesday on the Right2Know campaign’s website, said that the rush to complete the Protection of Information Bill by the parliamentary committee was “worrying” and would “lead to huge problems” and unnecessary tensions. “I hate to envisage the unforeseen consequences. It will certainly undermine public trust in the intelligence and security services at a time when confidence needs to be built,” Kasrils wrote. It was Kasrils who introduced the Protection of Information Bill to Parliament in 2008. However, he said in the letter that the issues under discussion were complex and sensitive, “and we need to ensure the proposed legislation does not undermine our Constitution and Bill of Rights”.

He added that the discussions held at the parliamentary committee stage had not inspired public confidence that the issues had been sufficiently canvassed and considered. All agreed that the outdated 1982 act had to be repealed and that a democratic state had the need to protect sensitive state secrets. “To this end it is noteworthy that the bill recognises the harm of excessive secrecy. However, what is of concern is that the proposed legislation is excessively broad and unfocused; certain of the penalties (other than that relating to espionage) are consequently extremely harsh.”

Kasrils said the issue was not only a matter of media freedom. “The requirements of the poor and needy – of those who are cheated by the powerful, the wealthy or the officials who squander the public purse or who fail in service delivery – can only be supported by a free press, by investigative journalism and research, by lively civic organisations.” A pertinent aim of this legislation – from its original conception – had been the creation of a system to enable the declassification of masses of government documentation. “The system envisaged is so complicated and so hampered by lack of clarity that government will be creating a bureaucratic nightmare. “This will act as a regression, both from the public right to access information and to freedom of expression.” Kasrils concluded that civil society was absolutely correct to ask government to think again “and not rush in where angels should wearily tread”.

– I-Net Bridge

Source: Business Report