Freedom of expression under siege?

[Dave A]

It seems government has seen fit to spy on the Mail & Guardian.

The M&G complaint, which dealt with concerns affecting mainly Sam Sole, Stefaans Brümmer and former editor Ferial Haffajee, detailed *incidents over a number of years and ran to 25 pages.

In a brief response this week Ngcakani found no wrongdoing on the part of the NIA or the CID: “Following extensive investigations on all your complaints with the intelligence *services, we have found that at all stages both the NIA and the crime intelligence division acted within the regulatory framework governing the activities of the intelligence services, which includes acting within the precepts set out in Rica.�

Rica is the Regulation of Interception of Communications Act, which regulates the legal interception of private communication. He found the crime intelligence division “at no stage abused their powers�.

Reacting to the findings, Laurie Nathan, who served on an intelligence review commission that delivered a detailed report to former intelligence minister Ronnie Kasrils, said *Ngcakani’s response was an indication of the problems raised by the commission: “The law governing interception of communication allows the NIA to bug telephone calls, with the permission of a judge, if there are reasonable grounds to believe that this is necessary to gather information on an actual or potential threat to the public health, safety or national security of the republic.

“These grounds are far too wide. The law provides no definition of ‘national security’, a term that can be interpreted very broadly. The result is that the NIA is able to spy on people and organisations that are engaged in lawful activity and are not suspected of any involvement in crime.

“This undermines constitutional rights and freedoms, draws the NIA into the arena of party politics and is open to abuse.
full story from M&G here

There definitely seems to be a problem here.

A judge has authorised the tap, one assumes based on legitimate grounds presented by the NIA.
Now what could those legitimate grounds be in this instance?

They were planning to rob a bank?
They were planning to blow up a government building?
They were planning to assassinate a member of government?

Seriously, what are legitimate grounds for tapping the phone of a newspaper editor or journalist?
And if it has anything to do with the journalist's profession, should a judge be allowing the request from NIA?

[tec0]

It is personal. Government is actively trying to destroy our press. The same system that helped them into power... However with the government being able to tap every computer, every phone and ever mobile do you honestly belief we still have rights? I don’t think so and the evidence is right there. The people need to stand up and start to protect the internet and protect the press it is the only tools we have to voice our concerns.

As for reasons to tap your phone. There must be prove of criminal activities and that is the end of it. You cannot act from suspicion alone. But like I said this is personal.

[I Robot]

Commissioning of independently produced South African programming

15 December 2009

The Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) has published final regulations and Position Paper on Commissioning of Independently Produced South African Programming.

The process was undertaken in terms of sections 4 and 61(1) of the Electronic Communications Act read with section 4(3)(j) of the ICASA Act of 2000. The purpose of the regulations is to ensure that commissioning practices are fair, transparent and non discriminatory.

The regulations introduce the requirement for broadcasting service licensees to submit to the authority for approval commissioning protocols in order to enable the Authority to monitor the commissioning practices of independently produced South African programming and to ensure that the same is conducted in a manner that is fair, transparent and non-discriminatory.

The authority makes this finding, taking into account the varying licence conditions of the broadcasting service licensees and the provisions of the television content regulations of 2006.

More...

[Dave A]

The start of the assault on independent broadcasting?

In the meantime the reining in of the constitutionally guaranteed independence of the National Prosecuting Authority seems to be complete.

[Dave A]

The passage of the Protection of Information Bill is heading down the home straight. And not much sign that any of the "consultation" process has had any effect.

Well, if pointing to the direct and very obvious consequences hasn't helped bring this to a grinding halt, maybe highlighting the pure bigotry will.

It's not often I read a blog entry by Pierre de Vos where I can agree with every point he makes - but in his boiled chickens pretending to be plumed peacocks piece I can only applaud as he cuts the issue down to size.

Here are some highlights to encourage you to read the full piece.

When these politicians (who pretend to be hysterical about media “excesses” and “mistakes”) refer to the media, they usually mean those sectors of the printed media who sometimes carry articles that contain allegations of corruption, tender rigging, high-handed and heartless incompetence by politicians and senior officials, the wasting of tax payers money by Ministers who stay in 5 star hotels for 6 months because they are not happy with the bed in their official residence, the fathering of children out of wedlock by our President or articles that do not seem to endorse the National Democratic Revolution as interpreted by Julius Malema and his woodwork buddies.

They do not usually refer to the tabloids (who are now more widely read than the so called “serious” newspapers). This is of course because tabloids seldom report on the alleged work done by politicians, but often print stories about “moffies” who tricked men into having sex with them by wearing dresses and were then stabbed in the gat, church ministers who had allegedly raped congregants, women who allegedly tricked men into buying them expensive presents before running off with their best friends, alleged drug dealers who are terrorizing communities, tik addicts who had sold their mothers gold teeth to buy some drugs and gentlemen of a certain age who allegedly molested young boys.

For the sake of our democracy we need more information and less regulation – not the other way around. Do not believe a word of this talk that the media is the greatest threat to our democracy. We all know that the greatest threat to our democracy is posed by the politicians and senior officials who are stealing our money and failing to address the poverty and vast discrepancies in wealth between rich and poor.

Some politicians say that the present legal avenues for redress are too expensive and cumbersome and that is why one needs a fast, cheap and efficient mechanism like a Media Tribunal to hold the media to account. Of course this can be said of almost any legal mechanisms to redress harm. At present it is rather expensive to prosecute corruption, so why don’t we just appoint a corruption tribunal to deal with the charges of corruption against President Zuma and dispense with this innocent until proven guilty stuff? Not going to happen, is it?

If the politicians were principled (I know this phrase might sound hilarious and unreal, but I am trying to keep a straight face while typing these words) and were not acting out of naked self-interest and greed, they would have insisted on other tribunals to deal with other excesses and mistakes in our society – most notably the excesses, mistakes and illegal behavior of politicians and senior officials.

So, please, before politicians start talking about the need for a Media Tribunal – as if this is the most important thing for our democracy – they should clamor for the institution of a Tribunal for politicians and officials where ordinary citizens could go to get these people fired and maybe thrown in jail when they fail us. I propose that such a tribunal should be staffed or appointed by members of the print media (as the ANC is proposing the Media Tribunal be staffed or appointed by members of Parliament). That should ensure that it is independent and impartial!

Are nominations open for blog post of the year yet?

Firken brilliant!

[Dave S]

Come on folks... We all knew the clamp down on media was coming, even back in 1994. The reasoning behind it is far more sinister than we even realise.

If you follow this from a biblical standpoint, WARNING - this might be very contraversial to some.

When the anti-christ rises he/she will need to be in a position where his/her methods, motives, etc. will not be questioned, how else is he/she to lead the blind into eternal distruction? If the general population can only access a corrupted version of the truth then very few are actually going to know the truth, and the media is the only voice that gets us to think about another viewpoint or creates doubt that everything is not as it seems.

The clampdown on media may be prominent in SA at the moment, but it is happening worldwide.

Dave, this also brings me to the E-TV vs SABC that we chatted about on another thread, how long does E-TV have before it is swallowed/killed by the Gov. controlled SABC?

[Butch Hannan]

I really love this last quote about a "Tribunal For Politicians" This appeals to me because there is no accountability for their actions or rather non actions at this time. There is a tongue in cheek piece on my website called "Contract For Politicians" which you may find interesting. As you can see I have no love for politicians and consider most of them to be a bunch of "wankers"

[Dave A]

Civil society organisations are willing to take the fight over the proposed Protection of Information Bill, currently before Parliament, all the way to the Constitutional Court should the Bill be passed in its current form.

Speaking at the launch of the Right2Know campaign on Tuesday, Idasa's (Institute for Democracy in South Africa) Judith February, a member of the campaign's working group, said that should the Bill become law in its current form it would be a "slight on our Constitution".

The Right2Know campaign was unveiled at St George's Cathedral in Cape Town, and encompasses more than 180 organisations and professional bodies, as well as prominent individuals, opposed to the Protection of Information Bill, or "Secrets Bill" as it is known.

"We have the critical mass of support to take it to the Constitutional Court if needs be," she said.
full story from M&G here

Record your support for the Right2Know campaign here.

[Butch Hannan]

I just have an uneasy feeling that the ANC are going to rail road this piece of legislation through. The rot started with the arms scandal which if opened up would in all probability have implicated Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki.
One wonders just what other issues they are afraid of being aired on the public domain. I would really urge you all to add your signature to the link that Dave has provided.

[wynn]

If the bill was already legislated we wouldn't know about the civil servants strike, would we?