The Centre for Social Accountability (CSA) widely applauded for forcing Parliament to release the Travelgate documents says, “it’s a bittersweet victory.”
The Centre for Social Accountability (CSA) widely applauded for forcing Parliament to release the Travelgate documents says, “it’s a bittersweet victory.”
In Parliament's 2006 Travelgate scandal, Members of Parliament (MPs) and travel agencies conspired to defraud the state through their travel arrangements. Most people remember the scandal — but the identities of many perpetrators remains a mystery. Grahamstown-based organisation is determined to change that.
The Centre for Social Accountability (CSA) is an independent institute affiliated to Rhodes University. The CSA’s Public Service Accountability Monitor programme, aims to put pressure on the government and make them realise that service delivery is the main way in which people's constitutional and social rights are realised.
In March 2009, the centre asked Parliament for access to documents identifying the MPs concerned. They cited the Promotion of Access to Information Act to justify their request. The Act allows anyone to request information from the state.
Parliament refused to release the information, arguing that it would amount to the unreasonable disclosure of personal information.
Following this refusal, the CSA brought an application to the Eastern Cape High Court, in Grahamstown in October 2010.
After several delays in the judgment, the ruling was finally passed on the 28 July this year by Judge Ziets Alkema. He ordered that the information be made available within 10 working days.
Head of media and advocacy at PSAM, Derek Luyt, says the centre is pleased with the judgement and believes it has sent out a powerful message, but says he is also sad that the CSA had to take action in the first place.
“It’s a bittersweet victory. It’s not a victory for the country, and it’s not a victory for democracy,” said Luyt. "Parliament has acted irresponsibly with taxpayers' money.”
He believes Parliament needs to practice better management, and investigate its own members.
Executive Director of the Southern Africa Litigation Centre, Nicole Fritz, fully supports the judgment. The litigation centre promotes human rights and the rule of law through litigation support and training.
"An open and transparent government is key to the constitutional rule of law for a biding state, to the extent that this case holds members of Parliament to account, shows they do not abuse their privileges and it also contributes to a strengthened constitutional government," said Fritz.
This is not the first time the CSA has taken the government to court. Following the Eastern Cape’s 2006 provincial Rapid Assessment Survey of 12 200 households the government held on to the report, saying departments needed to engage with the findings before any information was released. The survey analysed residents’ perceptions of government performance and service delivery.
The CSA believed that the information should not be withheld, as the research had been carried out with public money, and the matter was taken to court. The ruling favoured the CSA and the information was made available.
Even though they got this high court ruling in their favour, the CSA is not celebrating just yet, as they believe Parliament will appeal the decision.
