President Jacob Zuma has sent the Protection of Information Bill, also referred to as the Secrecy Bill, back to the National Assembly.
President Jacob Zuma has sent the Protection of Information Bill, also referred to as the Secrecy Bill, back to the National Assembly.
He announced this during a lunch for members of the Press Gallery Association in Parliament in Cape Town on Thursday 12 September.
Zuma said there were sections of the Bill, particularly sections 42 and 45, that were unconstitutional.
He said these sections were accordingly unconstitutional.
he explained that in terms of Section 79(1) of the Constitution, if the President has reservations about the constitutionality of a Bill, he or she may refer it back to the National Assembly for reconsideration.
"In this regard, I have referred the Bill to the National Assembly for reconsideration insofar as sections of the Bill, in particular Sections 42 and 45, lack meaning and coherence, consequently are irrational and accordingly are unconstitutional," the President said.
The Protection of State Information Bill, passed by Parliament earlier this year is intended to repeal the Protection of Information Act of 1982.
The proposed new Act was designed to regulate the classification of sensitive government information.
It was also intended to protect citizen’s personal information, such as identity documents, drivers' licences and birth and marriage certificates.
The Bill's opponents, most vocal of whom has been the Right2Know Campaign, say certain provisions in the Bill undermine the right of access to information and jeopardise the roles of whistleblowers and journalists.
The South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef) has welcomed Zuma’s decision to refer the Protection of State Information Bill back to Parliament for reconsideration.
"We agree with the remarks made by the president today that certain sections of the Bill are irrational and unconstitutional," they said in a statement. "The Bill criminalises the possession and dissemination of classified state information even if such information is in the public interest."
Sanef has consistently argued for the inclusion of a public interest defence clause to protect journalists and whistle blowers.
"Sanef is concerned about the provisions that allow for broad classification of information, including that which has nothing to do with security of the state, and the delegated authority to undefined state officials the power to classify information," they continued.
They called for these provisions to be amended so that they are in line with the transparent governance system envisaged in the Constitution.
"Although the president cited a few problematic provisions to explain his decision, Sanef believes Parliament has a opportunity to reconsider other provisions which may be unconstitutional," they said.
