Cape Town - The African National Congress on Thursday proposed writing limited protection for whistle-blowers into the Protection of Information Bill, but again ran into criticism of widening the ambit of the draft law to create a culture of secrecy.
ANC MP Luwellyn Landers suggested that those who divulged classified information would not be guilty of an offence if their action was covered by the Protected Disclosures Act, the Companies Act or any other law.
It was the party's response to calls from all quarters for a public interest defence that would enable journalists and whistle-blowers facing jail for disclosing state secrets to argue that they did so for the greater good.
Opposition parties have yet to comment on the proposed compromise. The Right2Know campaign, which was set up to oppose the bill, however said it did not go far enough to guarantee protection for those who exposed wrongdoing.
“The whistle-blowers' clause is very narrow,” said its co-ordinator Murray Hunter, pointing out that the Protected Disclosures Act only applied to whistle-blowers employed by the entity under scrutiny.
The lack of safeguards for whistle-blowers in a bill that introduces jail sentences of up to 15 years for exposing classified information was one of the main reasons that drove Cosatu to draw a line in the sand on the draft act two months ago.
The union federation's threat to refer the state secrets legislation for constitutional review was widely credited with forcing the ANC to announce a range of concessions in late June.
But since deliberations on the bill resumed this week, the ruling party appeared to reverse some of these by writing discarded notions back into the bill, under the definition of national security as cause for classification.
These include classification to protect economic information - a notion State Security Minister Siyabonga Cwele had agreed to bin because of fears it would be abused to cover up corruption.
The ANC also for a second day insisted the bill should deal with “information-peddling” and include it in the contested list of circumstances that would allow the state to classify information to protect the nation.
It has long been a cause of concern for the opposition, but chairperson of the ad hoc committee, Cecil Burgess, suggested there was no stopping it going into the act.
After the ANC on Wednesday failed to define the term, he said it meant the deliberate distortion of facts or the fabrication of information with the intent or effect of destabilising the country.
The Democratic Alliance's David Maynier said the ANC was trying not to protect the country, but the ruling party, from being destabilised by rumours.
“It is an entirely different matter.”
Maynier was referring to ANC statements in past months that information peddling should be criminalised to prevent a repeat of the fallout of the leaking of the 2006 so-called Special Browse Mole intelligence report. It contained warnings of a foreign-backed plot to bring Jacob Zuma to power and the threat of insurrection should he not become president.
Inkatha Freedom Party MP Mario Oriani-Ambrosini argued it was nonsensical to classify information to prevent the fabrication of information.
“It is a non sequitur.”
Writing it into law would “have a profound impact on freedom of the media”. He chastised Burgess for implying that critics would have to live with it.
“In a matter of this nature it is insensitive to say our objections will be noted, and it's too bad, but you will go ahead with it.”
The ANC subsequently asked for deliberations on the definition of national security to be deferred until the party has had time to caucus on it. - Sapa