AP

A man shouts out his objections during a protest against the Protection of Information Bill.

The ANC is expected to kick off its public consultations on the controversial Protection of State Information Bill, dubbed the Secrecy Bill, next month - after most of its provincial inter-parliamentary caucuses met behind closed doors this week to plan hearings.

It is likely these will take place in the first three weeks of next month, leaving the last week to consolidate the inputs.

However, the Right2Know campaign, an umbrella body for various civil society groups opposed to the bill, among other reasons because of the lack of a public interest defence for whistleblowers, said this week there was still a question mark over how any outcome of this process would impact on the bill, if at all.

The ad hoc committee that processed the bill reached the end of its lifespan shortly after adopting it and any proposed changes could only be effected by the National Assembly referring the bill to another committee of Parliament or establishing a new committee to consider them.

It is understood that Parliament has, in the meantime, referred all queries back to the office of the ANC chief whip, saying in a letter dated October 12 “political parties are entitled to embark on any process meant to assist them in their political work”.

R2K national co-ordinator Murray Hunter cautiously welcomed this week’s development on public participation.

“We would welcome any public participation which is as wide ranging as possible,” he said, adding it remained to be seen whether this was “an earnest public participation process.”

The campaign would mobilise supporters in each province to engage in the process, he added.

According to ANC chief whip Mathole Motshekga’s spokesman, Moloto Mothapo, details of the public engagements would be widely communicated to ensure “as many people as possible, regardless of their political allegiance, get an opportunity to have a say on the draft legislation before it is passed into law”.

It appears that while the office of the chief whip is driving the overall process, the inter-parliamentary caucuses, which bring together ANC councillors, members of the provincial legislatures, MPs and deployed party members, will determine the actual programme.

These public engagements are to be held in “regional assemblies”, an apparent blurring of the lines between ANC regions and geographic areas like the metros.

Just over a month ago the ANC in Parliament pulled the bill at the 11th hour from its second reading debate and adoption in the National Assembly.

The decision followed an ANC national executive committee (NEC) briefing on the bill and discussion which raised concerns relating to the question of freedom of information and the powers it would give the State Security minister.

At that stage the Protection of State Information Bill had already been adopted by the parliamentary ad hoc committee on September 13, despite threats by opposition political parties and civil society groups that the legislation would be challenged in the Constitutional Court.

The key objections are to mandatory jail terms for the possession or disclosure of classified information and the lack of a public interest defence to protect whistleblowers who release classified information in the interests of society.

While the ANC NEC officially let the ANC parliamentary caucus make the announcement of the delay and public participation process, few political observers accept the party’s insistence that the two were not linked.

On September 19, during a briefing on the NEC meeting, ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe said “we all agree the bill is necessary… but we must ensure our parliamentary people understand it”.

Any delay was about “internal realignment” to ensure ANC MPs were on board, not pressure from civil society, he said.

However, since the announcement, the ANC in Parliament has been on the back foot in trying to explain the renewed public participation process under its authority, instead of through Parliament.

Public hearings were held as part of the parliamentary process over the past year or so. MPs, including those of the majority party, insisted many of the concerns raised in these had been accommodated in the final version of the bill. - Sunday Independent