Barry Streek
The controversial National Convential Arms Control Bill was resubmitted to Parliament this week but like last year, encountered heavy flak over its secrecy provisions and failure to deal with small arms.
The Bill, intended to regulate arms production and trade, was withdrawn last September after it was attacked by NGOs, among others, who claimed it harked back to “the obsessive secrecy of the apartheid era”. This week interest groups also attacked the Bill for its silence on small arms, one of the biggest killers in Africa.
Sipho Pityana, foreign affairs director-general, responded that a separate Bill could be introduced on small arms and that it was a key focus for government. He said: “The biggest threat against us is small weapons A Bill on small weapons is a possibility.”
In its submission to the National Assembly’s defence committee, which is hearing evidence on the Bill, Gun Free South Africa said the exclusion of small arms from the definition of “conventional arms” was a matter of grave concern.
The organisation proposed that the definition of “conventional arms” should include the export of firearms or small arms. “It is critical that firearms exported from South Africa undergo a similar process of scrutiny as conventional weapons.”
The South African Council of Churches told the committee that the proliferation of small arms had fuelled conflicts across Africa and the world. “In a number of situations notably in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo the ready availability of small, light weapons has made it feasible for insurgents to forcibly recruit and deploy child soldiers.”
The churches said the country should give “further evidence of its commitment to end this scourge by making small arms and ammunition” subject to the Bill’s regulations.
NGOs have also attacked controversial secrecy provisions in the Bill that require the “written authority of a competent authority” for the disclosure by anyone of any information on arms “where such disclosure would be detrimental to the national interest or security of the Republic or to the commercial interests of the manufacturer”.
Mike Pothier, representing the Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference, said the provision was taken directly from legislation, including the 1992 Armscor Act, that “belonged to another era”.
“If there is something to be hidden under the rubric of ‘national interest’ there is a problem. Let us be open about it,” Pothier said.
Terry Crawford-Browne of the Economists Allied for Arms Reduction said the provision would prohibit the media, NGOs and others from divulging any information about the armaments industry.
“It is a despicable piece of legislation reminiscent of the obsessive secrecy and corruption of the apartheid era,” he said.
Laurie Nathan of the Centre for Conflict Resolution said the formulation of the clause was so broad that it would have prohibited the committee’s public hearings on the Bill.
Allison Tilley of the Open Democracy Advice Centre added that it might undermine the operation of the Promotion of Access to Information Act.