I am responding to Sam Sole’s article in the Mail & Guardian of March 7 entitled “Malice in Wonderland“.
The starting point of the Protection of Information Bill is that excessive secrecy harms security and that the flow of information is necessary to promote security.
This assertion is set out in the preamble to the Bill and is informed by the constitutional prescript that information in the hands of the state should be easily accessible to citizens, except in exceptional circumstances.
It is internationally recognised that the state, in certain circumstances, has a duty to prevent access to and disclosure of certain state information that would undermine national security. Decisions to prevent disclosure need to be justified in the context of our Constitution and need to be legitimate and in the public interest.
The government has no interest in hampering the work of investigative journalists. We recognise the valuable role of the media in keeping the public informed and in exposing abuse of state authority where it occurs. Journalists, in pursuit of the necessary information, obviously require sources and contacts. The government’s interest is only in preventing disclosure of information that by law needs to be protected.
Of significance is a provision in the Bill that makes it an offence to classify information as a means of preventing the disclosure of incompetence or corruption.
The Bill contains a number of mechanisms that will facilitate access to information. We have included a provision in terms of which an individual may request a review of the classification status of any classified document. Government departments possess large quantities of classified records that need to be reviewed. This provision will facilitate the declassification of government records and access by individuals or interest groups to previously restricted documents.
Private intelligence
The Bill also defines and criminalises certain activities of “information peddlers” in the private intelligence sphere that undermine national security. Our history has demonstrated that certain individuals knowingly supply false information to our intelligence structures with the sole purpose of undermining the integrity of government institutions.
The term “intelligence” is widely used to describe the collection, analysis and dissemination of information. Statutory intelligence structures exist to protect the state and ensure the safety and security of South Africans.
What distinguishes statutory intelligence structures from private individuals and companies who are in the business of collecting and analysing information are both the methods they employ to collect this information and the purpose for which it is collected. The law recognises that statutory intelligence and security structures might need to make use of intrusive techniques to obtain their information. No such allowance is given to individuals or private companies.
The government will take action against private intelligence companies only in the following instances: where they act as fronts for foreign interests with the intention of causing harm to the South African state and where they engage in unlawful collection of sensitive and classified state information.
It is for this reason that the Bill criminalises the unlawful accessing of protected information when the aim is to prejudice the security of the state or benefit a foreign state. In addition, the Bill criminalises the wilful provision of misinformation to the intelligence services.
The Bill has been published for comment and will be tabled in Parliament shortly. We look to the public to engage with the Bill. It is my belief that the parliamentary and public debate will clarify and improve this Bill.
Ronnie Kasrils is the Minister of Intelligence