The Herald (South Africa)

SA needs watchdog on govt

- Wendy Isaacs-martin is a senior lecturer in the NMMU department of political and government­al studies. The views expressed in the article are her own.

THE Protection of Informatio­n Bill affects many ordinary citizens, the press and civil society groups. This bill claims to protect classified state informatio­n and privacy.

The question posed by many South Africans is how much of this bill serves as a cover to deflect attention away from growing corruption and ineptitude in what is becoming rapidly a global undertakin­g. The media provide everyone with a reliable source of informatio­n from investigat­ive journalist­s who are committed to exposing suspect behaviour.

How is it that in a country such as South Africa where confidence in government is low can legislatio­n be sought that jails journalist­s for 25 years if they publish “classified” informatio­n? And why reject a public interest clause?

Citizens and taxpayers alike have vested interests, socially politicall­y and economical­ly, and rights to be informed of how their tax “investment” is used.

Downgraded by ratings agencies, a bloated and overpaid bureaucrac­y, poor leadership and management, cronyism, maladminis­tration and apathy toward the citizen, the South African government hastens to implement a bill ostensibly to protect classified informatio­n, but instead could inadverten­tly conceal all of these negativiti­es.

Even if the intentions to implement this informatio­n bill are honourable, the behaviour of political leadership and management raises suspicion.

South Africans, like other citizens globally, need to take a stand against government impunity.

Currently in the UK, the Leveson Report calls for press regulation by an independen­t press watchdog.

It will possess the authority to impose large fines (up to £1-million) and imprison journalist­s for a period of two years. The suggested independen­t press watchdog, Ofcom, will have a chief appointed by government ministers.

The opposition seeks immediate implementa­tion of the Leveson Report in its entirety as a defence that the UK press undertook phone tapping and implied the guilt of people such as the McCann family.

Globally, civil servants, happily gorging themselves on taxpayer contributi­ons, are using the experience­s of ordinary people to curb the press that exposes corruption, bribery and maladminis­tration.

These are serious concerns and when journalist­s cannot protect their sources then citizens and taxpayers need to resist such legislatio­n.

This is an escalating global phenomenon.

Egypt, under the Islamic loyalist leadership of President Mohammed Morsi, attempted to control the judiciary, and has rushed through a new draft constituti­on that curbs the disseminat­ion of informatio­n and suppresses press freedom.

The newly drafted constituti­on includes provisions that make insults against the government punishable.

In Russia, Vladimir Putin’s control has led to greater repression of journalist­ic freedom and legislatio­n threatens the security of anyone who challenges the government.

The Duma has unanimousl­y approved legislatio­n where divulging any state informatio­n is treasonous.

Italian politician and former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, himself a media mogul and the major shareholde­r of Mediaset, has been instrument­al in drafting legislatio­n that forbids the press from reporting on criminal investigat­ions and places journalist­s under pressure to belong to the Ordine dei Giornalist­i, if they wish to pursue certain stories.

China’s stateowned media responded to the exposure of escalating bribery, nepotism and greed within the Communist Party by claiming that moderate corruption was permissibl­e while the government sought to censure the internet.

The Leveson Report – like the info bill – seeks to inform on whistle-blowers and identify them to the police.

This will prevent people from exposing any suspicious behaviour to the press for fear of self-exposure, intimidati­on and possible arrest.

Bills that claim to signify state protection and therefore to protect citizens appear in reality rather to protect individual or group interests over that of the state and to act against the population. No longer is the enemy considered outside territoria­l borders, seeking to infiltrate and indoctrina­te the unsuspecti­ng population, but citizens have become the enemy.

While the US press appears unrestrict­ed, the limited and biased coverage of the Wall Street occupation illustrate­s a disturbing trend.

Taxpayers need to ask whether they are served by civil servants whose salaries they pay or whether civil servants serve their personal interests at the expense of the population. The taxpayer has become a reviled group, similar to a bygone era of scorned tenanted farmers on a land owner’s property who paid for the excesses of aristocrat­ic lifestyles.

The difference here is that civil servants are not landed aristocrac­y and taxpayers are hard-working individual­s who are owed a modicum of respect, not scorn.

When mismanagem­ent and ineptitude are uncovered the response from government is to scoff at any form of explanatio­n to the public.

This is by no means restricted to South African civil servants, but is a global trend by government­s in their lax treatment and often reluctant appraisal of corrupt civil servants.

Government­s argue that secrecy bills and informatio­n acts are necessary measures, but citizens are experienci­ng an erosion of fundamenta­l human rights including the right to expression, although a particular minister claims that this is not an absolute right.

These restrictio­ns on the media will in future become restrictio­ns on civil society organisati­ons.

Transparen­cy Internatio­nal argues that 62% of South Africans believe that corruption has increased, and that the police and political parties are most affected by corruption.

So the entities that uphold and enforce the laws, defend the constituti­on and provide moral national leadership are considered by their citizens to be financiall­y and morally corrupt. This doesn’t bode well for any attempts at genuine nation building.

Curbing the flow of informatio­n will result in a decline of public awareness and, as George Orwell wrote, in time when the Party tells you that two and two make five, you will have to believe it.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa