In the heart of the Secrecy Bill debate is whether the restriction on our rights confined in it corresponds to what is tolerable in an exposed and democratic society and whether fewer aggressive methods could have been used to accomplish an authentic purpose of limiting some government information in order to safeguard South Africans from terrorism and other outbreaks and to protect us from assaults anti the constitutional order itself
This bill states that publication of information - considered classified by the government - as well as the unauthorized possession of classified material, is a serious criminal offense. Sensitive information comprises any information relating to the protection and the preservation of all things owned or conserved by the state in addition to all information regarded valuable. The proposed punishment for concealing information that need not be concealed is an astonishing three years in prison. Reporters and informants that fail to adhere to these regulations could encounter a sentence of twenty-five years in prison if proven guilty of suspected crimes. Those who fail to report classified material are sentenced to three to fifteen years in prison – this determined by the stratum of classified information (the Guardian, 2012). .
It is understandable that many people would believe that the Secrecy Bill might be abused by politicians desiring to conceal their fraud, corruption and self-enrichment. Those people, who do believe so, are most probably going to be right regarding their accusations. There have been numerous incidents where whistleblowers have revealed corruption, unethical actions, crime, fraud etc. that was committed by officials, members of congress, leaders and even the President, Jacob Zuma, himself. What would stop the state from concealing these criminal and corrupt offences now? It would only make complete sense that they would hide such unethicality – these offences can only create animosity and uproar where it is not wanted.
