消毒,让他仰卧,左尖牙!2010年《保护国家信息法案》/《保密法案》的最终版本,及其对南非公民言论自由的威胁

Luthuli Siboniso Prosper Welcome
{"title":"消毒,让他仰卧,左尖牙!2010年《保护国家信息法案》/《保密法案》的最终版本,及其对南非公民言论自由的威胁","authors":"Luthuli Siboniso Prosper Welcome","doi":"10.5897/jmcs2016.0498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whilst the African National Congress (ANC, 2011) at the helm of the current South African government may have succeeded towards the end of 2013 in using its majority voting clout inside the country’s national parliament to forcibly push through the passing of the controversial and now infamous 2010 Protection of State Information Bill / Secrecy Bill, and thereafter declared it tame enough and ready to be gazetted into the country’s existing panoply of statutes, the reality of the Bill’s constitutionally-flawed and visibly-draconian state as it awaits to be enacted into law remains evident in its final version.  Using a descriptive analytical approach, this study undertakes a critical discussion on the aforementioned version of the Bill in order to demonstrate how its architects, the state’s team of securocrats and legal advisers should retrospectively be considered to have both intransigently and consistently resisted to implement a genuine redress on many of the issues which have been raised as concerns against it by its opponents and critics since 2010, thus leaving it in a state which continues to pose a variety of potential threats to the democratic civil liberty of freedom of expression enshrined in the country’s Constitution if enacted into law in its current state. In spite of a somewhat less-sanguine picture which is painted in the article about the Secrecy Bill, a positive conclusion, is however, reached to effect that various safeguard mechanisms contained in the country’s Constitution should ultimately be considered to provide adequate insulations against any future attempt(s) by democratically-elected governments in South Africa to arbitrarily enact any piece of legislation, including the Secrecy Bill, without facing stiff opposition and criticism from the country’s media and civil society. \n \n   \n \n Key words: Secrecy bill, Adhoc committee on the secrecy bill, classified state information, democratic civil liberties, freedom of expression, threats to freedom of expression, constitution-flouting, state securocrats, ANC-led government, and sufficiently-independent, publicly-accountable bodies.","PeriodicalId":126106,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media and Communication Studies","volume":"C-26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sanitized, made to lie supine and left fanged! The final version of the 2010 Protection of State Information Bill / Secrecy Bill, and its threats to the civil liberty of freedom of expression in South Africa\",\"authors\":\"Luthuli Siboniso Prosper Welcome\",\"doi\":\"10.5897/jmcs2016.0498\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Whilst the African National Congress (ANC, 2011) at the helm of the current South African government may have succeeded towards the end of 2013 in using its majority voting clout inside the country’s national parliament to forcibly push through the passing of the controversial and now infamous 2010 Protection of State Information Bill / Secrecy Bill, and thereafter declared it tame enough and ready to be gazetted into the country’s existing panoply of statutes, the reality of the Bill’s constitutionally-flawed and visibly-draconian state as it awaits to be enacted into law remains evident in its final version.  Using a descriptive analytical approach, this study undertakes a critical discussion on the aforementioned version of the Bill in order to demonstrate how its architects, the state’s team of securocrats and legal advisers should retrospectively be considered to have both intransigently and consistently resisted to implement a genuine redress on many of the issues which have been raised as concerns against it by its opponents and critics since 2010, thus leaving it in a state which continues to pose a variety of potential threats to the democratic civil liberty of freedom of expression enshrined in the country’s Constitution if enacted into law in its current state. In spite of a somewhat less-sanguine picture which is painted in the article about the Secrecy Bill, a positive conclusion, is however, reached to effect that various safeguard mechanisms contained in the country’s Constitution should ultimately be considered to provide adequate insulations against any future attempt(s) by democratically-elected governments in South Africa to arbitrarily enact any piece of legislation, including the Secrecy Bill, without facing stiff opposition and criticism from the country’s media and civil society. \\n \\n   \\n \\n Key words: Secrecy bill, Adhoc committee on the secrecy bill, classified state information, democratic civil liberties, freedom of expression, threats to freedom of expression, constitution-flouting, state securocrats, ANC-led government, and sufficiently-independent, publicly-accountable bodies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":126106,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Media and Communication Studies\",\"volume\":\"C-26 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Media and Communication Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5897/jmcs2016.0498\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media and Communication Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5897/jmcs2016.0498","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前南非政府的掌门人非洲人国民大会(ANC, 2011)可能已经在2013年底成功地利用其在国家议会中的多数投票影响力,强行推动通过了备受争议、现在臭名昭著的2010年《国家信息保护法案》/《保密法案》,并在此后宣布该法案足够驯服,准备将其纳入该国现有的一系列法规中。该法案在宪法上存在缺陷,在等待被制定为法律的过程中存在明显的严酷状态,这一现实在其最终版本中仍然很明显。使用描述性分析方法,本研究对上述版本的法案进行了批判性讨论,以证明其设计者,国家安全官员和法律顾问团队应该被追溯地认为是如何顽固地和始终如一地拒绝对反对者和批评者提出的许多问题实施真正的纠正,这些问题自2010年以来一直受到关注。因此,如果在目前的状态下制定为法律,它将继续对该国宪法所载的民主公民言论自由构成各种潜在威胁。尽管关于《保密法案》的文章所描绘的情况不太乐观,但得出了一个积极的结论,即国家宪法中所包含的各种保障机制最终应被视为提供充分的隔离,以防止南非民主选举的政府将来任意颁布任何立法,包括《保密法案》。不用面对来自国家媒体和公民社会的强烈反对和批评。关键词:保密法案、保密法案特设委员会、国家机密信息、民主公民自由、言论自由、言论自由受到的威胁、藐视宪法、国家安全官员、非国大领导的政府,以及充分独立、对公众负责的机构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sanitized, made to lie supine and left fanged! The final version of the 2010 Protection of State Information Bill / Secrecy Bill, and its threats to the civil liberty of freedom of expression in South Africa
Whilst the African National Congress (ANC, 2011) at the helm of the current South African government may have succeeded towards the end of 2013 in using its majority voting clout inside the country’s national parliament to forcibly push through the passing of the controversial and now infamous 2010 Protection of State Information Bill / Secrecy Bill, and thereafter declared it tame enough and ready to be gazetted into the country’s existing panoply of statutes, the reality of the Bill’s constitutionally-flawed and visibly-draconian state as it awaits to be enacted into law remains evident in its final version.  Using a descriptive analytical approach, this study undertakes a critical discussion on the aforementioned version of the Bill in order to demonstrate how its architects, the state’s team of securocrats and legal advisers should retrospectively be considered to have both intransigently and consistently resisted to implement a genuine redress on many of the issues which have been raised as concerns against it by its opponents and critics since 2010, thus leaving it in a state which continues to pose a variety of potential threats to the democratic civil liberty of freedom of expression enshrined in the country’s Constitution if enacted into law in its current state. In spite of a somewhat less-sanguine picture which is painted in the article about the Secrecy Bill, a positive conclusion, is however, reached to effect that various safeguard mechanisms contained in the country’s Constitution should ultimately be considered to provide adequate insulations against any future attempt(s) by democratically-elected governments in South Africa to arbitrarily enact any piece of legislation, including the Secrecy Bill, without facing stiff opposition and criticism from the country’s media and civil society.   Key words: Secrecy bill, Adhoc committee on the secrecy bill, classified state information, democratic civil liberties, freedom of expression, threats to freedom of expression, constitution-flouting, state securocrats, ANC-led government, and sufficiently-independent, publicly-accountable bodies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pharmaceutical companies Twitter communications: Engagement and message frames Assessment of communication interventions to improve the livelihood of rural community in Ethiopia: The case of Sidama Region Social media engagement and democracy: Understanding the impact of social media on youth civic engagement in Tanzania Looking for low-key: Noir and Neo-Noir from a cinematographic perspective Interventions and messaging in behaviour change communication response to COVID-19: A qualitative analysis of covid campaign in Kenya coastal counties
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1