CAPE TOWN - The Helen Suzman Foundation on Friday joined many others expressing concern at the draft Protection of Information Bill.

The foundation also slammed the proposed media appeals tribunal as a “sinister” attempt to control and manipulate the press.

“While we concede that every state needs to maintain its national security, the bill’s understanding of the ‘national interest’ is so broadly defined as to raise questions about the intention of the bill,” the foundation said in a statement.

A particular matter of concern was the lack of transparency, downward accountability and independent review of the behaviour of heads of organs of state in classifying information.

In effect, senior civil servants would apply a subjective test, not open to independent review, in determining what may or may not be in the public’s best interest.

In viewing the penalties which the bill proposed, an impossible burden would be placed on the courts which could only result in massive self censorship in the media.

Section six of the bill emphatically acknowledged the importance of freedom of expression and the free-flow of information, viewing these as “the basis of a transparent, open and democratic society”.

“This Bill undermines the very public interest that it purports to protect,” the foundation said.

“It has no place in a liberal constitutional democracy.”

The foundation also noted the release on July 29 of the ANC discussion document for the party’s national general council to be held in September.

“The document cites the print media as its primary concern, yet in its opening clauses notes that television and radio have far greater reach and penetration than print media.”

Notably absent from the document was any coherent and critical analysis of the state and role of television and radio which the document regarded as “conspicuous achievements”, but which were regarded by many as conspicuous failures, the foundation said.

The document raised important issues concerning ownership of the print media which needed to be debated so that greater diversity in ownership could be achieved.

But these important issues were used as a rationale for establishing a Media Appeals Tribunal.

“This justification is tenuous at best. More realistically, the creation of a Media Appeals Tribunal can and should be regarded as a sinister attempt at manipulation and control of the press,” the foundation said.

- Sapa