Constitutional Hill

New improved Secrecy Bill: still bad, still unconstitutional

Because of immense pressure from civil society, the original draconian version of the Protection of State Information Bill – also known as the Secrecy Bill – tabled in Parliament last year was substantially amended by both houses of Parliament. The version now awaiting President Jacob Zuma’s signatory, while still a thoroughly bad piece of legislation aimed at allowing the covering up of wrongdoing and abuse of power by the intelligence services, is much improved. However, the Bill is unlikely to pass constitutional muster. This is why.

The Secrecy Bill is ostensibly aimed at protecting the “national security” of the country by empowering members of the cabinet, the various security services (including the police and the military) and those bodies overseeing the security services to classify “information” as “confidential”, “secret” or “top secret”. The Minister of State Security is further empowered to grant the power to classify documents to any organ of state or part thereof – although this power cannot be granted to municipalities.

This means that the Minister of State Security has wide powers to authorise other bodies – after approval by Parliament – to classify information. If the Minister (and the majority party in Parliament) wishes to, they could empower any department of state or administration in the national or provincial sphere of government, any other functionary or institution exercising a public power or performing a public function in terms of any legislation and any owner of a facility or installation declared as a National Key Point, to classify information. The head of the Natal Sharks Board, the owner of President Zuma’s private house at Nkandla and the Vice Chancellor of UCT could all be empowered to classify information to protect the “national security” of South Africa.

‘‘Information’’ that can be classified is broadly defined to include not only information contained in documents and electronic recordings but also “verbal announcements”. This means that verbal announcements, say, made to troops sent to the Central African Republic about which private business interests they are tasked to protect could be classified as top secret. Verbal communications between the Guptas and the President or between the Guptas and any Minister or other official would also constitute “information” that could potentially be classified.

Although information can only be classified to protect “national security”, the Bill defines “national security” in a manner that is indeterminate and completely open-ended. The Bill thus states that “national security includes” – but is therefore not limited to – threats against the Republic based on terrorism and sabotage and acts directed at undermining the capacity of the Republic to respond to the use of, or the threat of the use of, force and carrying out of the Republic’s responsibilities to any foreign country.

Because the definition is open-ended, it is conceivable that a cabinet minister or the owner of Nkandla could interpret “national security” in a far broader manner than the examples mentioned in the definition of national security contained in the Bill to include almost anything that, in the mind of the classifier, would threaten “national security”. It would matter not whether this is information about how much money was spent on the upgrade of the private house of President Zuma at Nkandla, how often the Guptas meet with President Zuma and how much money President Zuma and his family have received from the Guptas – as long as it could be shown that the information was believed to involve “national security” it would be in line with the provisions of this Bill.

This means that the Secrecy Bill potentially empowers many people at various levels of government (and many organs of state) to censor information in the name of protecting “national security”, thus potentially imposing drastic limits on the right to freedom of expression and the right of access to information. It does so in two interrelated but distinct ways.

First, when information is classified anyone who leaks or holds or publishes the information commits a criminal offence, meaning that whistle blowers in possession of incriminating evidence of maladministration, “dirty tricks” by the securocrats, evidence of corruption or of criminal activities will think twice before leaking such information to the media for fear of being sent to jail for up to 25 years. Second, journalists and editors will be fearful of receiving any such information and of publishing it for fear of being sent to jail for long periods of time. The potential chilling effect of this law is therefore obvious and real. Only the foolhardy and exceedingly brave will leak or publish classified information – even if the information was wrongly classified to cover up criminal activity or maladministration.

In order to pass constitutional muster these potentially unconstitutional restrictions on the freedom of expression and information will only be justified if it can be shown that the law struck the appropriate balance between the need to protect national security, on the one hand, and the need to protect the rights of citizens to the free flow of information, on the other, and if less restrictive means could not have been used to protect national security in an appropriate manner.

Section 8 of the Bill purports to limit the potentially broad scope of the Bill by stating that classification of state information is justifiable only when it is “necessary to protect national security” and by stating that classification may not under any circumstances be used to conceal corruption or any other unlawful act, to avoid criticism, or to prevent embarrassment to a person, organisation, or organ of state or agency. The section also includes other guidelines which – if meticulously and honestly followed by the classifier – would substantially narrow the scope of the Bill.

Section 45 of the Bill criminalises the wrongful classification of information while section  46 further determines that a “head of an organ of state or an official of such organ of state who wilfully or in a grossly negligent manner fails to comply with the provisions” of the Bill could be sentenced to two years’ imprisonment. These safeguards would go some way to deter abuse of the Bill, but only if an independent body existed to investigate and to prosecute those who wrongfully classify documents to hide corruption or avoid embarrassment. Of course, there is no independent body that will dare to investigate these crimes and – unless a miracle occurs and a truly brave and impartial person is appointed as National Director of Public Prosecutions – such cases will never be prosecuted either.

Those who defend the constitutionality of the Bill will rely heavily on section 41 of the Bill to argue that it limits the rights no more than is necessary. This is so because the section provides a defence to those charged and prosecuted for disclosing even wrongly classified or corruptly classified information in a limited number of cases, included where the disclosure of the information is authorised by other legislation and where the classified information reveals criminal activity, including any criminal activity in terms of section 45 of the Bill.

Section 41 indeed provides an important safeguard for potential whistle blowers. Whistle blowers and journalists who are exceedingly brave (or just plain stupid or reckless about their own freedom and well-being) might well be prepared to take their chances in the hope that it could be shown that the leaked or published classified information indeed reveals criminal activity.

However, how this defence would work in practice is unclear. In terms of our Constitution every person is presumed to be innocent by a court of law until proven guilty. It is therefore unclear whether this defence in section 41 would be available to a whistle-blower or a journalist who receives of publishes classified information that reveals criminal activity if those involved in the criminal activity have not actually been convicted of a crime. How will a whistle-blower or a journalist be able to convince a court that the information reveals criminal activity if the criminal activity has not been successfully prosecuted? And how will the criminal activity be successfully prosecuted when the information revealing that criminal activity remains classified? This defence might therefore well turn out to be illusory.

Besides, the defence says nothing about wrongly classified information or information that do not disclose criminality, but does disclose venality, maladministration, abuse of power or just embarrassing information that would harm the political fortunes of those who classified it. Leaking or publishing such information would remain a criminal offence, which means that there would be a huge incentive for classifiers to classify information that reveals maladministration, abuse of power or other wrongdoing that would not rise to the level of actual criminality.

For example, although the use of more than R200 million of public funds to upgrade the private residence of President Zupta at Nkandla was highly embarrassing for the president, no one has been charged with any criminal offence and it is far from clear that a criminal offence was committed when this public funds were allocated to enrich the president. That means if the Secrecy Bill had been in place, all information about the Nkandla upgrade might well have been deemed national security information (protecting a so called “National Key Point”) and journalists who had published articles on the scandal might then have faced a five-year prison term.

The Act also provides for a Review Panel to review classifications of information but the panel is appointed by the majority party in Parliament and is therefore not independent. You can appeal the classification of information, but as it is a criminal offence to be in possession of classified documents it is unclear how you can appeal the classification of documents you are not allowed to know about and that you are not allowed to have in your possession.

In conclusion, given the indeterminate definition of “national security” in the Bill, the potentially broad powers granted to a wide array of people to classify documents, the lack of effective mechanisms to prevent the wrongful classification of information, the Kafkaesque review and appeal mechanisms and the limited and ineffectual defences provided for those who leak or publish classified information that reveals criminal activity or maladministration, I would be more than surprised if the Constitutional Court certifies this Bill as constitutionally valid.

  • Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….

    When is the SIU investigation into Nkandla Thulas promised us going to be gazetted?

  • unknown

    So we back in 1960 again… time to get Helen back to reporting…

  • Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….

    You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered.

    Lyndon B Johnson

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za ozoneblue

    Oh these evil GUPTAS again. How could a White liberal turn into such a xenophobic bigot. Or is it just what you expect of a Apartheid protege now specializing in “identity politics”.

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za ozoneblue

    Hey Pierre de Vos. What you have to say about those “Coloureds” who are taking legal action against DCS in WC?

    The silence is overwhelming. Isn’t it good to have apartheid back!

  • Colin

    I have noted the fury of all and sundry re the recent passing of the “Secrecy Bill”.

    Granted, there may be substance to some of the issues raised and the Con Court would probably be best placed to take a stand once and for all.

    What fills me with revulsion, though, is the DA’s selective stance on various issues as it suits them.

    DA parliamentary leader, Lindiwe Mazibuko, slammed the Bill as “unconstitutional and a threat to democracy’s values of freedom and openness” (source: News24).

    Let’s take a step back to pick holes in the DA’s “defence”.

    The City of Cape Town recently slapped DA Councillor for Strandfontein, Irma Jackson with a paltry R6 000 fine after she had become embroiled in travel scam involving 40 pensioners (source: IOL). The DA blamed a mysterious “travel agent” for the pensioner’s cancelled trip but then also confirmed that Jackson had repaid the pensioners about R120 000 from her own pocket (if she was not to blame, why refund them?, but ……. I digress). When I requested the name and contact number of this “travel agent”, the City sent me a 7 page document demanding, inter alia, my ID number and address before they would consider parting with this public information (with no guarantee that they would actually provide me with this obviously very sensitive details).

    Then, about two months ago, a forensic report into alleged corruption in the DA controlled Eden District Municipality was made public. Since then the DA has gone underground (“struggle style”) and there is no clarity on whether they have instituted disciplinary proceedings against their own members and if a fraud/corruption docket had been lodged with the Hawks. The “Botox Queen” has ignored my request and has palpably failed to respond to my pertinent questions on the issue.

    What about the Erasmus Commission where two Judges from Joburg were “imported” to close down and prevent Judge Nathan Erasmus from publicly disclosing what we are all still waiting to hear about the DA ……….

    So much for the DA’s selective opposition to certain State secrets. Why the secrecy? What else is the DA hiding from the gullible public………?????

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Colin

    “So much for the DA’s selective opposition to certain State secrets.”

    I can only say that I am relieved that ONE other contributor is outraged at the sheer hypocrisy of the DA! Also, where was the DA when the apartheid government was hiding billions in a secret “slush fund” to finance “Huisgenoot” magazine?

  • Maggs Naidu – Zuma knows what he is doing! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    No matter what the world may think of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, he has not done to his country what Zuma is doing to ours!

    I can think of no other country where the important state functions and resources are farmed out to business cronies, where the president is retained to do their bidding.

    It’s perhaps a good thing that those like Chris Hani, Oliver Tambo, Walter Sisulu, Ruth First, Bram Fischer, Govan Mbeki and other activists are not around to see and experience all that which is going on now in our country.

  • Dmwangi

    “Johannesburg – The SA Revenue Service (Sars) has acquired new powers to gather intelligence on taxpayers and collect revenue, it was reported on Tuesday.

    People and companies, such as lawyers, estate agents and medical aid funds, now had a duty to automatically submit information about their clients to Sars, The Times reported.

    The powers were reportedly gazetted last month and followed provisions of last year’s Tax Administration Act, which allows certain high-ranking Sars officials to authorise searches without warrants.

    “Ask anyone in the industry and they will tell you Sars is much more aggressive,” SA Institute of Professional Accountants national tax committee chairperson Ettiene Retief told the newspaper.

    One of the biggest changes in the new Tax Administration Act was the broadening of the scope of the information Sars could request, he said.

    Sars spokesperson Adrian Lackay reportedly confirmed the new regulations.

    “Sars can request any information from a bank account of a taxpayer as part of its third-party data verification,” he told The Times.

    It was increasingly using intelligence gathered through more than half a decade of e-filing “to aggressively patch the holes in the tax net,” SA Institute of Tax Practitioners CEO Stiaan Klue told the newspaper.”

  • Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….

    Colin says:
    May 7, 2013 at 13:34 pm

    That is why I regard Premier Zupta as President Zupta’s Minime!

  • Zoo Keeper

    Dmwangi

    Thanks for that post.

    The Secrecy Bill is one thing.

    However, SARS seems to operate in a very different constitutional space to everyone else. You are guilty until proven innocent (pay first complain later) with SARS, SARS may enter any premises and search without a warrant and now they may force private information to be disclosed without the knowledge or consent of the individual concerned.

    Why is SARS allowed to act completely outside of normal constitutional boundaries?

    WHY DOES NOBODY TAKE THEM ON???

  • Maggs Naidu – Zuma knows what he is doing! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Zoo Keeper
    May 7, 2013 at 18:36 pm

    Hey ZooKy,

    “WHY DOES NOBODY TAKE THEM ON???”

    The Halaal Pork Guys did with an interesting outcome!

    [Judge Rogers] distinguished between routine searches and non-routine searches, where officials suspect non-compliance with the act.

    He found that warrantless routine searches of businesses or people were justifiable to the extent that the searches related to the business for which the person or business was registered or licensed.

    In addition, he found that warrantless non-routine searches were justifiable only in respect of pre-entry facilities, licensed warehouses and rebate stores to the extent that the search related to the business of the facilities.

    However, he ruled that warrantless searches were not justifiable in other cases, particularly that of unlicensed premises or people, as well as non-routine searches of registered people or premises for purposes other than that for which the business is registered.

    http://www.iol.co.za/business/companies/key-ruling-for-cape-firm-1.1499828#.UYkvLUoVF8E

    http://www.legalbrief.co.za/filemgmt_data/files/Gaertner%20and%20Others%20v%20Minister%20of%20Finance%20and%20Others.pdf

  • Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….

    Zoo Keeper says:
    May 7, 2013 at 18:36 pm

    Our constitutional law professors are reds, not very principled, when it is not their ox being gored, and see tax as deserved punishment for the privileged.
    Certainly not knights in shining armour where liberties are concerned that they disagree with.

    I can point you right now to one advocating a family be Anton Pillered with not that much by way of substantiating evidence….

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Colin
    May 7, 2013 at 13:34 pm

    Colin, with a name like that are you a White? If not perhaps you are “Coloured” or what. Certainly you are not a Gupta.

    Now come and repeat with me – one, two, three, FUCK THE ANC!

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Another retired high court judge speaks out.

    “It is quite difficult to imagine anything more racist, immoral and absurd. It is obscene and vomitus that a government can be asking a Court to do this to its own people. It is even more vomitus that South African society is acquiescing, conniving and colluding at this obscene and tragic pantomime, playing out before its eyes and under its nose.

    No one seems to see or realize the very obvious point that any system that subjects human beings to such treatment must be defined as a system of persecution and ethnic victimization for the simple but good reason that it is only that grouping that is being visited with such hardship and oppression. The stance by government violates the most basic tenets of social justice and human rights.”

    http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/South-Africa-what-are-you-trying-to-do-to-Coloured-folk-20130429

    High five, my brother.

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Luckily for all of us, Brett’s “Genocide Watch” is watching with PdV & kie.

    National assembly approves controversial information bill
    REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS: PRESS RELEASE
    26 April 2013

    http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html

    But unfortunately nothing about Herr Mngxitama yet.

  • Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….

    Fuck off. I don’t own them.

  • Gwebecimele
  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Gwebs

    “Is this a Mazibuko”?

    No. Mazibuko is a little girl who serves tea. This is a boy who serves expresso!

    Thanks.

  • Maggs Naidu – Guptagate: The devil in the details! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Gwebecimele
    May 7, 2013 at 22:39 pm

    Gwebs,

    “Is this a Mazibuko?”

    You think Mazibuko would make a great housekeeper?

    Mario Borghezio, a member of the European Parliament for Italy’s anti-immigration Northern League in an April 30 radio interview. “She seems like a great housekeeper,” he added. “But not a government minister.”

    http://world.time.com/2013/05/06/italys-first-black-minister/#ixzz2SfhENDdH

  • Maggs Naidu – Sucking up? (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Hmmm.

    Well done Kevin Malunga – sucking up to parliament will get you everywhere, ne!

    Tensions have emerged between Public Protector Thuli Madonsela and her new deputy, Kevin Malunga, who wrote to parliament criticising his boss for clashing with MPs last week.

    http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2013/05/08/public-protector-faces-new-mutiny

  • Colin

    Ozoneblue – no need to get personal. Would prefer it if you could deal with the prima facie FACTS on the DA as I presented them ……… To recap – So much for the DA’s selective opposition to certain State secrets. Why the secrecy? What else is the DA hiding from the gullible public………?????

  • magabangeljubane

    Maggs Naidu – Zuma knows what he is doing! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com) says:

    Kevin Malunga’s real mandate at the Public Protector beginning to emerge? Clueless DA don’t even see this one coming.

    General: Madonsela’s new deputy tells MPs he disagrees with boss
    Tensions have emerged between Public Protector Thuli Madonsela and her new deputy, Kevin Malunga, who has written to Parliament criticising his boss for clashing with MPs last week, according to a report in The Times. In a letter addressed to Parliament’s Justice Committee, Malunga told MPs he ‘regrets the unpleasant altercation’ between them and Mandonsela last week over the powers of the Public Protector relative to the oversight role of Parliament. Madonsela has dismissed Malunga’s stand as having ‘no value’ at all. ‘To the best of my knowledge,’ Malunga wrote, ‘the views expressed (by Madonsela) regarding our relationship with Parliament are her personal views and do not reflect my views or those of staff at the office of the Public Protector.’ Malunga said that, though the Public Protector’s office was an independent institution, it was not above parliamentary oversight. Madonsela reportedly said Malunga had every right to disagree with her, but she believed his letter had no value. ‘To me, it really does not have any value. My deputy is one of my staff members. When one member of staff expresses a view I can be democratic; they have a right to their own views,’ she said. But she said she would have expected Malunga to have consulted her before writing to Parliament.
    Full report in The Times

    Madonsela’s jurisdiction and the degree to which Parliament can hold her accountable is under intense scrutiny – and the debate is likely to rage for some time with neither side agreeing, says a BDlive report. At issue is that Madonsela insists MPs cannot question her sole discretion to investigate matters of malfeasance in government. She maintains only a court of law may do so, while MPs insist that the Constitution and the Public Protector Act make it their duty and right to question the Public Protector. The report adds while the actions of the judiciary cannot be challenged, section 181 (5) of the Constitution specifically says of the Chapter Nine institutions that they are ‘accountable to the National Assembly and must report on their activities and the performance of their functions to the assembly at least once a year’. As reported previously in Legalbrief Today, ANC MP John Jeffery and Madonsela clashed in the meeting over her investigating a matter that was before the Labour Court. DA MP Dene Smuts has responded by saying section 6 of the Public Protector Act listed all the areas which the Public Protector could investigate, such as complaints of maladministration, but it also said ‘nothing in sections 4 and 5 shall be construed as empowering the Public Protector to investigate the performance of judicial functions by any court of law’. So anything to do with the courts was off limits for the Public Protector. Smuts said: ‘There are examples where some matters are clearly outside her jurisdictions such as liquidations and other matters before the Master’s office, and it is our right and duty to raise them.’
    Full BDlive report

  • Maggs Naidu – Sucking up? (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Well Mr Source – it’s called Brown-Nosing.

    Kevin Malunga will explain.

    If you’re still not clear, try OB.

    A source close to the committee, who declined to be named, said he could not understand why Mr Malunga wrote to the committee instead of taking the matter up with Ms Madonsela privately, particularly because he should have known that any letter to a parliamentary committee would eventually become a public document.

    http://www.bdlive.co.za/national/2013/05/08/madonsela-deputy-contradicts-public-protector-over-rights

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Colin
    May 8, 2013 at 7:04 am

    “Ozoneblue – no need to get personal.”

    Hey mate. You remember I use to be a keen supporter of the ANC. But things got PERSONAL. Everything is personal my bro, but I cannot “transform” my gender or the colour of my skin – and that is very PERSONAL.

    And it doesn’t matter what the question is – the ANCs answer stays the same.

    I quote ex-Cope jumped ship again to ANC Phillip Dexter, ANC Communications Coordinator in the Western Cape.

    “Currently of the 13 departments in the Provincial Government there are 7 white HODs (of which 2 are female) and one acting white male HOD, whose experience and qualifications are themselves questionable. Whites constitute 62% of all heads of departments. There are currently 4 Coloured HODs ( of which 1 is female ) and 1 African male head of department, who has apparently just resigned and was hesitantly-by the Premier-matched and placed into the post since he was already on the level of a DDG after the DAs restructuring. His appointment was therefor not a promotion Coloured HODs only constitute 30,7 % of the top echelons of the DA administration and Africans constitute a measly 7,6 %. Equally worrying is that Women-including White women-only constitute 23% of the HODs. This is a far cry from where we should be when comparing it to the demographics of the province where economically active population are Coloureds 52,5% and Africans 31,6%, Whites 15,6%, Indians 0,3% women 46,8%. When the ANC left power in 2009 there were 12 Departments as opposed to the current 13 since the Department of Housing and Local Government was a single department. At this time the demographic make up was much different. There were 6 Coloured HODs, of which 3 were female and 1 disabled, including a female Director General in the Department of the Premier. There were 2 African heads of Department, of which 1 was female and 2 White male heads of department. Coloured HOD’s constituted 50%, Africans constituted 16,6%, Whites 16,6% and there was a 16,6% vacancy rate. Women constituted 25% and disabled 8,3 %. While the situation in 2009 was not perfect, there was a definite trend towards the progressive realization of ensuring that the top management of the province was becoming more representative of the demographics of the province and reversing the discrimination that was left behind by the DA when it was in power in 1999. This was the situation when the DA took over in 2009. However, rather than building on the progressive foundation that the ANC government had set, since then we have sadly seen a backward slide in the situation, back to the bad old days of the pre-1994 apartheid era and 1999-2001 when the DA was in power. Since 2009 there has been a sharp increase in the number of white HODs from 16,6% to 62%. There has been a drastic decline in the number of Coloured and African HODs from 50% to 30,7% and 16,6 % to 7,6% respectively. There has also been a decline in the number of female HODs from 25% to 23% and no disabled HODs.”

    But the question was: which was the best-governed province in South Africa?

    http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/article862241.ece/W-Cape-is-the-best-governed-province–AG

  • Maggs Naidu – Cardinal Napier – “I don’t know any gays”! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Ozoneblue
    May 8, 2013 at 8:56 am

    OB,

    “Everything is personal my bro, but I cannot “transform” my gender or the colour of my skin – and that is very PERSONAL.”

    Of course you can “transform” your gender.

    You, Dmwangi and some others have been trying to convince us for a while now is that sexual orientation is a free choice!

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Maggs Naidu – Cardinal Napier – “I don’t know any gays”! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)
    May 8, 2013 at 8:59 am

    Maggs – did you ever see Tootsie? But that superficial sort of “transformation” ain’t going to work in Nollywood – no doubt – what is required is a full on race change.

    And what do I tell my nine year old boy. Dad is wearing a dress, putting shoe polish on his face and talking like a Black girl so he can find a job?

  • Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….

    Didn’t the ANC lose the Western Cape to the DA in 2009 because they were well on their way to fukking it up and everyone could see that?

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….
    May 8, 2013 at 9:10 am

    “Didn’t the ANC lose the Western Cape to the DA in 2009 because they were well on their way to fukking it up and everyone could see that?”

    Interesting question there Brett. And the answer is:

    “Currently of the 13 departments in the Provincial Government there are 7 white HODs (of which 2 are female) and one acting white male HOD, whose experience and qualifications are themselves questionable. Whites constitute 62% of all heads of departments. There are currently 4 Coloured HODs ( of which 1 is female ) and 1 African male head of department, who has apparently just resigned and was hesitantly-by the Premier-matched and placed into the post since he was already on the level of a DDG after the DAs restructuring. His appointment was therefor not a promotion Coloured HODs only constitute 30,7 % of the top echelons of the DA administration and Africans constitute a measly 7,6 %. Equally worrying is that Women-including White women-only constitute 23% of the HODs. This is a far cry from where we should be when comparing it to the demographics of the province where economically active population are Coloureds 52,5% and Africans 31,6%, Whites 15,6%, Indians 0,3% women 46,8%. When the ANC left power in 2009 there were 12 Departments as opposed to the current 13 since the Department of Housing and Local Government was a single department. At this time the demographic make up was much different. There were 6 Coloured HODs, of which 3 were female and 1 disabled, including a female Director General in the Department of the Premier. There were 2 African heads of Department, of which 1 was female and 2 White male heads of department. Coloured HOD’s constituted 50%, Africans constituted 16,6%, Whites 16,6% and there was a 16,6% vacancy rate. Women constituted 25% and disabled 8,3 %. While the situation in 2009 was not perfect, there was a definite trend towards the progressive realization of ensuring that the top management of the province was becoming more representative of the demographics of the province and reversing the discrimination that was left behind by the DA when it was in power in 1999. This was the situation when the DA took over in 2009. However, rather than building on the progressive foundation that the ANC government had set, since then we have sadly seen a backward slide in the situation, back to the bad old days of the pre-1994 apartheid era and 1999-2001 when the DA was in power. Since 2009 there has been a sharp increase in the number of white HODs from 16,6% to 62%. There has been a drastic decline in the number of Coloured and African HODs from 50% to 30,7% and 16,6 % to 7,6% respectively. There has also been a decline in the number of female HODs from 25% to 23% and no disabled HODs.”

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Colin

    “What else is the DA hiding from the gullible public………?????”

    Obviously, I don’t know all the DA secrets, but I will tell you this: The DA does not release its list of party funders! Can you believe that? And they have the cheek to criticise the Protection of Information Bill!

    Thanks.

  • Gwebecimele
  • Gwebecimele

    @ Maggs

    South Africa will pay dearly for allowing Madonsela to be the only person that stands between us the crooks.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Gwebs

    “South Africa will pay dearly for allowing Madonsela to be the only person that stands between us [and] the crooks.”

    While I do not question the integrity of Ms Madonsela, I am worried about the extent to which her findings have apparently vindicated the whinging whinings of the DA and the LIBERAL press.

    How do you explain dat?

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Gwebecimele
    May 8, 2013 at 9:38 am

    “But she ate the curry and left with pockets full of moola”

    But what is even more troubling is that Guptas only make up 1% of the WC population, 0% of WC government while their national demographics are 2.6%. It seems to me they are under-concentrated in Western Cape, which is why Hashim Amla decided to move there to correct these demographic imbalances.

    As far as female Guptas, and disabled Guptas and gay Guptas? I don’t even know what the stats are there but lets hope Pillip Dexter can dig them out from his filofax.

  • Brett Nortje – The ANC are backward! Completely out of place in the 21st Century….

    LOL!

  • Gwebecimele

    OB

    Cope Comrade Dexter says you are least transformed down there in the Republic, read below:

    “Currently of the 13 departments in the Provincial Government there are 7 white HODs (of which 2 are female) and one acting white male HOD, whose experience and qualifications are themselves questionable. Whites constitute 62% of all heads of departments. There are currently 4 Coloured HODs ( of which 1 is female ) and 1 African male head of department, who has apparently just resigned and was hesitantly-by the Premier-matched and placed into the post since he was already on the level of a DDG after the DAs restructuring. His appointment was therefor not a promotion

    Coloured HODs only constitute 30,7 % of the top echelons of the DA administration and Africans constitute a measly 7,6 %. Equally worrying is that Women-including White women-only constitute 23% of the HODs.

    This is a far cry from where we should be when comparing it to the demographics of the province where economically active population are Coloureds 52,5% and Africans 31,6%, Whites 15,6%, Indians 0,3% women 46,8%.”

  • Gwebecimele

    us [and] the crooks

    Thanks Dworky.

    It is sad that snr comrades such as Pikoli, Mboweni, Kathrada and others can only vent their anger/dissapointment about the ANC on on media platforms such as twitter whilst still serving in ANC structures.

    That should worry all of us who support the ANC.

  • Gwebecimele
  • Brett Nortje – Dunning–Kruger effect: Is it possible the ANC do not realise how badly they suck at running our country?

    Gwebecimele says:
    May 8, 2013 at 11:12 am

    Do you think the displaced cadres were honest with themselves about how badly they were doing their jobs?

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Gwebecimele
    May 8, 2013 at 11:12 am

    “Cope Comrade Dexter says you are least transformed down there in the Republic, read below:”

    I have read and I weeped. By my calculations the HODs of WC government departments constitutes 13/5,822,734 = 0.000223263% of the Western Cape population that stubbornly remains un-“transformed”.

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Gwebecimele
    May 8, 2013 at 11:31 am

    http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2013/05/08/newcastle-mayor-complains-of-gupta-slur

    Thanks gwebs. Point taken. Maggs would be absolutely delighted.

    “When Rehman told the official he was offended, he reportedly replied: “You can go back to India and take offence, here in South Africa, this country belongs to us.””

    “Asked by the newspaper to comment, Atul Gupta said his family was “really saddened by the racism and xenophobia driving the current debates”. “As a family we settled in South Africa in 1993 to assist in any way we could with transforming this beautiful country.” Gupta said he had become a South African citizen and remained “committed to helping non-racialism and empowering those who were previously disempowered both politically and economically”.”

    But we know PdV and British business interest also don’t like these upstart filthy rich tjarras helping themsleves to the pie. So it is OK.

  • Gwebecimele

    Call another conference, these are the delegates who vote on our behalf.

    http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2013/05/08/another-municipality-bites-the-dust

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za/ Ozoneblue

    Gwebecimele
    May 8, 2013 at 11:55 am

    “The KwaZulu-Natal government has taken over the financial administration of the ANC-led Umzinyathi District Municipality after it spent millions it does not have.”

    “Umzinyathi joins the Abaqulusi, Imbabazane, Ugu, Uthekela, Indaka and Mtubatuba municipalities, which are under administration.”

    Gweb. You are clearly not listening to ANC “transformation” bandwagoner Phillip Dexter. The short answer is:

    “Currently of the 13 departments in the Provincial Government there are 7 white HODs (of which 2 are female) and one acting white male HOD, whose experience and qualifications are themselves questionable. Whites constitute 62% of all heads of departments. There are currently 4 Coloured HODs ( of which 1 is female ) and 1 African male head of department, who has apparently just resigned and was hesitantly-by the Premier-matched and placed into the post since he was already on the level of a DDG after the DAs restructuring. His appointment was therefor not a promotion Coloured HODs only constitute 30,7 % of the top echelons of the DA administration and Africans constitute a measly 7,6 %. Equally worrying is that Women-including White women-only constitute 23% of the HODs. This is a far cry from where we should be when comparing it to the demographics of the province where economically active population are Coloureds 52,5% and Africans 31,6%, Whites 15,6%, Indians 0,3% women 46,8%. When the ANC left power in 2009 there were 12 Departments as opposed to the current 13 since the Department of Housing and Local Government was a single department. At this time the demographic make up was much different. There were 6 Coloured HODs, of which 3 were female and 1 disabled, including a female Director General in the Department of the Premier. There were 2 African heads of Department, of which 1 was female and 2 White male heads of department. Coloured HOD’s constituted 50%, Africans constituted 16,6%, Whites 16,6% and there was a 16,6% vacancy rate. Women constituted 25% and disabled 8,3 %. While the situation in 2009 was not perfect, there was a definite trend towards the progressive realization of ensuring that the top management of the province was becoming more representative of the demographics of the province and reversing the discrimination that was left behind by the DA when it was in power in 1999. This was the situation when the DA took over in 2009. However, rather than building on the progressive foundation that the ANC government had set, since then we have sadly seen a backward slide in the situation, back to the bad old days of the pre-1994 apartheid era and 1999-2001 when the DA was in power. Since 2009 there has been a sharp increase in the number of white HODs from 16,6% to 62%. There has been a drastic decline in the number of Coloured and African HODs from 50% to 30,7% and 16,6 % to 7,6% respectively. There has also been a decline in the number of female HODs from 25% to 23% and no disabled HODs.”

  • - Dunning–Kruger effect:Brett Nortje – Is it possible the ANC do not realise how badly they suck at running our country?

    Ozoneblue says:
    May 8, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    I’ve sent a request to MECs Mandla Nkomfe and Ntombi Mekgwe (C.c.ing Min Collins Chabane) to have the City of Johannesburg placed under administration i.t.o. S139(1) of the Constitution because of the 3 1/2 year old Joburg Billing Crisis.

    Lets see how that pans out.

  • Brett Nortje – Dunning–Kruger effect: Is it possible the ANC do not realise how badly they suck at running our country?

    A nudge is good as a wink to a blind man, Gwebecimele!

  • Zulani
  • Maggs Naidu – The DA fought apartheid! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Zulani
    May 8, 2013 at 14:49 pm

    Zulani,

    “The ANC’s dubious donors”

    perhaps.

    That was complied by a DA fellow, wasn’t it?

    When the DA opens its donor list then they what they say will be worth considering.

    In the meanwhile, I am likely to vote for the DA (despite my strong reservations) if the ANC does not get rid of Zuma before the next elections!

  • Brett Nortje – Dunning–Kruger effect: Is it possible the ANC do not realise how badly they suck at running our country?

    Maggs, I asked you this the other day and you didn’t answer: Did you see what the DA did to school feeding schemes in the Western Cape?

    They’re clueless, Maggs! They don’t know how to do politics.

    Do you want to become known as what my friend Dan Khumalo used to describe as ‘a migratory bird’?

  • Maggs Naidu – The DA fought apartheid! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Brett Nortje – Please answer question 9!
    May 8, 2013 at 19:59 pm

    Hey Brett,

    “Did you see what the DA did to school feeding schemes in the Western Cape?”

    Are the DA feeding rich WHITE people in the WC?

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za ozoneblue

    @maggs

    That is very good maggs – you Guptas should vote for the African nationalists. LOL. Black fascists and nazis types like Julius Malema and Andile Mngxitama.

    “When Rehman told the official he was offended, he reportedly replied: “You can go back to India and take offence, here in South Africa, this country belongs to us.””

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za ozoneblue

    Hey maggs.

    Did you read the front page of The Post today?

    Perhaps you should stop shouting your racist invective against white people and rather worry more about your own Gupta arse.

  • Lisbeth

    “Did you see what the DA did to school feeding schemes in the Western Cape?”

    No, what? Did they increase the nutritional value?

    Maggs, the DA are not feeding rich WHITE people in the WC. I should know.

  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za ozoneblue
  • Brett Nortje – Dunning–Kruger effect: Is it possible the ANC do not realise how badly they suck at running our country?

    Maggs Naidu – The DA fought apartheid! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com) says:
    May 8, 2013 at 20:02 pm

    Can you believe this, Maggs? Doesn’t he know food aid is delivered the day of elections?

    The cheek of it!

    How are cadres supposed to surreptitiously abstract money from school feeding schemes now? You’re right! Talk about being anti-poor!

    http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71654?oid=373084&sn=Detail

    WCape govt expands school feeding scheme – Donald Grant
    Donald Grant
    29 April 2013

    MEC says 430 000 learners in 1 022 schools receive lunch meal every day, breakfast to now be included

    Western Cape Government further expands access to meals at schools

    This morning I visited Academia PS in Eerste River to join learners for their breakfast meal which is now being served as a secondary meal on the Western Cape school feeding scheme. In my recent budget speech I announced that this year, following a pilot last year, all feeding scheme schools will begin serving breakfasts to learners, as well as, the lunches they already receive.

    It is a sad reality that many of our learners rely on a meal at school as their only meal of the day.

    The Western Cape Government is committed to ensuring that our poorer learners of this Province receive a nutritious meal every day. That is why our successful school nutrition programme has expandedyear on year to assist more of our hungry learners.

    Currently, over 430 000 learners in 1 022 schools in the Western Cape receive a lunch meal every day. This includes all Quintile 1-3 schools and 311 Quintile 4 and 5 schools serving learners in poorer communities.

    In 2009, 334 287 learners were part of the school feeding scheme. Therefore, in the last few years, the scheme has expanded to include nearly 100 000 more learners. The funding for school feeding has also expanded significantly, with allocations to the feeding scheme having more than doubled since 2009/2010, increasing progressively from R112 million to R260 million in 2013/2014.

    The increased budget does not only allow for the additional learners but also provides for a more nutritious meal being served to our learners, placing specific emphasis on healthy foods. The nutrition value of the meals has increased since 2011 by the inclusion of fresh fruit and vegetables, tinned fish and lentils. It also provides for cooked, ‘hot’ meals being served five days a week.

    2 828 volunteers assist our schools in preparing and serving the food.

    This year, the WCED are expanding the scheme even further to include an additional breakfast meal. This morning I helped serve porridge to learners at Academia PS, and had an opportunity to join learners for their breakfast as well, which was very tasty.

    Learners will begin to receive their breakfast meal served five days a week before the start of school each day.

    This will not only provide more nutrition for our learners but will encourage our learners to arrive early for school.

    Statement issued by Donald Grant, Western Cape Minister of Education, April 29 2013

  • Gwebecimele
  • http://www.ozoneblue.co.za ozoneblue

    Gwebecimele May 8, 2013 at 20:47 pm

    “Juju ate all our money”

    You aint see nothing yet. Idi Amin sommer ate all the money with the Guptas still attached to it!

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Maggs

    “In the meanwhile, I am likely to vote for the DA (despite my strong reservations) if the ANC does not get rid of Zuma before the next elections!”

    With respect Maggs, I hope you have time to reconsider. Just imagine if the DA actually won. They would bring both Apartheid and Capitalism back. Then where would be be?

  • Maggs Naidu – The DA are feeding rich WHITE people! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Lisbeth
    May 8, 2013 at 20:22 pm

    Lisbeth,

    “Maggs, the DA are not feeding rich WHITE people in the WC. I should know.”

    Hmmm – let’s see …

    1) Lisbeth is the DA
    2) Lisbeth is a rich WHITE people
    3) Lisbeth is a hungry rich WHITE people
    4) Lisbeth is the WC
    5) Lisbeth was not invited to the DA foodfest (sort of like Gwede was not invited to THE WEDDING)!

  • Maggs Naidu – The DA will bring back apartheid! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    May 9, 2013 at 0:32 am

    Dworky,

    “Just imagine if the DA actually won. They would bring both Apartheid and Capitalism back. Then where would be be?”

    You mean that the DA would do exactly the same thing that the Zuma led administration is doing?

    If Madame Zille were to be President, would public works turn Table Mountain into a national key point and build her a $500 billion “safe house” on it with private cable cars, space-shuttle landing site, submarine docking station, tunnels to Australia (just in case) … ?

  • Brett Nortje – Dunning–Kruger effect: Is it possible the ANC do not realise how badly they suck at running our country?

    Maggs, promise me before you vote for the DA you’ll ask them if Hulley has delivered the spy-tapes yet?

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Maggs

    “If Madame Zille were to be President, would public works turn Table Mountain into a national key point and build her a $500 billion “safe house” …?

    Maggs, this is, with respect, a silly circumlocution. We need not worry about Zille’s OTT plans — provided you and people like you don’t invoke Nkandla and Guptagate as an excuse for voting against the oldest and most respected liberation movement , led by MANDELA, the world has ever known!

    Thanks.

  • Maggs Naidu – GOSA is FUBAR! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    May 9, 2013 at 9:12 am

    Dworky – shut up and “answere” the English exam paper below.

    Shocking errors in English exam paper
    2013-05-09 08:45

    Johannesburg – The education department in Mpumalanga has issued a warning to an official who drafted a Grade 7 exam paper littered with grammar and spelling mistakes.“Instruction to learners Read all the intructions carefully. Answere on the answer sheet provide. Write neatly. [sic]”

    “One day I returned at the camp to find Isaiah sitting at some distance crying. ‘The bees, she got the jam.’ He had been stung in many places. While he was up at the Windmill doing some laundry and swimming, a bee has discovered some open tin of fig jam in the tent. She had made a beeline for her hive, and returned several co-workers. On the principle of finders keepers, they believed that the fig was theirs, and made these quite clear to Isaiah. As I has been guilty of leaving the jam leaving the jam in the tent, I felt in duty bound to get that tin of jam out way before others returned returned. [sic]”

    But don’t worry – this is now solved :

    [Mpumalanga education spokesperson Jasper Zwane] said the official who had set the paper had been removed from the task and had been given a warning.

    He said a team had been put together to ensure this did not happen again.

  • Maggs Naidu – Iyoh! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    Defending the brown nose!

    Deputy public protector Kevin Malunga hit back yesterday, telling public protector Thuli Madonsela that he was not her “staff member” but an office bearer appointed by parliament.

    http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2013/05/10/thuli-s-deputy-hits-back

  • Maggs Naidu – Zuma knows what he is doing! (maggsnaidu@hotmail.com)

    “Durban – Advocate and Judicial Service Commission (JSC) spokesman Dumisa Ntsebeza launched a scathing attack on the government for its failure to employ the services of black advocates, saying this was driving some out of the profession.

    Ntsebeza said that from now on there should be a policy stating that no white advocate should be briefed by the government if they did not have a junior assisting them who was either black, Indian or coloured. He said the government used the services of mainly white law firms and advocates like David Unterhalter SC and Jeremy Gauntlett SC, who were made out to be “superhuman”.

    Ntsebeza said on Thursday that there were many female and black advocates who had left the profession because of a lack of briefs from the state, which was the biggest consumer of legal services in the country.”

    http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/state-hires-only-white-advocates-1.1513525#.UYyXfkoVF8E