Debate over South African political financing has, over the years, occupied the public discourse. The 2005 IDASA v ANC High Court ruling, that the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) did not necessarily require political parties to disclose funding sources, began the debate, and the so-called “Gupta Leaks” have given it a new sense of urgency. Recent concerns over state capture allegations and a national election looming has seen political party funding feature prominently in both political and civil society discourse.

1. The Centre for Constitutional Rights (CFCR) is a unit of the FW de Klerk Foundation – a non-profit organisation dedicated to upholding the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution). To this end, the CFCR seeks to promote the Constitution and the values, rights and principles enshrined in the Constitution; to monitor developments including legislation and policy that may affect the Constitution or those values, rights and principles; to inform people and organisations of their constitutional rights and to assist them in claiming their rights. The CFCR does so in the interest of everyone in South Africa.
   

South Africa, like virtually all countries in the world, maintains a domestic intelligence service. The Constitution as such empowers intelligence services, including those of the defence force and the South African Police Service (SAPS). To this end, the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), in accordance with the South African Police Service Act (SAPS Act) establishes a crime intelligence division whose mandate is “to gather, correlate, evaluate and analyse domestic intelligence, in order to identify any threat or potential threat to the security of the Republic or its people…”

Yet consider that the previous head of Crime Intelligence, Mulangi Mphego, was forced to resign in 2009, after he was accused of interfering with state witnesses in the corruption case against former National Police Commissioner, Jackie Selebi. Mphego’s successor, Richard Mdluli, was suspended in May 2011. This, after being arrested on a number of criminal charges, including murder, attempted murder, intimidation, kidnapping, assault and defeating the ends of justice. Major-General King Bhoyi Ngcobo featured briefly as acting crime intelligence head, post Mdluli.

The Qwelane and the Huffington Post matters – still none the clearer

In the last week, two significant rulings were made regarding the boundaries of hate speech in terms of the Constitution, and whether legislation prohibiting hate speech oversteps constitutional boundaries. Considering the enthusiasm by the State to criminalise hate speech in the controversial Prevention and Combatting of Hate Crimes and Hate Speech Bill, it is crucial to consider the impact of these two rulings.

What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore—
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over—
Like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
Like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?

Part 1 – The Bill versus the right to freedom of expression

On 10 August 2017, the Centre for Constitutional Rights (CFCR) made a written submission on the redrafted Cybercrimes and Cybersecurity Bill (the Bill) to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services. 

The Bill seeks to address the increase in cybercrimes and breaches in cybersecurity in today’s digital era. It is a technical piece of legislation which provides a range of new offences pertaining to cybercrime, as well as various new complex structures to monitor cybersecurity, while obliging electronic communications service providers and financial institutions to assist in investigations.

The CFCR restricted its comments to the impact of the prohibition of “malicious communications” on the right to freedom of expression and the impact of certain provisions on the State’s surveillance powers on the rights to privacy and access to the courts.