**We apologise for any cross-posting - The following is being forwarded exactly
as received**

To: IFEX Autolist (other news of interest)
From: Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI), [email protected]

FXI convenes Forum to oppose Anti-Terrorism Bill

24 March 2003

Forum of Non-Governmental Organisations opposes the Anti-Terrorism Bill

The FXI has convened a Forum of Non-Governmental Organisations which has
resolved to oppose South Africa's proposed Anti-Terrorism Bill, tabled in
Parliament for debate on the 10 March. The Bill was referred to the Portfolio
Committee on Safety and Security on the 14 March for public hearings and
deliberations. Public invitations for submissions on the Bill have been issued
and the deadline for submissions is the 30 April.

Among the reasons cited for the introduction of this Bill is that it will bring
South African law into line with many other countries that have passed similar
legislation since the terrorist attacks in America on September 11 2001. It is
important to note that since year 2000, government has been attempting to
introduce legislation that would cater specifically for the crime of terrorism
in South Africa. The first attempts to do so failed as the draft Bill met with
stiff opposition from many quarters particularly due to the draconian powers
given to law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute acts of
terrorism. The draft Bill also violated a wide-range of fundamental rights and
freedoms by introducing measures for detention without trial, reversal of onus
of proof upon an accused person and stringent bail conditions.

Last September the Department of Safety and Security introduced a Draft
Anti-Terrorism Bill for comment and debate. There was little publicity around
this Bill, which the government took the rather innocuous step of posting on its
website. Since then, and well until the tabling of the Bill in Parliament on 10
March 2003, there has been little effort to publicise its presence.

The FXI in concert with a range of other human rights organisations opposes the
introduction of this legislation in South Africa. Firstly, the Bill itself is
fundamentally flawed and the logic behind its motivation unclear. Furthermore,
the process followed in drafting this legislation is highly questionable as no
discussion document was published, neither was there proper consultation done by
the South African Law Commission with the various stakeholders.

Secondly, because terrorism is an offence that attracts some of the severest
penalties known in law, it would have been thought that the Bill would at least
attempt to provide a simple, clear and unambiguous definition of the term
'terrorism'. Unfortunately this has not been done and on the contrary the Bill
presents a vague and incomprehensible definition of what it means by 'terrorist
act', which it defines as ". an unlawful act . that is likely to intimidate the
public or a segment of the public".

Such a wide and vague definition could be used to proscribe a whole range of
civil and political activities such as demands for land, demonstrations, pickets
or a civil disobedience campaign.

It should be noted that this is the third attempt on the part of the legal
drafters to arrive a definition of terrorist act; the flawed nature of their
latest attempt points to the fact that reaching a satisfactory definition is all
but impossible. It should further be noted that it is extremely dangerous to
attempt to criminalise actions that cannot even be defined properly.

The Bill proposes extremely harsh bail conditions and moves out of the ambit of
normal criminal justice inquiry by empowering police offices to secure orders to
question individuals through what it calls 'investigative hearings'. Added to
this is the fact that the Minister of Safety and Security will have powers to
'black list' organisations, which he suspects of committing terrorist acts
either inside or outside the Republic, sometimes without compelling evidence to
inform his/her decision.

Put simply, this Bill poses the same degree of threat to human rights and
fundamental freedoms in South Africa as did its draft predecessor in 2000. It
threatens the existing framework of basic rights and civil liberties, which has
been hailed as one of the most substantive in the world. As noted in a media
statement issued by the Forum in February, the situation in the country does not
warrant the enactment of this law and the need for the Bill has not been
sufficiently demonstrated. This is more so especially given that there are
enough laws to deal with the kind of criminal activities that the Bill seeks to
punish. The fact also that the Minister of Safety and Security stated that law
enforcement agencies had managed to 'break the back' of the right-wing threats,
and apprehend successfully those responsible for the bombings in November 2002
is proof that there are enough laws to deal with terrorism in the country.

Essentially, this Bill is not in the interests of South Africa as it is being
forced on weaker states by powerful nations such as the United States and the
United Kingdom in their prosecution of the so called 'war against terror'. The
grand design of the US and the UK to extend their influence and hegemony
throughout the world has become patently clear with their current illegal war
against Iraq.

In a press statement released earlier today, the Forum called for the withdrawal
of the Bill and for the state instead, to put more resources towards the
detection and prosecution of crimes and activities covered by the Bill, but
using the approximately twenty-two existing pieces of legislation covering these
crimes. Over-legislation cannot and will not provide the solution to tackling
crime and its courses. Only a properly implemented crime prevention mechanism,
as encapsulated in the National Crime Prevention Strategy will do.

Issued by the Freedom of Expression Institute on behalf of the Forum Against the
Anti-Terrorism Bill, which includes: -

Media Review Network
Africa Muslims Agency
Media Workers' Association of South Africa
Southern Africa Journalists' Association
Human Rights Media Institute
Anti-Privatisation Front

**The information contained in this autolist item is the sole responsibility of
FXI**