(FXI/IFEX) – The following is an FXI statement: 27 February 2004 FXI CALLS FOR COMPLETE RETRACTION OF ANTI-TERROR BILL The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) has today, Friday 27 February 2004, welcomed the temporary shelving of the controversial “Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Bill” (the Bill) by the ruling African National […]
(FXI/IFEX) – The following is an FXI statement:
27 February 2004
FXI CALLS FOR COMPLETE RETRACTION OF ANTI-TERROR BILL
The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) has today, Friday 27 February 2004, welcomed the temporary shelving of the controversial “Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Bill” (the Bill) by the ruling African National Congress. This means that the Bill will not be tabled in the National Assembly, as was initially envisaged in a bid to have the anti-terrorism law in place by the end of March 2004.
However, the FXI noted that political, rather than constitutional reasons appear to be the real motivation behind the government’s momentary backtracking. The institute argued that this is borne out by the fact that the ruling party’s alliance partner, the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), has, among other things, threatened to call for a national strike and lodge a constitutional court challenge if their concerns regarding the Bill are not addressed. COSATU has warned that the Bill’s definition is so vague and wide that it characterises ordinary forms of industrial action, such as unprotected strikes and pickets, as terrorist activities. The FXI stated that if pursued, COSATU’s actions would have had the effect of tarnishing the ruling party’s image, especially at this crucial time in the run-up to the country’s third general elections slated for 14 April 2004.
The FXI pointed out that from the beginning it had warned that the Bill stood to seriously compromise fundamental rights and freedoms in the country because terrorism as a concept is impossible to define with any sufficient degree of precision. The institute recalled that in a press statement released on behalf of a wide range of civil society organisations on 12 February 2003, it had cautioned that one of the fundamental problems with the then draft bill was that it did not:
“Deviate from its predecessor [the draft Anti-Terrorism Bill, 2000] in any substantive sense. Its main thrust is that it impinges unduly on constitutional freedoms, criminalises recklessly all manner of behavior and, moreover, is largely unnecessary. Among other things, it fails to define what is terrorism and presents instead a vague and extremely broad definition of what constitutes an act, or acts, of terrorism.”
In addition, the FXI recalled its April 2003 written submission to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security that was handling the Bill, where it had argued that there was no justification for the introduction of this type of legislation in South Africa as there were enough laws to deal with the sort of offences contemplated by it. At that time, the FXI had expressed its fears that the very vague and broad definition of ‘terrorist act’ in the Bill:
“Could be used to proscribe a whole range of legitimate civil and political activities in the country, such as demands for land, demonstrations, pickets or civil disobedience campaigns.”
The FXI stated that most of its reservations seem to have been borne out because even the Portfolio Committee has conceded that “there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism”, while COSATU says the broad definition of ‘a terrorist act’ violates the workers’ constitutional right to strike and in effect “returns [South Africa] back to the days of apartheid”.
The FXI pointed to a press statement it had issued earlier in the week in which it urged President Thabo Mbeki not to give his assent to the Bill because it poses a grave threat to fundamental rights and freedoms such as those relating to expression, association and due process.
Furthermore, the FXI reiterated its earlier call that the Bill must be shelved once and for all, as it has proven beyond any reasonable doubt that it is virtually impossible to pass a law of this nature without undermining the regime of civil and political rights in the country. Instead, the institute called on the government to make use of existing criminal laws, which have proved effective in tackling crimes like urban terror and the activities of certain rightwing organisations in parts of the country. Where such laws prove ineffective or insufficient, the FXI said, then they should be revamped and strengthened.
