Chairperson, hon Burgess, thank you for your courteous remarks. Sir, during the Mbeki era, the Kasrils Intelligence Ministry set itself the task of writing a law which would constitutionally answer these specific questions: One, what may be classified; two, by whom; three, when should declassification occur and who should do it; and four; what procedures, systems for review, reports and requests should be provided for?
However, the questions were not answered in the 2008 Kasrils Bill, which said that just about everything could be classified under the then notoriously broadly-defined national interest, by almost everybody. The 2001-11 ad hoc committee has, however, now answered these questions in the 68 meetings that were held. We sat for many hours.
So, what may be classified? We have given the answers - only sensitive information actually likely to cause demonstrable harm to national security at three thresholds of damage. Our only remaining problem, as the DA, is the fact that the top secret level is not sufficiently distinguishable from the secret level. For the rest, we succeeded in achieving 99% of what we argued.
Regarding the next question - how is national security defined - it is, as it ought to be, largely about keeping us safe from various forms of force. It is 95% of what the hon Maynier argued, and specifically excludes lawful political activity, advocacy, protest or dissent.
What may not be classified? What were once nonbinding directions have, at my request, been turned into conditions and constitutionalised. Whereas the 2008 version asserted that secrecy exists to protect national interest, the provision now reads, on our formulation following the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that secrecy is justifiable only when necessary to protect national security. All of us consider this conditions clause to be the real breakthrough in the Bill.
Who may classify? Only the security services, as we argued, as against all 1 001 organs of state, with the Minister allowing other departments, on good cause shown, to opt in after gazetting that fact.
When does declassification occur? On the opposition side we were ready to adopt Dr Verne Harris' recommendation for self-executing declassification. But, do not underestimate the effects of the declassification provisions which we have adopted against the new, strict criteria. Do not underestimate the reporting and reviewing requirements. The creation of the independent review panel is the ANC's idea, with the opposition invited to draft and the hon Steve Swart doing the bulk of the work. The panel is independent and it can review, set aside and instruct reclassification.
We have, in other words, done some very good work. We have rewritten the whole Bill and we have cleaned up Ronnie's mess. That gentleman has been quoting his own Bill in campaigning against this one. He has repeatedly quoted, verbatim, from his own notorious old clauses on national interest and then called the new Bill a "dog's breakfast of toxic gruel". We threw Ronnie's breakfast into the rubbish bin a very long time ago.
Now, why, sir, despite all the gains that vindicate the parliamentary process, will we vote against this Bill? It is because the ANC failed to clear the last hurdle, and instead of fixing up their offences has now gone walk about with the Bills through the provinces.
We will vote against it because we think that the offences, especially of possession and disclosure, and especially in respect of the intelligence services, offend against the right to receive and invite information. As they stand, they will have a chilling effect on media freedom.
That is why South Africans, led by civil society and the DA, have protested in their thousands. To suggest that they, although civil organisations, are proxies funded by foreign spies, as you did here today, speaks of a paranoiac approach. It is absurd; they are our people. That to me seems like paranoia. Those are all of our people out there protesting.
I think a certain paranoia also underlies the intelligence clause. Why is there a separate offence of possession and disclosure in respect of the intelligence services, but applicable to all persons? Let us not forget that the Cabinet issued a directive in 2003 - yes, President Mbeki, who else - to spy on competition between and within political parties. Today the hon Minister confirms that he has a concern about information peddlers sowing, I think he said, disunity within the ranks of government. Mangaung lies ahead. [Interjections.]
Let me quote one very last time, and I have quoted the Rev Frank Chikane too often, "Corrupt intelligence services are the most dangerous threat to the security and integrity of the state". [Time expired.] [Applause.]