Zuma sends Info Bill back to Assembly

President Jacob Zuma has referred the controversial Protection of State Information Bill back to the National Assembly, he said on Thursday.

   

Hosting a lunch for members of the parliamentary Press Gallery Association, he said he did not think the bill would pass constitutional muster and had therefore sent it back to the Assembly for consideration.

 

Here are President Zuma's remarks: 

 

The Protection of State Information Bill was passed by Parliament and referred to me for assent and signing into law.

 

The Bill is intended to repeal an old apartheid law, the Protection of Information Act of 1982 which is not in line with the Constitution.

 

It must provide for a coherent justifiable system of regulating classification, reclassification and declassification of sensitive government information.

 

It is also intended to protect valuable information.

 

This is information relating to citizen’s personal information such as identity documents, drivers licences, birth and marriage certificates, company registration information and others. This will help to ensure that this information is not altered, lost or destroyed.

 

The second information that will be protected is sensitive information which relates to national security.

 

I have given consideration to the Bill in its entirety and the various opinions and commentaries regarding the constitutionality and tagging of the Bill.

 

After consideration of the Bill and having applied my mind thereto, I am of the view that the Bill as it stands does not pass constitutional muster. 

 

The Constitution requires that the President must assent to and sign the Bill referred to him or her by the National Assembly.

 

However, in terms of section 79(1) of the Constitution, if the President has reservations about the constitutionality of the Bill, he or she may refer it back to the National Assembly for reconsideration.

 

In this regard, I have referred the Bill to the National Assembly for reconsideration insofar as sections of the Bill, in particular Sections 42 and 45, lack meaning and coherence, consequently are irrational and accordingly are unconstitutional.

 

-Jacanews/Sapa