Media guardians appalled by Chauke's actions

On 17 October 2006, Chauke sharply criticised editors for talking to Cabinet about the Bill when it was before Parliament and thus, he said, in effect passing a motion of no confidence in the parliamentary process.

In the statement issued to the press, MISA-SA and the FXI object to Chauke's strictures as being uninformed and a distortion of what occurred.

Not informed

They assert that the media was not informed of the intention by the Home Affairs Ministry to withdraw the exemptions from the provisions of the Films and Publications Act that the media were granted in 1962, nor was there any discussion with the media over the consequences of this drastic proposal which in the media's view would introduce pre-publication censorship on print and broadcast media.

When the media discovered the import of the Bill and that a deadline of 10 August had been set for public comment on it, MISA-SA emailed Chauke on 10 August requesting a fortnight's extension of time for making submissions.

In addition, MISA-SA, together with FXI and SANEF, sent joint representations to Chauke's Parliamentary Committee outlining objections to the Bill.

When it was learned that the Bill was being presented to Cabinet for onward transmission to Parliament, MISA-SA in concert with the FXI sent a message to President Thabo Mbeki, requesting that he delay the passage of the Bill to Parliament so that there could be comprehensive consultation between the media and the Department.

Submitted before

According to the statement:

MISA-SA and the FXI emphasise that this approach to the Cabinet was before the Bill was submitted to Parliament by the cabinet.Subsequently, the Home Affairs Ministry, and later the Minister in the Presidency, Essop Pahad, invited SANEF for discussions about the Bill and the Cabinet and then took the decision to delay the Bill for proper consultation. MISA-SA and FXI have welcomed the Cabinet decision -- which was what we requested in our original request to President Mbeki -- though we are at a loss to understand why the decision was not made in response to that letter.

MISA-SA and the FXI are now calling upon Chauke to clarify statements he is recorded as having made on 13 September, when the Home Affairs Department briefed the Committee on the Bill:

According to minutes of the Parliamentary Monitoring Group, Chauke argued the following: "...If the Constitutional Court found that legislation was unconstitutional and that the rights of the press who "provided pornography as they pleased" were being infringed upon then one should perhaps consider amending of the Constitution...If one were going to take a mandate from the people it might lead to the amendment of the Constitution. Members should remember that this was 'the government of the people by the people' and that everyone, including the Constitutional Court understood this concept very well." (Quote from the Parliamentary Monitoring Group minutes.)

If this is indeed what Chauke said, then MISA-SA and the FXI are shocked by this injudicious statement. It is also an extremely dangerous statement that cannot be left unchallenged, as it feeds into calls by pro-death penalty and anti-gay marriage groups to amend the Constitution. These are all indicators of a growing conservative nationalist politics in South Africa, which undermines many of the progressive values enshrined in the Constitution that unite South Africans as a nation.

It is particularly shocking for such an inference to have been made by a Parliamentarian, as it undermines the very basis on which laws are being made. The Constitution is not an inconvenience to be tossed away when its contents do not suit Parliamentarians and their constituencies; it should stand above the vagaries of political sentiment.

MISA-SA and the FXI also state that they are unaware of the basis on which Chauke infers that pornography is freely available in the media.