[Owasp-cape-town] Fwd: [Cybercrimes Bill] REPORTBACK on meeting with Deputy Minister of Justice John Jeffrey (JJ).
timo.goosen at owasp.org
Mon Feb 29 12:47:14 UTC 2016
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Murray Hunter <muz.hunter at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:12 PM
Subject: [Cybercrimes Bill] REPORTBACK on meeting with Deputy Minister of
Justice John Jeffrey (JJ).
To: stop-cybercrimes-bill at googlegroups.com
Please find below a reportback on the meeting with the Deputy Minister of
Justice on Cybercrimes Bill. (I also missed an email from Christo at OWASP
about joining the meeting - have been in touch with him and will see if
OWASP can set up a follow-up meeting with Deputy Minister/DoJ)
*REPORTBACK on meeting with Deputy Minister of Justice John Jeffrey (JJ).*
This meeting was attended by the following folks from R2K: Alison Tilley,
Ghalib Galant, Karabo Rajuili, Mark Weinberg, Murray Hunter and Nonhlanhla
Chanza on 24 Feb.
We were given to understand there was no specific agenda to this meeting
and arrived with a range of issues to raise with JJ. However, it appears
the meeting had been set up primarily as a consultation on R2K’s submission
and critique of the draft Cybercrimes Bill.
*THE SUMMARY: *
The Deputy Minister has intervened in the drafting of the Cybercrimes Bill
to avoid further embarassment and to prevent the Cybercrimes Bill from
becoming another “Secrecy Bill” political crisis. Thus the Deputy Minister
is putting pressure on the DoJ to engage in further consultations and
significant redrafting of the Bill before it arrives in Parliament. They
have also asked R2K to submit suggestions for someone to join an advisory
panel on redrafting the Bill.
It was generally a friendly and productive meeting. We did not discuss the
content of the Bill but instead looked at the process:
*1. Further consultations:*
After the Deputy Minister’s intervention, we are told the Bill will undergo
extensive redrafting and be opened to further consultation. We are given to
expect we will be included in this consultation and can widen the door to
ensure others will as well. In particular our concern is to ensure that
this is not a process of closed-door consultations with big industry
players, but something which speaks to the broader civic tech community and
the human rights and social justice community. This point needs to be
followed up - because we do believe the Bill's principle drafter is going
to be resistant to following through with this.
In general though, while we have reason to be cynical about promises of
further consultations, I haveheard from someone who has been engaging the
DoJ on this matter that several very contentious parts of the draft Bill
have already been scrapped in the last month — so there is cause to believe
the Department will have to put its money where its mouth is.
*2. Expert Panel*
The DoJ has asked for us to suggest names of human rights legal experts who
could form part of an advisory panel to guide the work on the Bill. As I
understand it, this panel is made up of information security experts, legal
advisers from the NPA and SAPS.
*The R2K caucus who came out of that meeting are proposing that we suggest
Alison Tilley, who would sit in her personal capacity. We have also floated
the idea with Jane Duncan and Anriette Esterhuysen, who are considering it.*
*3. Opening up the process*
I'm aware that a number of people who weighed in on this Bill have also
heard from the DoJ or the Deputy Ministry. However, if you have *not* and
would like to be put in touch with them, please drop me an email.
*4. Timelines: *
Because the President mentioned the Cybercrimes Bill in his SONA reply, the
Department is under additional pressure to ensure it is prioritised and
tabled in Parliament this year. We understand 3 months is being allocated
to finalising the next draft of the Bill.
*5. Mapping stakeholders*
Attached is a list of the people and organisations that weighed in on the
draft Bill - circulated by JJ's chief of staff. (Hope this is POPI
*---If it's of interest, here's a summary of other issues raised*
They will look into our complaints about trying to get information from the
RICA judge. The Deputy Minister, and even worse the Department’s legal
adviser, were sadly not up to date on the international best practice when
it came to minimum transparency in surveillance laws. (e.g. people should
be notified after the fact if a warrant was issued in their name - even if
it’s 6 months or 12 months later.)
The Department is apparently intending to *start *work on reforming Rica in
*2017* (but the Deputy Minister says realistically this would be closer to
2018) The Minister asked for submissions on any current
The national budget tabled this week does include provision for the office
of the information regulator. While the justice committee in Parliament has
been slow to proceed in appointing the IR and implementing SA’s data
protection law, it would seem things are now proceeding.
*Whistleblower protection and the amendments to the Protected Disclosures
Act (SA’s whistleblower law):*
the Amendment Bill is largely positive and will go a long way to extending
protection of whistleblowers. However, it must first be passed through
Parliament. The fact that this Bill was was referenced in the President’s
SONA reply means that it will likely be prioritised through Parliament.
*Access to copies of the Constitution:*
Nonhlanhla raised that copies of the Constitution are meant to be readily
available at govt buildings and rarely are. They have promised to link us
up with distributors.
*Hate Speech Bill*The Hate speech legislation will have a provision around
criminalising racist speech. The Bill will go to cabinet soon, and we
should get in touch with the hate crimes working group for more detailed
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Stop the Cybercrimes Bill!" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to stop-cybercrimes-bill+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to stop-cybercrimes-bill at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 17666 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Owasp-cape-town