South Africa's New Secrecy Bill Putting Country's Democracy at Stake

not transferred to countries outside European economic area unless country has adequate protection for the individual

The Privacy Protection Act of 1980 protects journalists from being required to turn over to law enforcement any work product and documentary materials, including sources before it is disseminated to the public. Journalists who most need the protection of

As the anti-apartheid struggle ramped up in South Africa in the 1980s, the Kagiso Trust was formed as a NGO to support the struggle against apartheid and to distribute funds from the European Union and other donors. This was to provide the uplifting and empowerment of disadvantaged communities in South Africa through various development initiatives. At this stage, the core focus of the Kagiso Trust was on “building partnerships and collaborations to strengthen the implementation capacity of people and organisations in development”[1]. Following South Africa’s transition into democracy in 1994, the Kagiso Trust refocused its goals and efforts on education [1], which is considered a critical component in the eradication of inequality.

As a Canadian in today’s society we believe we have a certain set of inalienable rights. One of those rights that seem to be at the forefront of the 2015 Canadian election is privacy. As Dr. Kent Roach and Dr. Craig Forcese state, “privacy is, in our society, the right to be left alone by the state.” The Conservative upbringing of Bill C-51 challenges the ideology around our right to be private, as well as our government’s role in the protection of Canada from threats of terrorism. The Harper government essentially, will increase their role in national security to keep a constant watchful eye on potentially harmful situations and end them before anyone is hurt or killed. If passed, the bill would allow the government to arrest anyone suspected of terrorism without that person even committing a crime. Furthermore, the language used in the bill is extremely vague and makes one question, where the line will be drawn? Will our basic rights to peaceful protest and free speech be affected? Unfortunately perhaps they will. One of the most concerning parts of the bill in regard to privacy is the fact that the government will now be able to access several sensitive documents about citizens from top agencies such as the Public Health Agency, Canadian Border Services Agency as well as the Canadian Border Services Agency. Privacy is changing in Canada. This is a landmark bill and as such it is creating quite a splash in the ongoing Canadian Election.

The government keeping secrets from the public behind closed doors is hurting our society. There have been meetings with the FISA court which allows government lawyers to come in before federal judges in secret (quigly). There is

The act authorizes federal and local government agencies to unethical and unconstitutional investigations, surveillance, and exchange of information on every American citizen. Undoubtedly, this action violates explicitly the Fourth Amendment, as consequence our privacy has been compromised since then. The U.S government can normally spying on its own people and conduct secret investigations, warrantless searches, and indefinite detentions based solely on their beliefs. Every time a US citizen picks or make a phone call forces to pause regarding whether if we have been listening by the National security agency (NSA), which at the same time infringing our freedom of expression guarantee by the First Amendment. Under this unprecedented surveillance program, the government agencies have the ability and capacity to build an enormous range of database with information on every American affiliation and associations with others, even if we are not related or involved in any terrorism activities or connections whatsoever. Moreover, government agencies are forced multiples businesses and organizations like internet and phone providers, universities, airliners, employers, and medical facilities, etc. to turn over their client’s

The schematic format of this paper is to provide a brief inquiry of Parliament’s response to the legislature, examine the issues surrounding oversight, and investigate the violations of constitutional rights. Although C-51 is divided into five parts, the following experts will examine privacy protection from parts one through four. These include, the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act, the Secure Air Travel Act, the Criminal Code, and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act (Parliament of Canada, 2015).

Opening, The Patriot Act provides an easy excuse for governmental individuals to intrude on citizens' privacy. As "The USA PATRIOT Act: Preserving Life and Liberty," expresses, "Examining business records often provides the key that investigators are looking for to solve a wide range of crimes. Investigators might seek select records from hardware stores or chemical plants, for example, to find out who bought materials to make a bomb, or bank records to see who's sending money to terrorists. Law enforcement authorities have always been able to obtain business records in criminal cases through grand jury subpoenas, and continue to do so in national security cases where appropriate." The previous excerpt justifies the claim that the act is a

The Act? The Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was signed by none other than George bush on October 6 2001, the act itself is abbreviated for uniting and strengthening America by providing appropriate tools required to intercept and obstruct terrorism act of 2001. Now what this act contained was a series of amendments, or orders that a lot of aspects of modern society had to be monitored and recorded so that way another attack like 9/11 wouldn’t happen. Basically they enhance domestic security against terrorism, heightened surveillance procedures, increased border security, removing obstacles to investigate terrorism,and increased information sharing.They made a wall between everyone's life and theirs with a hug peep hole. Any sensible person would say that such action is for the national security of our country and it makes us a safer country. Although this does make for a huge security benefit for our country, it is sad to say that nobody really has true privacy. How much privacy do we really

The PATRIOT Act is the perfect law to show how the lines of how to handle bad legislation easily blur. This is a law that allows the federal government to strip a person

This law gives companies that are private more flexibility to report public information about the number of national security demands for surveillance they obtain. It needs declassification with the FISA courts and their view that deals with the legal ruling also a summary if they cannot get the declassification. It made to stop interpretation that secret like the one that granted the massive collection of their phone records of the United States. Also, have transparency, it will let the people know if any of these powers is abused granting the private companies, to be able to release more information also acts of surveillance. The law on the freedom act will also give a judicial review of any gag orders, which has to deal with any request from the NSL’s. This law helps citizens put their mind at ease with the patriot act. It violations of privacy rights bring balance, to society again and obtain freedom back to the people. Nevertheless, at the same time help, law enforcement agencies still have the tools; they need to fight to protect the United States from any enemies and their threat to attack our society (Ken Dilanian, 2015).

     The Patriot Act is a bill that was passed in the wake of 9/11/01. Not even two months after the horrific event which we all know as 911, the bill was passed with great haste and secrecy. The bill was passed on October 26, 2001. The bill was passed to raise the security of the country. Sadly many speculate that most of the members in congress did not even read the 342 page bill. Within a matter of days the executive branch with its new powers began to initiate many new executive orders, policies, regulations and

"Secrecy and a free, democratic government don't mix," President Harry Truman once said. Harry Truman understood the importance of an open government in a free society. Unfortunately, George W. Bush has a different outlook. From the first days of his administration, President Bush has taken steps to tighten the government's hold on information and limit public scrutiny of its activities. Expansive assertions of executive privilege, restrictive views of the Freedom of Information Act, increasing use of national security classification, stonewalling in response to congressional request for information – all these were evident even before the September 11 attacks (At Issue: Has the Bush administration misused government

The Freedom of Information Act was enforced when our government realized the importance of the relationship between access to information and government accountability. This act enables citizens to view a plethora of different files and records from government agencies. This act proved to be “a principal instrument for breaking down bureaucratic secrecy in American public administration” (p. 62).

Many of the contemporary issues in South Africa can easily be associated with the apartheid laws which devastated the country. The people of South Africa struggle day by day to reverse “the most cruel, yet well-crafted,” horrific tactic “of social engineering.” The concept behind apartheid emerged in 1948 when the nationalist party took over government, and the all-white government enforced “racial segregation under a system of legislation” . The central issues stem from 50 years of apartheid include poverty, income inequality, land ownership rates and many other long term affects that still plague the brunt of the South African population while the small white minority still enjoy much of the wealth, most of the land and opportunities