23 January 2015 by and

Right2Know Campaign & South African History Archive Trust // Minister of Police and Another

On 22 January 2015, Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr's Pro Bono and Human Rights practice received notice from the State Attorney that the Minister of Police and the SAPS' National Deputy Information Officer had withdrawn their application for leave to appeal the recent decision of the High Court, granting the Right2Know Campaign (R2K) and the South African History Archives Trust (SAHA)) access to the list of National Key Points declared in terms of the National Key Points Act (the Key Points Act).

Jacquie Cassette, the Head of the Probono and Human Rights Practice at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, who represented the R2K and SAHA in this case, explains, “In his judgment Sutherland J had declared the decision by the respondents to refuse access to the list to be unlawful and unconstitutional and ordered them to supply all the names of places or areas that have been declared Key Points within 30 days of the judgment. He also ordered that they pay the costs of the application including the costs of two counsel.

“The withdrawal of the application for leave to appeal means that Sutherland J's judgment now stands and pursuant to his order we yesterday finally received a list of places that have been declared National Key Points. This list has been forwarded to our clients R2K and SAHA,” Cassette explains.

“In his judgment, which made some key findings concerning the application of the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) and its proper interpretation, Sutherland J had also rejected the Minister and the Deputy Information Officer's contention that the list could not be revealed in the interests of national security. He found that no evidence had been adduced to support their allegations about threats to national security,” she explains.

According to Sutherland J, the "rationale offered by the respondents [was] spoilt by the conduct of the Government itself, because evidence was adduced of ministers having furnished details of key points to Parliament for the whole world to know. . ."

Sutherland J concluded that given the serious allegations concerning abuse of the Key Points Act and the failure to set up a special account for the recovery of public moneys expended on securing Key Points of owners (who by law were required to bear the costs of securing them) there was a need for transparency in order to repair public confidence.  

“The withdrawal of the application for leave to appeal and the disclosure of the list of Key Points is accordingly a small but an important victory for the principle of transparency upon which our democracy depends,” Cassette adds.

The information and material published on this website is provided for general purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

We make every effort to ensure that the content is updated regularly and to offer the most current and accurate information. Please consult one of our lawyers on any specific legal problem or matter.

We accept no responsibility for any loss or damage, whether direct or consequential, which may arise from reliance on the information contained in these pages.

Please refer to the full terms and conditions on the website.

Copyright © 2020 Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr. All rights reserved. For permission to reproduce an article or publication, please contact us cliffedekkerhofmeyr@cdhlegal.com