Various news organizations Stakeholders concerned about the future of South Africa's public broadcaster have expressed regret at Parliament's decision to press ahead with the SABC bill without any public hearings scheduled for next month.
According to the revised committee schedule, “Parliament will finalize the flawed and constitutionally questionable SABC bill without hearings,” said Michael, director of the Gibbs Media Leadership Think Tank at the Gordon Institute of Business Science.・Mr. Markovitz stated. Posted in X on monday.
“This bill does not address any of the SABC's core issues and will create yet another problem in this unseemly rush to pass before an election.”
His conclusions were based on a January 25 Portfolio Committee on Notice scheduling “discussion and update on written submissions received on the SABC Bill”. However, the debate on the bill, scheduled for March 8, makes no mention of the submissions from the various parties.
In November, the SOS-backed Public Broadcasting Union and the African Media Monitoring Alliance (MMA) wrote to the Portfolio Committee calling for the bill to be scrapped based on the belief that it “provides no clarity, new structures or objectives”. asked to do so.
“Rather, it is a rehashing of old ideas with regressive concepts and represents a reversal of the SABC's significant gains in independence and credibility.”
The Portfolio Committee responded by calling for written submissions on the SABC Bill. SOS, MMA and the South African National Editors Forum (Sanef) jointly submitted a submission on 16 January expressing their deep concerns about the bill. The groups cited a “series of catastrophic and unconstitutional flaws” in the bill and called for it to be withdrawn.
'shocking'
“It is essential that any legislation involving public broadcasters, which serve millions of South Africans, is given sufficient time for stakeholders to make well-considered and informed representations. It provides more effective and accurate recommendations,” they said.
The SOS and MMA are critical of the urgency with which the bill is passed and that failure to give all stakeholders sufficient time to consider the bill will completely undermine the constitutionality of the consultation process. He reiterated his concerns.
SOS National Coordinator Uyanda Sijotula told TechCentral on Tuesday that the cancellation of public hearings on the bill was “shocking.”
Read: Public confidence in SABC takes another blow
“It was unexpected and at the last minute. We had already booked our flights and accommodation. Initially we thought the cancellation meant the bill would be dealt with after the election. However, that was a mistake. We intend to proceed without holding public hearings. This is shocking considering that this bill was passed by the cabinet and submitted to parliament without any public participation. (Second installment of the bill). As soon as we learned of the cancellation, we sent a letter to Congress.'' Read the letter here (PDF).
The submission was not simply a criticism of the drafting of the SABC Bill.
“Although the majority of organization submissions said this bill should not be passed in its current form, we (SOS, MMA, Sanef), Icasa and e.tv all agreed that the SABC Bill should be withdrawn by the Minister. “I specifically requested that it be rejected or rejected.'' That is completely decided by Congress,'' Sciotula said.
“It is important to note here that the committee has decided to skip a public hearing on the SABC bill, even though 17 written submissions have been received, many from key sector bodies. “It clearly shows that,” she said.
“We want the same level of urgency.” [by the department of communications] In response to the SABC bill being submitted in the draft white paper. [on audio-visual services], currently 13 years late. It is important to address how to ensure public interest content providers are fit for the digital age.
Read: 'Devastating' SABC bill must be withdrawn
“In our view, the only reason for the rush is the need to try to pass the bill before the election. And this is a huge red flag, especially given the worrying provisions within it.” This is appalling parliamentary practice and goes against our commitment to transparency, accountability and independent public broadcasting. It will not endure,” Sciotula said.
The chairman of parliament's communications portfolio committee, Boyce Maneri, could not be reached for comment. – © 2024 News Central Media
