The Constitutional Court’s ruling in favour of amaBhungane, striking down the unfettered powers of the state to individual and bulk surveillance of data and communications, is a major victory for our rights to privacy.
The apex court has confirmed amaBhungane’s landmark high court victory. The State Security Agency must stop bulk interception immediately, journalists’ sources must be protected, and you must be notified after you were bugged.
The Electoral Laws Amendment Bill, intended in part to protect voters’ personal information, will restrict access to the voters’ roll and the information contained in it. The gains are negligible compared with the cost: a potential threat to democracy itself.
AmaBhungane has approached the high court on an urgent basis to access a “section 417” inquiry into the collapse of Paramount Combat Systems, an armoured vehicle manufacturer that forms part of an international – and politically connected – group.
That there are opportunists who will look at a global tragedy and see only a chance to defraud the public purse underscores an urgent need: we must know who these people are. We need beneficial ownership transparency in procurement.
An investigative outfit with an advocacy programme may raise eyebrows. But amaBhungane has scored major wins for transparency and free speech.
Lockdown shouldn’t have to mean ‘locked out’: amaBhungane champions keeping courts accessible to the media in the time of Covid-19.
After the vague and worrying policy on phone-tracking, officials have tightened the regulations significantly. But let’s see what comes out of the oven.
The state’s first move to use phone tracking to fight covid-19 lacks key details and safeguards against abuse.
Ruling in president versus protector matter a setback, but the game’s not over.
The minister of police is in the odd position of upholding the same spying system that targeted him.
Our challenge to the abuse of the state’s surveillance capacity is coming to a head.
We’re not taking sides in the dispute between the president and the public protector. But the gaping hole in the transparency fence must be fixed.
We have initiated public interest litigation challenging two Acts’ tax secrecy provisions.
The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism has applied to join the legal fray between Cyril Ramaphosa and Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane over the president’s failure to declare very large donations received by the CR17 ANC election campaign.
AmaBhungane and Financial Mail join forces to take on corporate “cover-up”.
The ATI Network is a coalition of civil society and media organisations, who have since 2008 worked collaboratively to advance the constitutional right to information as provided for in the Promotion of Access to Information Act of 2000.
The constitution sets the bar, but can our spies and our state rise to the challenge?
AmaBhungane advocacy coordinator Karabo Rajuili recently addressed the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) on draft regulations for the Political Party Funding Act. She focused on sections of the Act that impact the free flow of information and freedom of the media.
At the heart of the problem is the country’s main communication surveillance law, the Regulation of Interception of Communications Act (Rica).
AmaBhungane’s constitutional challenge to SA’s surveillance law RICA in court.