Hon Chairperson and hon members, the fight is not over. I will tell you which fight. Just over one year ago, this House was faced with the piece of legislation that threatened our democracy's foundational values of freedom and openness. In response to that threat, Parliament sprung into life. With unprecedented opposition co-operation, the government was forced into a series of U-turns.
In the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces, we refused to back down because we knew the dangers that the Bill presented. I wish to pay tribute to the DA members who have worked tirelessly ever since to improve this Bill - the hon Dene Smuts and hon David Maynier; and in the NCOP, the hon Alf Lees and hon Darryl Worth. By working with other members of the committee and opposition parties, we were unflagging in our determination to fight this unconstitutional Bill. Outside Parliament too, a well-organised campaign demonstrated the determination of all our citizens to defend South Africa's hard-won democracy. It showed that our independent media and civic organisations are indeed strong.
I believe there are two foundational principles that are widely accepted in this House across party political boundaries. The first principle is that democracy cannot work when security exceeds its proper limits. The second principle is that the media cannot function when important information is suppressed. Bad governments thrive under the cloak of darkness. Those who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear. The danger of this Bill was that its provisions could have shielded those who engaged in corruption and shady acts.
It was also tabled within the context of what seemed to be a revived security state: the cover-up of the Presidential Handbook; the secrecy behind the spending of R206 million worth of public money on President Zuma's Nkandla homestead; the circumstances surrounding the Marikana tragedy; and the continued failure to appoint a head of the Special Investigating Unit, SIU. All of these related events and others, pointed to how the government was attempting to close down the democratic state.
The Bill could have been used to keep the lid on embarrassing information about the government, and could have been deployed to prevent new information from emerging in the future. So, we held the line, and the outcome was a greatly improved Bill. But we cannot stop here because this fight is not yet over. The fact remains that this Bill is still flawed because Parliament does not have the power to legislate on matters yhat are exclusive provincial competences.
From the beginning, the Bill ought to have been tagged as a section 76 Bill to allow for proper provincial scrutiny. Hon members will know that, in the past, the Constitutional Court has declared Acts of Parliament null and void because they were not correctly processed as section 76 Bills. This is exactly what happened with the passage of the Communal Land Rights Act, Clara. In our view, this Bill, likewise, does not pass constitutional muster.
I sense that there are hon members in the government benches who know in their hearts that this Bill is still unconstitutional. The question is, will they stand up and be counted? Will members of the Congress of South African Trade Unions, Cosatu, continue the fight after their leaders' valiant presentation on this Bill to the ad hoc committee? Will you stand on principle and take up the fight with us?
Last year, we know that 35 members of Cosatu, in this House, voted for the secrecy Bill even though their organisation opposed it publically. Today, their legacy is at stake. I hope those hon members will do the right thing.
The fight is not yet over. This House has a grave responsibility to ensure that every piece of legislation that we pass is aligned to the Constitution. Therefore, we will be seeking a legal opinion from senior council on the constitutionality of the entire Bill. [Interjections.]