Do you have news to tell us? Send your e.mails with news and inquiries to:

Register with us for free to follow our news on the right-hand tab






Article posted  by: White Nation correspondent Roodepoort  May 23   2018



Castle Lager now without labels due to the “racist” rhetoric of Ashwin Willemse

Afrikaner lib calling white Boers ” Boerbare” (Boer Barbarians.) 

South African black hippocracy: Zuma Jr only getting R 30 000 fine- White Momberg jailed for same offense. 

Whites in SA now fed up- take up arms to defend their property against communist land expropriation. 

White woman shot by thugs while jogging in Sandton. 









WHITE NATION long ago already reported and questioned this devious RICA and FICA systems Zuma’s regime forcefully imposed onto us as public. We already pointed out that Zuma’s lie that RICA will help “tracking “ stolen phones is a cockamamie  bullsh*t story- but RICA will be imposed to infiltrate our privacy– and also will scrupulous service providers give our personal details for all the corporate vultures to contact and pest us with all kinds of advertisements. We were not wrong!

Professor Jane Duncan has released a new book titled “Stopping the Spies: Constructing and resisting the surveillance state in South Africa.”  In the book, Duncan argues that the Rica process and institutions have been run down, and the public safety and security risks are huge. The Regulation of Interception and Provision of Communication-related Information Act (Rica) came into effect in 2009 and serves as the basis for the lawful interception of citizens’ communications.

The impact is mostly felt by South Africans when they have to produce identification and proof of residence when registering new cellphone numbers. The type of information mobile service providers give to law enforcement officials on receipt of a subpoena as part of the Rica process includes:

  • The International Mobile Subscriber Identity number associated with a SIM.
  • The handset’s International Mobile Equipment Identity number.
  • Call dates and types.
  • Whether a call was made or received and its duration.
  • The number dialed or received.
  • Outgoing SMSs.
  • The base stations the phone connected to and the originating base station.

In her book, Duncan argues there are major flaws in the system. She said the police and the State Security Agency are increasingly heavy users of the Rica system, and that the act has become dated. Duncan pointed to the Glenn Agliotti case, where she argued his acquittal was partly due to the fact that his cellphone records were obtained illegally during the investigation. She quoted Judge Frans Kgomo, who lambasted the cavalier approach of the police to their acquisition of cellphone records.

Abuse of the system by the police was demonstrated by Hodes SC during cross-examination of these cellphone ‘experts’. This elicited a question from me at one stage to the effect whether if and when this country’s state president’s phone records were subpoenaed, whether the cellphone companies would issue them out without much ado. The answer was that those records would be extracted and handed over without asking another question. It is my considered view that if this state of affairs did occur or does occur and is allowed to persist, we should all be afraid.

Activism is needed

In an academic paper with the same title as her book, Duncan argued that state surveillance can be challenged through activism. “Activism against unchecked communications surveillance in the wake of the Snowden revelations have showed that reforms can be won when these practices are resisted,” said Duncan. She said activists who are serious about challenging surveillance state powers need to place both the politics and the economics of surveillance at the forefront of these struggles. “When surveillance becomes part of the programs of mass movements, various questions begged to be answered,” she said. Instead of focusing on “surveillance as being everywhere and nowhere”, which can be paralyzing, she proposes bringing “agency back into the picture”. This can be done by challenging individuals rather than a faceless structure that cannot be changed through activism.

Rica challenged in South Africa

In 2017, the amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism launched a constitutional challenge against Rica and unregulated bulk communication interceptions. amaBhungane argues that there are five constitutional flaws were Rica regulates, including that the target of the interception order is never informed of the order, and that there is no oversight for the storage of data by private companies and the accessing of this data by state officials.

The amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism has launched a constitutional challenge against the Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-Related Information Act (RICA) and unregulated bulk interception. “RICA serves as the basis for the lawful interception of citizens’ communications, but we contend that there are fundamental flaws in RICA and that various sections are inconsistent with the Constitution,” said amaBhungane. “We are going to court, starting with the high court in Pretoria, so as to strengthen the protection of journalists and the public against the abuse of this arguably necessary, but intrusive legislation,” it said.

The complaint addresses two categories:

  1. The areas where RICA regulates surveillance, but does so inadequately.
  2. Where it fails to regulate certain monitoring activities at all.

Where RICA does regulate, amaBhungane argues that there are five constitutional flaws:

  1. The target of the interception order is never informed of the order – even after the period of interception has ended and an investigation concluded.
  2. RICA is silent about the procedure state officials should follow when examining, copying, sharing, and storing the intercepted data. Where the interception is found to be irrelevant, there is no certifiable procedure for the data to be destroyed.
  3. RICA requires private companies to store certain information, but does not provide oversight mechanisms.
  4. There are deficiencies in the regime for oversight by the retired judge nominated to rule on interception applications.
  5. RICA fails to protect targets of interception who have a legal duty to protect the confidentiality of communications and sources, such as lawyers and journalists.

There is a second category of problems with RICA, in that it does not regulate certain kinds of interception at all.

  • RICA does not cater for the regulation of “bulk interception”, which uses computers to scan massive flows of data.
  • RICA does not provide an approval mechanism regarding interception or surveillance of “foreign signals”, which may ensnare people in South Africa.

The intelligence community presently monitors such communication without a warrant. We argue that because it inevitably limits fundamental rights… it is essential that its implementation is subject to proper checks and balances,” said amaBhungane. The founding papers were served on the Minister of Justice, police, state security and communications, and interested parties last week.