If the handbook is an accurate representation, Mxolisi Ndimande’s story has the typical elements of the state gathering intelligence on civic organisations. When the Political Discussion Forum in Katlehong were marching under the United Front, his name was submitted to the Ekurhuleni Municipality as an organiser. The next day he received a call. “Who are these people who want to march all the time, to disrupt the work of the government?” asked a woman calling from a private number and claiming to represent the State Security Agency (SSA). She wanted the names of steering committee members.

Soon after, Ndimande saw two white bakkies outside a planning meeting. Three men stood around one of the bakkies, its bonnet open as though it had broken down. But when members filed out of the meeting, the three men started asking questions: what did they speak about, who are the leaders, how was the meeting organised? The march was delayed, but eventually its organisers had to meet police to discuss the details. Among the five officials in the room, including a superintendent from the Ekurhuleni Metro Police and the provincial commander of Public Order Policing, was a man introduced as a colonel from Crime Intelligence. He asked one question: why they were protesting instead of engaging with authorities?

Mxolisi Ndimande’s story is typical of those in Big Brother Exposed: Stories of South Africa’s Intelligence Structures Monitoring and Harassing Activist Movements. The handbook was compiled by Right2Know and released on Tuesday at the offices of the National Union of Metalworkers SA (Numsa), which has accused the intelligence agencies of covertly gathering information on its activities since deciding to form its leftist coalition for socialism, the United Front. Ndimande’s and other stories in the handbook are examples of what many people expect of the State Security Agency and Crime Intelligence: clumsy attempts to monitor organisations and individuals seen as threatening to the political status quo. Alone, the stories don’t mean much to those of us already cynical about the freedom allowed to “opposition” activists. Together they chart a dangerous trajectory.

“These very powerful and untransparent agencies run the risk of conflating the interests of the state or the governing party, with real potential threats to people’s safety and security,” reads the report. “When intelligence agencies monitor the activities of civic activists, it may well violate the constitutional right to privacy, as well as international principles on the protection of privacy. It can also be a form of intimidation, and have a chilling effect the freedom to campaign, which is enshrined in other constitutional rights. The threat of surveillance can also sow division within organisations, causing members to suspect one another as informers. There are real threats to people’s safety in South Africa where many people would agree that the intelligence agencies have a role to play: these tackling include gangsterism and organised crime, xenophobic attacks, the worrying trend of political assassinations – and, of course, police brutality. There are also potential threats to South Africa’s constitutional order, including the cancer of corruption in government and the private sector, and the risk of political manipulation of important state institutions such as the police and security agencies. It is clear that the situation becomes worse, not better, when intelligence agencies turn their sights on political activists and civic organisations who are working to defend and build democracy on the ground.”

Big Brother Exposed details at least nine instances where it’s alleged the SSA or Crime Intelligence have been monitoring and interfering in activists and organisations across the country. Activists, often on a local level, academics and unionists are targeted. The trend seems to be the same. An intelligence official contacts a member or leader of an organisation planning protest action that could embarrass the government or be seen as the beginning of a bigger movement. Sometimes they introduce themselves as intelligence officials, sometimes not. They ask for information, perhaps offer to pay for it. There is a veneer of intimidation. They sit in on police meetings with the organisations on their planned activities. And they get irate if they don’t get what they’re looking for.

Such state monitoring isn’t unique to South Africa, nor does it seem well executed. It looks like SSA and Crime Intelligence officials grew up reading Nancy Drew, but finding real investigations a little too difficult, are hacking away as amateur sleuths for their political bosses, stumbling around activist circles without disguising their work. While invasive and annoying, the incidents appear not to pose a dire threat to activists. In some instances it’s difficult to even tell who is responsible for making inquiries: Crime Intelligence, the SSA, some dude with a grudge?

But Big Brother exposed is far too reminiscent of the past: spies monitoring and in some cases intimidating local activists because there is a paranoia about the threat they pose to political stability, in this case, the ANC’s hold on government. What’s worrying is what this report could suggest. If we know about these clumsy incidences, what else is going on? How often are the security services making illogical leaps connecting national security, political stability and organisations democratically participating in community issues? And if the report suggests much of the intelligence gathering on civic organisations is collected to effectively protect the ANC, what might the party know or sanction?

While the report points out that in the early 2000s President Thabo Mbeki expanded the National Intelligence Agency (which is now part of the SSA) mandate to include political and economic intelligence, it also clearly outlines how the General Intelligence Laws Amendment Act of 2013 states that political activity, advocacy, protest or dissent are not considered national security issues. But in these cases, that’s what the intelligence officials are focusing on.

State officials will of course deny these allegations and point to the available recourse, the Inspector General of Intelligence who can investigate alleged abuses. But it’s hard to take any denials seriously. Hostility towards the ANC government and incidences that embarrass the state are regularly described by leaders as threats to the nation, plots to overthrow the state by an unelected minority. Just look at the reaction on issues such as the rise of the EFF, the Nkandla report, disruptions to the State of the Nation Address and the platinum belt strike. DM