New York. London. Madrid. Mumbai. Mogadishu. Islamabad. Darfur. Baghdad. The litany of terror goes on and on. Will Cape Town join the list? Johannesburg? Durban? With the 2010 Soccer World Cup a few hundred days away, we need to ask the question: is South Africa adequately prepared to deal with the threat of a global terror attack?

During the Apartheid era, South Africa brought into effect a large number of terrorism-related laws designed to curb liberation movements. The Terrorism Act of 1967 was a despised law, allowing suspects to be detained for an indefinite period of time. Black Consciousness founder Steve Biko was the most high-profile victim of this law.

By 1994, many of these laws were abolished, leaving South Africa in the unusual position of having no specific terror laws. With the country undergoing massive transformation, it would seem that terrorism was at the bottom of the agenda.

Enter Planet Hollywood

A series of devastating bombings connected to People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (Pagad) in the greater Cape Town area in 1998/99 resulted in the government attempting to introduce a number of new laws surrounding terrorism. The drafts that followed were seen as being too restrictive and broad, with Cosatu (amongst others) claiming that they were draconian. Later drafts were seen as being too ineffective and narrow.

A proper law was finally enacted in 2004. The Protection of Constitutional Democracy Against Terrorist and Related Activities Act was the culmination of nine years of work by lawmakers to craft an effective terror law.

Offences include: hijacking an aircraft or ship; involvement in explosives; hoaxes; financing terror-related activities; holding hostages; dealing in or facilitating a transaction knowing or suspecting that it is related to an offence; and the providing of weapons and/or training to someone associated with terrorist activity.

Prison sentences in accordance with the new law vary depending on the crime and court, from five years in a magistrate's court, all the way up to life imprisonment in a high court.

International co-operation

South Africa has also sought numerous agreements with other African countries over various terror-related activities; such as a civil aviation agreement signed in 2007 with Senegal and an extradition agreement signed with Swaziland in 2005.

In the wake of 9/11, South Africa's extradition agreements with the USA were spotlighted. An explosive investigation by Carte Blanche into the rendition of Khalid Rashid brought this issue to the public's attention.

According to the former Home Affairs Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, Khalid Rashid was deported to Pakistan, where he was detained. What complicates matters is the fact that he was flown by a private, unchartered jet to be questioned in connection with the London bombings. A 2006 City Press article claims that Rashid "obtained explosives and recruited South Africans to join al-Qaeda".

Despite incidences such as this one, South Africa is often seen as the shining light of the continent, thanks to its freedom of information laws — something that can't be said for the USA and other African countries, where the fear of attacks, terror-related or otherwise, has resulted in many broad and vague laws being passed that restrict freedoms.

Prevention at the expense of freedom?

Laws such as the USA Patriot Act are examples of laws that are arguably unfairly skewed in favour of the government. This law, in its original form, would give the US government the right to indefinitely detain immigrants, conduct surveillance, tap phones, emails and other communications as well as search properties without consent.

We are fortunate that the freedom of information and association are important parts of our Bill of Rights. We also have relatively lax laws when it comes to surveillance and detention — with particular emphasis on civil rights.

The South African version of the 'USA Patriot Act' is the Regulation of Interception of Communications Act of 2002, which sought to regulate surveillance of various forms of communication. This Act put stringent abuse-checking mechanisms in place — forcing the State to provide a vaild reason for the surveillance, previous investigation attempts and the nature of the communication — to ensure that the individual rights of citizens are not abused. This law, while arguably limiting the freedom of civilians, has plugged some of the loopholes in South Africa's terror legislation.

It all comes down to implementation

While South Africa's terror laws are theoretically promising, their practical implementation has yet to be tested. Furthermore, there are some disturbing examples of laxity on the part of South Africa's security institutions. Reports in Asian Times Online suggest that displaced Tamils are using a South African flying club to train pilots and acquire Czech-made light aircraft for the Tamil Tiger liberation movement (regarded internationally as a terrorist organisation). The most plausible explanation for why no action has been taken against these individuals, if this is indeed the case, is that the ANC government supports the Tamil Tiger's war for independence against Sri Lanka.

As if that weren't enough, a damning US terror report, entitled 'Country Reports on Terrorism', slammed South Africa's Department of Home Affairs for poor administration and corruption when it comes to affairs related to immigration.

"Reading between the lines it stops short of labelling us a failed state due to our lack of control of the circulation of false permits and passports, affecting our government’s ability to pursue and intervene in counterterrorism initiatives," Gary Eisenberg, chairperson of the Immigration & Nationality Committee of the International Bar Association said.

In the report, border security and socio-cultural attitudes were also cited as obstacles in the fight against terror; though it noted, positively, South Africa's sharing of intelligence with the USA. Further proof of the unreliability of South Africa's Home Affairs department, is the new requirement by the British for South African citizens to obtain visas in order to visit the UK.

Despite these issues, South Africa has managed to host 144 international events since 1994 with no serious incidents. This was perhaps one of the reasons why South Africa was considered a safe option for the Indian Premier League — with the police, defence force and National Intelligence Agency collaborating to ensure the safety of both players and spectators, according to a police media statement.

As the nature of terror attacks has evolved from the domestic threat of the 20th century to the global threat of the 21st century, our country's attitude towards terrorism also needs to evolve. While our biggest concern for 2010 has, thus far, been crime, our location at the tip of Africa does not protect us from the threat of a terror attack by a militant group hoping to cash in on the publicity of a major international event. Will it take a 9/11 or a 7/7 London bombing before South Africa starts thinking seriously about the threat of global terror? Let's hope not.

Do you think South Africa is ready to deal with a terror threat? Share your thoughts below...

The beggar gauntlet Rebekah Kendal reckons that begging is bad for SA because it fosters a culture of dependency.

Visit our politics page Need the latest political news, features, interviews and profiles? Visit our dedicated page...

Behind closed doors Rebekah Kendal reckons that the real losers in the Percy saga are victims of domestic abuse.