Wyndham Hartley's column, Journalists must bear the brunt on disclosure (October 23), is informed by ignorance about media freedom, or a deliberate misunderstanding of the manner in which journalists should execute their duty.

For Hartley, there is only one option, to publish, protect sources and wait for the inevitable knock on the door. Journalists must not expect any special treatment. This is a rather poor argument and misses the point by a wide margin.

The question of whether journalists should be compelled to testify before the Hefer commission seems to have created the impression that by exempting them from giving evidence the commission will be treating journalists as a "special breed" of professionals.

A submission to the commission last week by the Freedom of Expression Institute, the Media Institute of Southern African and the South African National Editors Forum said that by requiring journalists to testify before other means of seeking the same information have been tried and exhausted the commission will be doing a great disservice to the public. Journalists should not be the first port of call.

Our constitution recognises the role of a vibrant media in our democracy, and the Constitutional Court has said a free media is critical in fostering democratic practice and ethos. The argument is not about "publishing and perishing" but about publishing and still living to publish another day.

Simon Kimani Ndung'u
Head: Anti-Censorship Programme Freedom of Expression Institute

With acknowledgements to Simon Kimani Ndung'u and the Business Day.