Section 70
Mandatory disclosure in public interest
Part 3 · Access to Records of Private Bodies · Chapter 4 — Grounds for Refusal of Access to Records
Despite any other provision of this Chapter, the head of a private body must grant a request for access to a record of the body contemplated in section 63(1), 64(1), 65, 66(a) or (b), 67, 68(1) or 69(1) or (2) if— (a) the disclosure of the record would reveal evidence of— (i) a substantial contravention of, or failure to comply with, the law; or (ii) imminent and serious public safety or environmental risk; and (b) the public interest in the disclosure of the record clearly outweighs the harm contemplated in the provision in question.
Source: SAFLII — Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000 (consolidated, updated 11 October 2024) — cross-checked verbatim before publishing.
Beyond the text
What this means in practice
- The override: despite most refusal grounds, you must grant access if the record reveals a substantial breach of the law or an imminent, serious public-safety or environmental risk — and the public interest in disclosure clearly outweighs the harm.
- It is a high bar, but it means ‘mandatory refusal’ is never truly absolute.
- It applies specifically to the ss.63(1), 64(1), 65, 66, 67, 68(1) and 69 grounds.
Relevant tool
PopiGuard builds the s.70 public-interest test into your refusal decisions — so a defensible override is never overlooked.