LONDON (Reuters) - Proposed South African media legislation that has been criticised as an attempt to muzzle the press reminiscent of apartheid-era censorship is likely to be changed to reflect public concern, a government adviser said.

Parts of an information bill that lawmakers from the ruling African National Congress say is designed to protect state secrets have been carelessly formulated, said Joel Netshitenzhe, a member of the government's National Planning Commission.

If passed, the bill would also restrict access to information from official regulators and state-owned enterprises, which critics say could deprive investors of important commercial information.

"The manner in which some of the clauses were formulated contains a carelessness that could have created a wrong impression altogether about what the actual intentions were," Netshitenzhe told Reuters on Wednesday.

He said that as a result of vigorous public debate, changes were being made to ensure that the legislation protected state and commercial information that should be kept secret but did not threaten the freedom of the media or the public.

"There would be changes pertaining to the utilisation of national interest as one of the criteria for classification. Also in the formulations relating to commercial interest, there will be changes," he said, speaking during a visit to London.

"There is continuing debate about how you handle genuinely secret information that, for instance, the media would put into the public domain and use the defence of the public interest," said Netshitenzhe, a former head of South African government communications and information, and a former head of policy in the presidency.

South Africa is looking at how media regulation is handled in countries such as Canada and India, he said.

Separate plans put forward by the African National Congress for a media tribunal to investigate complaints and punish irresponsible reporting have also been criticised by media watchdogs.

Media organisations say the tribunal is an attempt to crush investigative reporters who expose corruption and hold the government accountable.

Netshitenzhe said it was unfortunate that an impression had been created that a decision had been taken on a tribunal when in fact the proposal was still being examined, taking into account South African and global experience.

The lesson from abroad was that it was ill-advised to regulate the press from outside and self-regulation by the print media was better, he said.

The South African media is looking into the question of self regulation and one way of dealing with violation of privacy may be to strengthen the laws on defamation, Netshitenzhe said.

"In my view, when parliament looks at this matter and looks at the international experience, those are the kind of conclusions it should come to," he said.

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter