It should be noted that all the Business Units are linked by the common vision of the Department, namely:

The Department aims to achieve this by:

• Promoting constitutional democracy;
• Providing appropriate legal services; and
• The sound management of courts and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

The Business Unit: Court Services deals with the latter objective, in particular, and has as aim to provide an enabling environment for the provision of swift, accessible and economic legal redress to all customers of the courts by –

• Providing administrative support to the judiciary
• Providing and managing court facilities for all court all court users
• Developing and implementing policy on the functioning of the courts

The core business of the Business Unit is explicit from the mission and vision provided below:

The aim is to implement a decentralised court services delivery model that will devolve appropriate delegations and powers to Court Managers that are being appointed country-wide to enable them to manage the courts in order to –

This will enable the Department to provide efficient support services to the Judiciary, including –

Apart from the cost of litigation, other important factors that inhibit access to justice and are recognized as such by the Department in its core business are delays in the legal process, undue formalities in the legal process, the geographic distribution and physical availability of courts and legal representation or advice and the many elements of uncertainty in the legal process, and the anxiety and anguish caused thereby. The Department will therefore endeavour to facilitate easy access to justice through:

• Fast tracking the appointment of Maintenance Officers and Maintenance Investigators to reduce the backlog in maintenance cases;
• Expanding the Family Courts to all major court centres;
• Building capacity for the implementation of the Domestic Violence Act;
• Fast tracking the implementation of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention Unfair Discrimination Act;
• Fast tracking the implementation of the Child Justice Bill and the Childrens Bill once enacted;
• Building new court buildings and upgrading existing ones based on the need to address the unsatisfactory state of courts in previously marginalized areas; and
• Expanding the establishment of Sexual Offences courts.

This goal focuses on ensuring the Department’s longer-term capability. Particular emphasis is being placed on the following capability areas:

• Improving management systems, and the strategic use of management information;
• Improving policy capability to analyse and advise on the impact that court processes have on people and communities;
• Continuing to develop strong workplace relationships and culture;
• Developing the technical, managerial, leadership and relationship management skills of staff;
• Managing, maintaining and enhancing new technology and systems;
• Integrating accountability processes to link the day-to-day activities of all staff to the goals we seek to achieve.

Facilitate the transformation of the Judiciary involves that Court Services assists by amongst others –

• Striving for a unified Judiciary between high and lower courts;
• Removing impediments to the independence of the judiciary; and
• Rationalising the court structure in conjunction with the Chief justice

This objective aims to –

• Facilitate co-ordination between the Judiciary, Prosecution and the Department to be able to deal swiftly and effectively with the problems of case backlogs and maintenance payments through short-term solutions as well as through comprehensive, longer-term change projects which apply the discipline of business process re-engineering to our business operations;
• Build effective working relationships with other agencies, particularly those in the justice sector, to ensure information sharing and alignment of policy and strategy;
• Improve interaction with the court customers and in particular the public so as to improve service delivery and to promote confidence in the justice system and the rule of law.

This strategic goal involves analytical and advisory work at all stages of developing and implementing policies that impact on the Department or the Courts.

This strategic goal envisages the establishment of a case flow management system that will increase the effectiveness of the system through improved interaction between the role players, judicial leadership in the court management process and the tracking of the progress of every case, at every stage of the case. The system is based on the collaborative efforts of key stakeholders involved in case management to ensure that –

• The police, correctional services, prosecution, magistrates and judges are involved in case management for an integrated approach to case flow management;
• There is minimal opportunity for passing the blame between the different stakeholders for the failures of the justice system;
• Views and expertise on matters relating to case flow management are exchanged.

Accurate and reliable Information is vital for efficient planning and for resource allocation to the courts and it is therefore crucial to establish a court information management system to collate information that is usable. In order to gather information at a court level, it is necessary to enhance the capacity of the courts, so that information can be collated and channeled to the information management structure at the national level.

4. PROGRESS TOWARDS THE REALISATION OF THESE GOALS

With the reconfiguration of the Department into self-contained and core function-driven business units it became necessary for the Court Services Business Unit to develop a new strategy that will develop capacity at the courts so that they become self-sustained delivery service points.

This reflects a major shift from the current operating model whereby courts are largely dependent on Regional Offices and to a certain extent National Office for operational management. Delegations relating to budget management, human resource management, finance and procurement lie currently with Regional Heads, and Court Managers and Control Officers are not empowered to take decisions that are crucial to the delivery of support services to the Judiciary and the Prosecution and this has led to massive delays and inefficiencies in the functioning of the courts.

The Business Process Reengineering exercise is being driven by the Re aga Boswa ("we are rebuilding") project, but the ideas behind these proposed changes came from the role players involved in the justice system, mainly the Judiciary, the prosecution, police and departmental staff. The needs of the community, our strategic objectives of timeliness, quality and judicial support and general objectives of improved effectiveness and efficiency support these ideas. The way we do things will become more customer-focused.

Re aga boswa is about the design and implementation of the decentralised court support service-operating model, which was approved by the Justice Board in mid 2002. The specific objectives of Project Re aga boswa are to:

• Build on the decentralised operating model that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has already developed.
• Develop a detailed organisation and process design for the Court Services Business Unit that covers all aspects of a national, provincial and local organisation, structure and procedures to support a decentralised operating environment for the courts.
• Develop a phased implementation approach and detailed plan for operationalising the detailed decentralised design pilot sites as well as for the national roll out.

The project aims to implement and operationalise the detailed decentralised design in selected pilot sites and provides assistance with the implementation and change management aspects pertaining to the transition to a decentralised support services environment.

The project is implemented in two phases, namely the Design Phase which focuses on business process mapping and the development of organisational structures at national and court level, and the implementation phase which entails the piloting of the new Operating Model. The Design Phase was concluded in December 2002 and the Implementation commenced in KwaZulu-Natal on 3 February 2003, and is scheduled to run for three months. The national roll out is envisaged to commence in August 2003.

A new Court Service Delivery Model was developed during the Design Phase, which aimed at reengineering business processes and redesigning organisational structures to ensure efficiency and efficacy of the court system. The new operational model also creates a new management structure in the Courts, where Court Managers will be empowered to take responsibility for the day-to-day management of the courts thereby relieving the Judiciary and the Prosecution of administrative tasks and thereby facilitate the separation of functions between the administration and the judiciary.

• Separation of powers between administrative, prosecutorial and judicial functions with clear lines of accountability
• The devolvement of delegated authority to Court Managers for efficient and expedient service delivery
• The establishment of a Court Shared Service Centre (CSSC) to perform administrative transactions on behalf of a cluster of courts
• The capacitating of courts to empower them to perform the new responsibilities and challenges
• The development and implementation of an effective performance management system based on realistic and binding Service Level Agreements between the key stakeholders.

On the general management side there will be a dedicated focus on Facilities Management to address issues pertaining to building maintenance, court security, asset management and IT support.

The following are the primary features of a CSSC –

• The CSSC is an extension of the court, handling processes emanating from the courts and not visa versa as it is with the Regional Office model
• It is modelled on an open plan style of office for optimal space utilisation, increased productivity, strong team work, better communication and an efficient process flow management
• It delivers only administrative transaction relating to HR, Procurement, Finance and IT
• It operates only as an administrative services provider to Court Managers to implement decisions taken by Court Managers within their scope of delegation
• The essence of the centre is the establishment of an efficient helpdesk with a Basic Call Management System (BCMS) and a mailroom with an effective Document Management System (DMS), which are essential tools for an effective performance management system.
• The Centre will have a flat structure with a Court Centre Manager (at middle management level) assisted by Team Leaders from the HR, Finance and Procurement, and IT functional streams to ensure adherence to the work targets set for the Centre

The design of the new Court Services Delivery Model was preceded by a number of studies and research which studies of other international jurisdictions the product is a combination of best practices extracted from a number of countries and adapted to the South African situation. The model provides an alternative solution to improve service delivery at the courts to overcome the escalating case backlogs and log case turn around time. The staffing approach of the model will largely depend on the re-diversion of the existing resources to areas of needs. The de-establishment of Regional Offices will yield a larger percentage of human and financial resources which will be re-diverted to implement the new model.

Of the eight Business Units in the Department, the color coded Business Units have direct interface with the courts. Court Services Business provides the enabling environment for those Business Units to deliver specialised services to the courts in a coordinated fashion:

The rationale for the re-configuration of the Department into Business Units is to develop and enhance expertise on matters falling within the mandates of the individual Business Units for clear policy formulation and strategic focus. Through the Centres of Excellence (CoE’s) the Court Services Delivery Model other Business Units are enabled to focus on issues of policy and strategy while courts through the Court Services Business Unit take the burden of implementing such policies.

A series of strategic interviews and workshops were held with all Business Units to explore opportunities of alignment between their individual business models and the Court Services Delivery Model and as it is reflected hereunder, all Business Units having a direct interface with the courts, and as such have aligned and synchronised their activities to the extent that they relate to the courts.

Court Services and Human Resources have developed business models with similar features. Like the Court Shared Service Centre (CSSC) the Customer Management Centre (CMC) model developed by HR is based on decentralised services to bring services closer to the customers.

The two models were analysed and compared and their distinguishing features extrapolated and in the end the following alignment opportunities were agreed upon:

• HR was responsible for the development, improvement and modernization of HR processes and the CMC was the vehicle to deliver on those activities. The modernization programme entails the automation of HR processes which will result in huge reduction of human recourses capital over some time. The automation process which has commenced with the Leave automation, has been scheduled for completion within the next two years
• Court Services will take full responsibility for the execution of all administrative transactions within the CSSC including HR transactions. The support staff in the CSSC will resort under and report to the CSSC Manager who will in turn report to the Court Performance Sub unit at National Office.
• HR Business Unit (through the CMC) will take responsibility for ensuring compliance with HR policies and applicable legislation
• The CSSC Manager will ensure attainment of set performance standards and compliance with Performance Management Standards set between Court Managers and CSSC’s
• The volumetric report providing for 1x Team Leader plus 9 x support staff will be increased to 1 plus 15 to address the identified HR process gaps
• Court Services in collaboration with HR will identify a properly qualified and experienced person from the DoJ staff to assume the role of CSSC Manager on an acting capacity while the recruitment processes are under way to appoint a permanent person
• All other support staff will be selected through the skills audit process and the selected staff to be appointed/seconded to the center with the necessary delegations
• The HR Delegations’ Task Team and the Court Services’ Delegations Committee will be integrated to finalise HR delegations to Court Managers and CSSC Manager.

CS and OCFO are unanimous that the development and improvement of finance processes is the domain of the OCFO while CS takes responsibility for executing the processes. Put more simplistic, the OCFO determine the "How" and CS execute the "What". The how part will include:

• Compliance with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) and Treasury Regulations
• Capacitation of court functionaries through financial training programmes (Governor Brown)
• Subject matter expertise and advice through budget couches
• Project Management to reduce backlogs

The compliance, training, advice and project management roles will be performed by the Operations Managers who are managed and guided by the Regional Finance Managers.

Two strategic meetings were organised between the two Business Units, the first merely to share information and relevant documentation while the second was more of a day’s workshop between managers of the two Business Units with a view of finding common ground between the strategic plans of the two Business Units. After intensive deliberations, consensus was reached on a number of strategic aspects, among others:

• The establishment of a joint structure for joint planning on matters relating to IT support
• The participation of ISM on the Steering Committee of the Re aga boswa project
• The ISM would continue to play a strategic support function within the existing departmental structures, including the mordernisation programme.

The project has attained major achievements in a number of areas and some of the notable milestones are:

• The Court structure depicted above has been finalised and is being implemented at the pilot site in Durban
• A concept of the new Court Shared Service Centre described above has been finalised and will be located temporarily at the Devonshire House where the current KZN Regional Office is located. The reason to locate the CSSC at the current Regional Office is based on economical considerations and value for money. The lease contract in respect of the Devonshire House, which is paid by Department of Public Works on behalf of DoJ will be expiring at the end of 2005 and it makes economical sense to utilize the building for the reminder of the lease contract taking into account that the building will be under utilized with the demise of the Regional Office.
• A new set of delegations for Court Managers has been compiled, workshopped with selected Court Managers and other relevant role players for validation purposes and will be submitted shortly to the Director-General and the Minister for approval
• A position Paper on the distinction between Court Manager and Registrar has been compiled and was workshopped.
• All functions within the courts and National Office in Court Services have been redefined and new job profiles have been finalized. A comprehensive Procedure Manual on the new job profiles has been completed to facilitate training of the court functionaries in respect of the new functions
• Training programmes to empower court functionaries on their new roles have already begun. The table below shows the number of court officials who have already received training (The figure circled in blue reflects the number of officials already trained):

The model was canvassed with, consulted on and deliberated upon with the judiciary and the prosecution as the key functionaries within the court environment. Judges have given their support of the programme and magistrates have no difficulty with the model save that they seek an alignment of the model with the Belabela resolution taken by the Lower Court Management Committee (LCMC). Joint structures of the Department and the LCMC have been constituted to identify issues that can be aligned and develop a joint strategy to address them, and defer to the Chief Justice and the Ministerial Task Team those issues which relate to policy.

The prosecution supports the change programme and the NPA participates in the Re aga boswa Steering Committee while Director of Public Prosecution in KwaZulu Natal has nominated the Durban Chief Prosecutor to participate on the project implementation at the pilot site.

4. IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGY

As indicated above, the new strategy is mainly implemented through the Business Re-engineering exercise known as the Re Aga Boswa Project.

The implementation of the new Court Services Delivery model will result in the phasing out of Regional Offices and the re-diversion of resources currently residing at the Regional structures to the courts where they are needed most.

The phasing out of Regional Offices is on schedule and will be dealt with incrementally. The phasing out of the first office, namely the KwaZulu Regional Office has begun and it is anticipated to end on 31 July 2003.

A schematic outline of the time frames for the KwaZulu Natal and national roll out is given hereunder:

In the last financial year we have been able to appoint twenty Court Managers and we hope to double the number in this current financial year. Most of the appointment will be made from within the current-serving officials who continue to be exposed to development programmes to upgrade their skills that will enable them to meet the challenges of the redefined posts.

A training programme attended by all Court Managers and Registrars was conducted from 7 – 11 April 2003 to empower Court Managers to handle challenges brought by the new court services delivery model

Integrated Case Flow Management is a project launched in response to the need to deal proactively with the huge backlog of both civil and criminal cases in our courts. In the High Courts, for example, the waiting period in criminal cases is about twenty months, and in civil matters, about twelve months. From observing and studying some of the world’s most efficient court systems, such as in Singapore, the Department concluded that the greatest impact on the backlog of cases would be felt by introducing an Integrated Case Flow Management system in the court environment. The project is part of the Criminal Justice Strengthening Program and will contribute to the Program’s objective of streamlining court services to provide modern and efficient administration of justice. Case Flow Management is Judiciary driven with the Magistrates and Judges taking an active role in dictating the course of the case, and provides for coherent and systematic case scheduling and rostering to ensure that blockages at every stage of a case are identified prior to the set date of trial and addressed accordingly.

The fragmented and uncoordinated case management processes between the Judiciary, the Prosecution, the Police, the departments of Correctional Services and Social Development and Legal Aid Board had made it easy for every stakeholder in the justice value chain to shift the blame for poor or non-delivery of services to the others.

Through the Integrated Case Flow Management System, the Business Unit seeks to establish a system that will enable all role players in the case management process to work jointly with a view of coordinating all their planning processes and resources for greater impact and improved service delivery. The benefits of an Integrated Case Flow Management System include reduction/elimination of case backlogs, reasonable cycle times, early court interventions and dispositions, information sharing and collective wisdom, increased convictions and improved service delivery. Case flow management is being strengthened by other projects currently underway such as the Integrated Court Centre Project, the Court Management Information System Project and the Operations Centre – all three which is leading to improved measurement of performance and integrated planning and service delivery improvement. The challenge remains to improve co-ordination within the Integrated Justice System and the two clusters (JCPS and Social clusters).

A Case Flow Management system is being piloted at the Cape Town and Johannesburg high courts, Durban Family Court and Soshanguve Magistrate’s court. The process is led by the judiciary in all the pilot sites and involves the participation of other stakeholders (SAPS, Correctional Services, Legal Aid Board). While the implementation at the Durban and Transvaal Provincial Division is on schedule, implementation in respect of the remainder of the pilot sites is still at a planning phase. With regard of the high courts Judge Kriegler, who recently retired as a judge, has been engaged to assist in building capacity at the high courts while a seminar on case flow management for the lower court judiciary is being planned for June this year.

In general the past year saw further improvement in addressing the needs of vulnerable groups such as women and children.

• In this regard it should be noted that the establishment of sexual offences courts have been prioritized and closer interaction in this regard between the NPA and Court Services was effected.
• Family courts are receiving focused attention.
• Maintenance courts are receiving attention and the appointment of maintenance investigators was promoted and more maintenance prosecutors were appointed. Fifty two Maintenance Investigators have been appointed at the selected courts country-wide to reduce the maintenance case backlogs and fast track the process of policy formulation to establish a permanent Maintenance Investigation dispensation in our Maintenance system.
• The Child Justice Bill is being promoted. Consultations to obtain comments and inputs on the Child Justice Bill are on-going and strategies to divert juvenile offenders from the criminal justice are being drawn.
• Equality courts are being introduced.

Since 1997, Family Courts have been operating on a pilot basis without any structured policy framework. A need for dedicated section at the various to handle family disputes in our courts is overwhelming. The idea is not to establish a separate structure for courts but to have a section in each court centre dedicated to handle family disputes. The Department has completed a Blue Print for a Family Court dispensation and the Business Plan reflecting the gradual implementation of the Blue Print is being finalized. The phased-in implementation is scheduled to commence this financial year (2003/2004). The implementation will see the strengthening of the current pilot sites in Johannesburg, Lebowakgomo., Port Elizabeth, Durban and Cape Town and will also provide for the expansion of the Family Court dispensation to other court centres.

Because the Government regards maintenance as a priority and an urgent need of many of our children, the Department has also embarked on an independent project to prioritise the restructuring of maintenance courts, although such courts will fall under the umbrella of the Family Courts.

Relating to the progress on the implementation of the Maintenance Act, 1998 (Act No. 99 of 1998), my Department regards this as a priority area and is continually introducing new efforts to improve the maintenance system. During the past year, much progress has been made in relation to improving the maintenance system in general and I would like to highlight the following aspects in this regard:

• The National Prosecuting Authority has appointed 80 maintenance prosecutors and 10 senior maintenance prosecutors in all the provinces. This has already increased the capacity of the maintenance courts to deal with matters of this nature, especially relating to criminal prosecution for the failure to pay maintenance and the civil enforcement of maintenance arrears, such as emoluments attachment orders, warrants of execution and garnishee orders.
• The Department is very conscious of the need to appoint maintenance investigators and is treating this as a matter of top priority. While the policy and regulations for the appointment of Maintenance Investigators, are being finalised, the Department has appointed 55 Assistants to Maintenance Officers (which will be in fact contract Maintenance Investigators), on a contract basis to assist with maintenance investigations for a fixed period contract of six months with effect from 1 April 2003. The contract appointments were made in 55 Maintenance Courts where Maintenance Prosecutors have already been appointed by the Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions (Sexual Offences and Community Affairs Unit). These appointments have already started to make positive impact on the tracing of maintenance defaulters as well as obtaining the necessary financial information for just and equitable maintenance orders in the courts where the contract maintenance investigators have been appointed, and for this we express appreciation. The Districts/ Courts where the contract Maintenance Investigators have been appointed, are the following:

• Appointments of permanent Maintenance Investigators:

The Department launched a Baseline Costing Study on the Appointment of Maintenance Investigators in March 2002. Out of this research, the last report of which was submitted in December 2002, a whole new Maintenance Court model is being proposed, because appointing Maintenance Investigators alone, will not solve the problems experienced in the Maintenance Courts. A holistic approach is needed, so that maintenance is prioritised as one of the core functions of the Department. This report is being considered and those recommendations that are feasible will be implemented in phases, as soon as funds become available for this purpose. However, the Department will prioritize the permanent appointment of Maintenance Investigators as Public Servants in all Maintenance Courts. Job evaluations and job descriptions of the new post class "Maintenance Investigator" by the Department’s Human Resources Business Unit is already receiving attention.

The Department is convinced that in addressing the progressive realisation of the Department’s objectives to transform the maintenance courts and therefore to improve the maintenance system in the Family Courts, the following benefits will ensue:

• Cementing the family fabric;
• Poverty alleviation;
• Increased access to education;
• Keeping children off the streets;
• Reduction in crime;
• Improved standards of living for all; and
• Respect for the law.

The Department is committed to strengthening the protection of vulnerable people in the criminal justice system. In keeping with this commitment, the Child Justice Bill, No. B.49 of 2002, was introduced into Parliament on 8 August 2002 and presented to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development on 20 February 2003. The Department, supported by the Inter-sectoral Committee for Child Justice, has made presentations which focused on implementation planning and budgetary aspects relating to the Child Justice Bill. In addition to the government briefing to Parliament, public hearings were also held over three days in the last week of February 2003. Several non-governmental organizations and individual experts gave oral submissions, and many written submissions were also received. There was broad support for the Bill. The Portfolio Committee began their deliberations on the Child Justice Bill on 10 March 2003. Redrafting is currently being undertaken by the drafting team.

The process of planning for the implementation of the Child Justice Bill has been very innovative. Firstly, the planning and budgeting process started early in the process of law-making. Each decision made during the drafting and development phase was costed and weighed in terms of cost implication and cost benefit. The Bill was the first one ever to be costed whilst still in development at the South African Law Commission. When the Bill was placed before Cabinet, it was accompanied by an implementation strategy framework. The next step of the planning process looked at what the expected expenditure would be for the first three years of the Bill’s operation. Assisted by the Child Justice Project located in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the various Departments have developed a detailed implementation strategy and budget, linked to the Medium Term Expenditure Framework. The end result is a comprehensive document called the "Implementation Strategy and Budget for the Child Justice Bill". The document provides a complete financial and planning picture at any point of the implementation process. This overall picture of the entire child justice system can, at any point of the implementation process, be broken down into cross-sectoral phases or into individual department components that fold out over a time continuum from 2003 to 2005. In the view of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the approach of planning and budgeting for the Child Justice Bill may serve as a model for every piece of legislation that comes before Cabinet and Parliament in the future.

Regarding the Specialised Sexual Offences Courts, it should be noted that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the Units in the Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions responsible for Sexual Offences and Community Affairs and the National Prosecuting Service, have established a close working relationship and have developed a National Strategy for the Roll-out of Sexual Offences Courts, so as to prioritise the hearings relating to sexual offences in dedicated Sexual Offences Courts on a Regional Court level.

Fourty Sexual Offences Courts have already been established in crisis areas, although some of them (20) are not fully compliant with the Sexual Offences Courts Blueprint yet. Courts have been dedicated or are in the process of being dedicated to the hearing of Sexual Offences cases, in the following areas: Protea Soweto (4 courts); Welkom; Port Elizabeth; Klerksdorp; Bethlehem; Parow (2 courts); Cape Town; Wynberg (4 courts); Bloemfontein (3 courts); Pretoria (3 courts); Kimberley; Thlabane; Pietermaritzburg; Atlantis; Sebokeng; Thabamoopo; Mmabatho; Umlazi; Thohoyandou; Umtata; Nelspruit; George; Vosloorus; Evander; Inkanyezi; Verulam; Upington; Vredendal; Pinetown; Odi; Kuilsriver; Edenvale; Mankweng (Pietersburg); Paarl; Khayelitsha; Mitchells Plain; Ladysmith; Umtata and Vryheid.

The SOCA Unit had meetings with most Provincial Police Commissioners regarding the problematic issue of withdrawal of sexual offences cases. The Provincial Commissioners have issued instructions to the effect that no sexual offences cases can be withdrawn by anyone other than a prosecutor. Even cases that were filed as ‘undetected’ should be taken to the prosecutor for a decision.

Training of prosecutors, intermediaries, police officials and magistrates takes place regularly and is ongoing. For example, one hundred and eighty (180) Regional Court Magistrates received training from 28 to 30 November 2002 in the Strand on the "Judicial Officer and the Child Witness".

With the extension of sexual offences courts, the use of intermediaries has become more crucial. There is still disparity on the recruitment and utilization of intermediaries. On one hand Judicial Officers are complaining about the quality of services rendered by intermediaries due to lack of training and on the other hand intermediaries are dissatisfied with low tariffs for their allowances which have not been reviewed for the past ten years. To address all these concerns, the Department has conducted a survey on the intermediaries’ services in our courts in order to develop a National Action Plan to address problems experienced. Such tariffs will be reviewed from time to time. In the meantime it has been proposed that the tariffs for daily allowance for intermediaries be increased from R50-00 to R150-00 per day. A National Action Plan is being developed to give guidance on the future utilization of intermediaries.

In addition to what was stated above regarding the re-engineering of court services and Re aga boswa, it should be noted that the Department has made progress during the past year with regard to Sub-offices identified as unsatisfactory as far as work performance and service delivery were concerned.  Progress was also made in respect of addressing Sub-offices with financial management problems.  Further attention was given to the "Adopt a Court Project" where managers at National Office visited Sub-offices in order to identify and solve operational problems that adversely affect the efficiency of the courts and provide suitable and flexible problem solving models for addressing current and future problems in courts.  An example of the above-mentioned interventions occurred at Magistrate’s Office Brits.  In this instance, a senior administrative official (stationed at National Office) with many years in court administration assisted the personnel at that office on a weekly basis for a lengthy period and provided continuous "hands on" training on all aspects of court administration. 

Saturday and Additional courts have been introduced as a temporary measure to reduce the number of cases on the court roll. This has had considerable success. The main objective in the long run, however, is to increase the productivity of courts and to clear the backlogs.

Community participation in the administration of Justice is crucial. Presently, Magistrates are still exercising their discretion to appoint community representatives in their benches. Although an Act of Parliament has been passed to make it imperative for Magistrates to sit with Lay-Assessors in certain cases, due to financial constraints, its implementation is planned to be in phases. The idea is to implement the Act country-wide when funds are available. In the meantime, the Act is planned to be implemented during 2003 in Gauteng, Western Cape and Eastern Cape.

To a large extent, members of the public rely on interpreting service to follow court proceedings. A process of transforming court interpreting service is under way. Court Interpreters are playing a major role in our Justice system as they serve as both the ear and the voice of participants in the Justice system. Their conditions of service are being reviewed. New initiatives are being implemented to ensure their representation in the management structure of the Department. The use of foreign interpreters will now be properly regulated and the availability of interpreting service on a daily basis will be ensured in each court. A programme of capacity building regarding interpreters will be introduced to ensure quality interpreting service. Above all, their conduct will be regulated by a Code of ethics to enhance the decorum and the dignity of courts in which they serve.

We have embarked on the transformation of the sheriffs profession and substantial progress has been made in this regard. To ensure quality service, the principle of competition in the Sheriffs’ Profession is now also being implemented. As a start the following offices have been designated as areas in which more than one Sheriff may be appointed and published in Government Notice No. R.212 dated 14 February 2003:

• Alberton Lower Court
• Krugersdorp High and Lower Court
• Randburg High and Lower Court
• Rustenburg Lower Court
• Sandton High and Lower Court
• Vereeniging / Meyerton Lower Court

9. FACILITIES

The Department's budget allocation for capital works for the 2002/03 financial year was R211, 138 million. In order for certain major works projects to be able to be proceeded with, an additional amount of R60 million was allocated by National Treasury. The full amount of R271 138 000 was spent, meaning this was the largest ever amount to be spent on capital works in the Department in a single financial year.

The efficient spending of the new budget for 2003/04 of R229 million in respect of capital works and R35 million in respect of upgrading of infrastructure will be actively pursued.

The Department has delivered the following new courts:

• Botshabelo - a new court building in the Free State with 5 new court rooms.

• Queenstown - additions to the existing building comprising inter alia 6 new court rooms.

• Khayelitsha - a new court building on the Cape Flats with 13 new court rooms, offices, a cash hall and a cell block.

• Blue Downs - a new court building in the district of Kuils River in the Western Cape with 8 new court rooms, offices, a cash hall and a cell block.

• Patensie - a new periodical court with 1 court room and offices in the district of Hankey.

• Kroonstad - additions to the existing building comprising 3 court rooms and offices.

• Khutsong - a new branch court with 1 court room and offices in the district of Carletonville.

• Johannesburg - 3 new courts and offices in the CBD for the regional court for specialised commercial crime cases. (The former Perm building in Eloff Street has been converted).

• Mobile courts have been placed at Randburg, Kathlehong, Orlando, Pretoria North, Diepsloot, Westonaria, Odi, Hammanskraal, Vredendal, Tembisa, Mamelodi, Hermanus, Leeu-Gamka, Butterworth and Uitenhage as an interim measure to alleviate pressure on existing facilities and for sexual offences courts.

• Peddie - repair of fire damaged part of the building as well as additional accommodation.

• Middeldrift - New Building.

Three additional criminal courts and five judges' chambers in the Palace of Justice for the Pretoria High Court have been refurbished.

Building projects at Atteridgeville and Sasolburg have unfortunately been delayed due to the liquidation of the building contractors. New contractors have subsequently been appointed.

A library building has been converted into accommodation for the Southern Circuit of the High Court at Ramsgate in KwaZulu-Natal.

New court buildings / additions to existing buildings at Atamelang, Bothithong, Sebokeng, Centane, Tshidilomolomo, Port Elizabeth, Nelspruit, De Aar, Pretoria North, Benoni, Boksburg, Tembisa and Scottburgh as well as Atteridgeville and Sasolburg, are in construction. The construction of the new Constitutional Court building in Johannesburg is progressing as planned. The expected completion date is November 2003.

In addition to the projects indicated supra, construction of a new building at Randburg and additions at Ceres will start shortly.

Fifty three offices have been identified for the Repair and Maintenance Programme (RAMP), of which the first twenty are in execution.

Numerous minor works and planned maintenance services have been and are being carried out in rural and previously disadvantaged areas.

An amount of R40 million has been spent on furniture, office machines, court recording equipment and sexual offences court systems at courts.

Apart from the continuation of ongoing building projects to be overseen, the acquisition of sites, briefing of architects and actual planning of major projects such as Madadeni (new building), Ekangala (new building), Daveyton (additional accommodation), Thabong (community safety centre), Ntuzuma (new building) and Polokwane High Court (conversion and refurbishment) are to be attended to.

10. SECURITY MANAGEMENT

During 2002/03 amounts of R40 million and R18 million were allocated respectively for security services and were divided into the projects indicated below:

• The cash in transit services are being provided in 200 offices.
• Not all offices are receiving cash in transit and guarding services due to financial constraints.

The total amount requested for security services in this financial year was R415 m but the amount that could be allocated is R45 million. The inadequate budget is insufficient to provide all the required security measures in our courts. More funds are required in order to meet the minimum security standards in our courthouses.

The total number of offices that requires to be installed with security measures is in the region of 700, but only ±200 offices are secured at this stage. This means that many of our courts around the country have poor or no security at all. This is a serious risk to the Department, staff members, the Judiciary, Magistrates, Prosecutors and members of the public who are visiting our offices on a daily basis.

A security audit is almost on its final draft stage and it will be finalised at the end of May 2003. In this report, all the shortcomings regarding court security will be identified and the recommended solutions will be translated into security plans that will seek to address these problems immediately, in the medium and the long term. A security strategy of the Department together with other policy guidelines in respect of the protection of information, personnel, infrastructure and equipments against potential threats of aggression will be developed this year.

A summary of the security projects to be implemented additionally in line with the allocated funds for 2003/ 2004 is as follows:

These steps or actions include, among others, the following:

• Proper effective and efficient access control.
• Movement control in our courthouses/ offices.
• Record keeping.
• Protection of the Judiciary and Magistracy.
• Patrols
• Escorts
• Static observation.
• Contingency (emergency) planning.
• Guarding services.
• Manning a security control room.

It is important to note that the abovementioned actions are all part of an integrated process of which the components can be discerned but not separated.

In order to deliver all the abovementioned services in our work environment, additional resources remain a critical catalyst.

10. CORRUPTION

Though measures were instituted to help address financial mismanagement and corruption in the department at the various offices, continuous attention hereto will remain a priority of the department. The hotline remain an important measure in this regard and is being utilized by the Inspectorate to follow up allegations.

11. BUDGET ASPECTS

The budget variance that will be dealt with relates to the figures for the year ending 31 March 2003 and is based on the following report relating to Court Services that was drawn on 22 May 2003 by the Budget Division in the Office of the CFO:

Programme 1

• Programme 1: Management
• Programme 2: Administration

The Administration Programme is divided into three sub-programmes namely:

• Sub Programme A: Improvement of Court Performance
• Sub Programme C: Implementation of Legislation and Protection of vulnerable groups
• Sup Programme B: Facilities & Infrastructure

The various projects have been clustered under the three sub programmes. The table below shows the projects which have been clustered under the three sub programmes and the budget allocation in respect of each sub programme:

Business Plans have been drawn for each project with time frames and clear deliverables.

10. CONCLUSION

Our challenge over the next three years is to sustain and enhance the current court support service delivery system while changing to new ways doing things at the same time. The degree of change will mean a major shift in the way we think and carry out our business. We also need to improve court performance and service delivery.

However, it needs to be pointed out that almost all courts, especially lower courts are experiencing the following capacity constraints:

• Overstretched resources – most courts’ infrastructure can no longer cope with the increased workload which had almost doubled over the last eight years as a result of the obligations flowing from the Constitution and legislation which had increased accessibility of services relating to, among others, Maintenance of minor children and spouses, Domestic violence, equality and discrimination cases, community participation through the lay assessor system. In addition, the historic discrepancies between disadvantaged areas and other areas still exist though it is receiving attention.
• Inadequate human resource capacity – Increase of the workload necessitate an increase of person power. The staff at most of the courts had remained relatively static despite the increase in the workload mainly to an insufficient personnel budget allocated to the courts. This is however receiving attention as was pointed out above.
• Lack of necessary skills/expertise – The demands of the modern society require different skills and increased knowledge to satisfy the needs. As crime become more complex and organised and as the technology age dominate our lives it becomes increasingly important to improve the skill of the work force in all areas (judicial, prosecution and administration) to keep with the developments. We have not been able to develop or implement fully adequate development programmes for the officials at the courts. New legislation have had to be implemented without an extensive training programme for the implementers of the Act, and part of the reason has been the inadequacy of funds.
• Inability to measure performance properly has been impacting negatively on management of the court processes and the department.
• Security at courts remain inadequate as a result of insufficient funds.
• Insufficient and inappropriate utilisation of funds – Courts have been the hardest hit institutions in terms of the budget cuts because they have always been on the lowest ladder of the budgeting process. Lack of appropriate financial management skills at the courts has negatively impacted service delivery at court level.

On the positive side and to deal with these constraints as well as the objectives of the Business Unit, various interventions have been made and are continuing. The following warrant mentioning:

• Additional budget allocations have been mobilised from the National Treasury for the next financial year to alleviate the infrastructure and human resources backlog. The additional budget (dedicated for Human Resources backlog, Court Improvement, Protection of Vulnerable groups and Security of Courts) will yield positive results for the under resourced courts.
• The implementation of the new Court Services Delivery Model through Re aga boswa will ensure the re-evaluation of the courts organisational structures to provide capacity where needed. The national roll out of the project is expected to address the structural deficiencies.
• The Court Services strategic refocus the past year has led to the realignment of all delegations to the courts for efficient and expedient service delivery.
• Changes that will be introduced through the organizational design and the new model for court management are being factored and integrated in the MTEF budget process to sustain the change process. The cost benefits for the new design and court model are immense in that duplication and overlapping will be eradicated, the efficient and effective justice system will impact positively on preventing and combating crime, ensure good governance, constitutionalism and respect for the rule of law and thereby boosting investor confidence for the country’s ailing economy.
• In general the past year saw further improvement in addressing the needs of vulnerable groups such as women and children. This will remain a priority.
• Through increased expenditure, the infrastructure at the courts were improved and various new courts or additions to courts were made possible, leading to improved working conditions and service delivery. In this regard the strategic direction remains to address the historic imbalances and improve the situation at previously disadvantaged areas.