Court Services’ core function can be viewed as the facilitation of the adjudication of criminal matters, the resolution of civil disputes and the management of courts facilities. We execute these functions within the ambit of section 165 (4) of the Constitution which provides that: Organs of state through legislative and other measures, must assist and protect the courts to ensure their independence, impartiality, dignity, accessibility and effectiveness of the courts.

The DOJCD and thus also Court Services, deals with this through the 3 Key Strategic Result Areas:

• Ensuring access to justice for all,
• Modernising Justice Service Delivery,
• Transforming Justice for a twenty-first century South Africa.

Court Service has a history of under-funding, in particular regarding human resources. This is the case despite Court Services carrying the largest mandate of the Department. To deal with this in an improved fashion and with the assistance of the new Ministry, a Joint Budget Task Team was set up to review the extent of under-funding in the Department, especially for the courts.

The mandate of this Task Team relating to Court Services is as follows:

• Creating an effective court management system where magistrates and judges no longer perform administrative functions (Re aga Boswa)
• Address the historic under funding of court personnel and the Department’s lack of capacity to deliver essential services including, a failure to provide adequate security services at the courts
• Addressing the impact of moving the personnel budget of the magistracy (to be a direct charge against the revenue) in terms of the Remuneration of Public Office- bearers legislation
• Hastening the transformation of the judiciary and the justice sector through amongst others the revitalisation of the Justice College to include the training of judges and create a pool from which Black and female practitioners can be drawn for appointment to the bench and key positions in the justice sector.
• To deal with the impact of the rationalisation of courts including the establishment of the additional high courts for Mpumalanga and Limpopo and the alignment of the lower courts with the re-demarcated magisterial boundaries to maintain a court system in line with the Constitution and the needs of the people
• Enhancing the efficiency of the justice cluster through modernization of the justice delivery system including case management to eradicate case backlogs and reduce case cycle times

The areas of service delivery in Court Services that have had a specific negative impact due to resource constraints are the following:

• Security
• Lay assessors (less than 20 courts covered)
• Maintenance Investigators (conservative approach)
• Re aga Boswa roll out (phased approach)
• Transformation of the judiciary
• Court capacity (limited incremental approach based on pressure points)
• Monitoring of court performance
• Legislative implementation in the past and future

To use security as an example, we never had sufficient funding to cover all the courts or services in terms of minimum standards and as a result thereof we could only fund at present:

• 137 courts are receiving guarding services on a twenty four hours basis per

day country wide

• 203 Courts countrywide are receiving Cash in Transit services
• 136 Courts are equipped with Armed response Alarm System
• 46 Courts have been installed with physical security infrastructure during the period under review, and

• 58 X-Ray units were installed in various courts during the period under review.

In order to deal with issues such as security and the other aspects mentioned above, funds had to be transferred from other core areas to cover the deficiencies in these regard.

Figures received from our CFO’s Office indicate at this point in time that total expenditure for the previous financial year (ending 31 March 2005) was R2,383,959,434 against a budget of R 2,402,408,000.

The projected savings is as a result of the implementation of JYP at court level as well as the down scaling of projects. Lay assessors’ appointments could for example only been done at less than 20 courts.

Due to the fact that Court Services usually overspends on compensation of employees because of under-funding for this item, an amount of R60 million was transferred from other items to offset the balance between the allocation and the projected total spending on this item as part adjustment estimates. Conservative expenditure on various projects were also required in the latter part of the year to prevent overspending in general and to offset the personnel under-funding.

Court Services has structured its activities according to five main sub programmes, namely:

This programmatic structure will coordinate and facilitate the decentralisation of operational matters to court level so as to improve efficiency and decision making at court level. However the challenge for court services remains human resource capacity, the funding of which has a backlog since the 1997/98 financial years.

The budget for all courts are:

• Service delivery and integration (R68m, R85m and R134m)
• Modernising the justice system (R10m, R20m, and R30m)
• Effective and efficient management of cases through the justice chain (R97m, R227m and R317m)
• Transforming the justice system (R11m, R27m and R35m)
• Court Security (R50m, R70m and R100m)

Other aspects also additionally funded include:

• Lay assessors (R10m, R15m and R30m)
• Rehabilitation of courts (R50m, R50m and R61m)
• Court Nerve Centre (R4m, R6m and R8m)
• Victim Support Programme (R10m, R15 and R20m)
• Specialised courts (R10m, R12m and R15m)
• Filling Court vacancies (R50m, R150m and R220m)
• Appointment of magistrates (R15m, R17m and R20m))
• Court personnel : new high courts (R0, R5m ad R2m)
• Witness fees (R5m, R6m and R7m)
  

The Re Aga Boswa project seeks to create capacity at provincial and national level for the implementation of the Departmental policy and strategy. The project is intended to reengineer and optimise business processes at the courts and redesign organizational structures to capacitate courts to deliver an efficient and effective service to all end users. The primary objectives of the project are to carry out a business process reengineering exercise and effect the necessary changes or improvements to the processes to ensure Efficient, Accessible, Swift and Effective services to all court users.

An outcome of the Re Aga Boswa project has been the development of a Court Management Model, which makes provision for a court clustering system to facilitate the management of the 750 courts countrywide. Courts within a particular province constitute a provincial cluster headed by a Senior Court Manager, and every cluster is divided into sub-clusters or areas headed by an Area Court Manager. Each individual court, within a province, falls within a specific area or sub-cluster. The area court level becomes the nodal point or the "hub" court where delegations in relations to recruitment of court personnel and procurement of services and goods of a capital nature are devolved. Specialist services in areas such as Sexual Offences, Equality, Commercial Crimes courts and Alternative Dispute Resolution will be co-ordinated. Registrars at area level will be appointed to coordinate these specialist services. The particular circumstances of an area and its profile (such as demographics, crime statistics and economics) will determine which specialized services will be offered at which Nodal Points. It is envisaged that Nodal Points will operate as "One Stop Centres", where a range of specialist justice services can be accessed, in addition to the "normal" justice services, available elsewhere.

Some of the efficiency gains of the project relate to the releasing of magistrates from administrative functions to focus on judicial functions. Prior to the advent of the principle of separation of powers derived from the new constitutional order, 26 Chief Magistrates, eight Regional Court Presidents and 65 sub-cluster heads performed both administrative and judicial work. The appointment of Court Managers ensures that the management of the budget and court facilities lie with court managers and senior judicial officers are released back to the courts to perform judicial work and increase the productivity of the courts. Enhancing management and administrative capacity at court level has partly contributed to the no qualification audit report, the first in the last decade.

This is a service delivery improvement programme through which the entire approach to the management of cases in the justice system is being reviewed, intensified and integrated. This focuses primarily on governance, re-engineering of processes and implementation of information management technology.

The governance aspect is anchored on judicial control or leadership of the court and co-ordination of stakeholders in the justice value chain to align their efforts towards processing cases in the shortest possible time. This is supported by a re-engineering of current processes to ensure that procedures and structures are aligned with the changes that are being instituted to optimise case flow. Technology is used to assist in optimising operational processes and create a culture of management through information.

Integrated Case Flow Management Centres (previously known as IJ Court Centres) are currently operating at 44 district criminal courts. Statistics for the fourth quarter (October to December 2004) revealed that 57% of the courts have improved on their performance since the concept was introduced. The system allows the IJS to track cases and measure the performance of the courts where the project has been implemented. The roll out of this project to other courts is subject to the deployment and conversion to the e-Scheduler/ caseflow management system. This system was developed to replace the previous stand alone case roll management system. The deployment and conversion exercise was undertaken in April 2005 to all 44 sites and the roll out to 20 additional courts is planned for this financial year at an estimated cost of R1.5m. This new system will be available on the local area network which does not restrict or limit the number of users; it configured to have the ability to reduce data capturing timeframe and will generate comprehensive statistics to conduct performance analysis at a local level.

Additional Courts (including Saturday courts) were introduced as a short-term measure to address the backlog of cases pending trial. As a result of this initiative, the backlog was reduced by 76 836 cases between 2001 and 2004. This has resulted in an average of 21 953 cases finalised per annum in the past three years, in addition to the number finalised in permanent courts. Attention is being paid to backlogs in regional courts as directed by the Cabinet Committee in October.

As part of a number of initiatives to improve court effectiveness and deal with the backlog of cases, the Department continued during 2004 with Additional and Saturday Courts. This initiative, however, is viewed as a temporary measure which is dependent on the establishment of permanent solutions to capacitate the courts to cope with the workload.

In view of budgetary constraints and other initiatives embarked upon – such as the appointment of 47 new regional court magistrates – a phase-out plan for the current year was devised at the end of September 2004. In line herewith:

• Only the 20 Additional Sexual Offences Courts will continue on a contract basis from October 2004 onwards; and
• The other Additional courts have, with effect from 1 May 2005, only deal with partly-heard cases and will not take on new cases. In some of these courts there are more than 50 partly heard matters. Such matters will be finalised during the current financial year.

Judiciary-led case flow management, by means of which the pace of litigation, including the management of postponements, will be firmly in the control of the judiciary rather than litigants, will also help address case backlogs.

As at 31 December 2004, the outstanding court rolls were as follows:

High Courts 1 067

Regional Courts 43 076

District Courts 144 297

The statistical trend in respect of the outstanding court roll for the District and Regional Courts is set out below:

The table below presents the number of cases finalised and the number withdrawn in High, regional and district courts over the past six years.

There is a significant increase in the number of cases finalized by the High Court in 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 financial years, whereas the number of cases finalized in both Regional and District Courts fluctuate. The number of withdrawn cases in all the three courts is decreasing at a moderate rate.

While there was a significant increase in the number of cases finalized in the High Courts in the 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 financial years, the number of cases finalized in the regional courts fluctuated from year to year. The number finalised in the district courts also substantially increased over the past five years. There appears to be a moderate decrease in the number of cases withdrawn at all three court levels.

The Department has planned and costed intersectorally for the implementation of the Child Justice Bill and the Department has further facilitated the establishment of 3 One Stop Child Justice Centres in Port Elizabeth, Bloemfontein and De Aar/ Port Nolloth. An intersectoral Workshop was held on 15 to 16 February 2005, chaired by the Department of Justice, to recommend policy and practical guidelines for the establishment of One Stop Child Justice Centres.

Other specific interventions to address the backlog of cases pending trial include the diversion of children in trouble with the law whilst awaiting the finalization and implementation of the Child Justice Bill. Inter-sectoral monitoring of the numbers of Children Awaiting Trial takes place monthly and interventions are instituted to have as many children as possible assessed, diverted or placed in alternative care or referred to the Children’s Courts where they are declared as in need of care and protection.

Whilst they are awaiting trial they are also placed under home based supervision, in places of safety or back in the care of parents or caregivers. When in need of care, children are placed in foster care or children’s homes. They can also be referred to reform schools as a sentencing option. Blockages in the IJS are being addressed and an inter-sectoral awaiting trial Protocol as well as a Protocol relating to dealing effectively with children referred to reform schools are in place.

The Inter-sectoral Child Justice Steering Committee has instituted various initiatives to deal with the backlog of cases pending trial that relate to children. To this effect, it has:

• Prioritised getting children at risk, especially those under 18, out of prison. Prioritized provinces in respect of this initiative are KwaZulu-Natal, Western Cape and Gauteng;
• Developed an inter-sectoral plan of action to fast track getting children out of prison;
• Ensured the prioritization of the standardization of diversion programmes. The first report pertaining this is expected in 2005; and
• Promoted Restorative Justice Training Workshops for magistrates and prosecutors in each province in 2004 and will further promote in 2005/06 as a priority., and

• Interim guidelines for children awaiting trial, to divert them as much as possible from the mainstream criminal justice system, have been implemented.

Monitoring of prisons/detention centres that accommodates children awaiting trail takes place on a monthly basis. This process is vital for planning purposes to provide alternatives for children in detention. The monthly statistics also fulfil the obligations in terms of the Integrated Justice System. The Deputy Minister of Correctional Services have also escalated the removal of awaiting trial children from prisons. The situation regarding children awaiting trial has been steadily improving the past few years.

However there were only 1357 Children Awaiting Trial as on 31 March 2005 countrywide, so downward trend is continuing.

Enhancing our court information management system is one of our priority for in the current MTEF. Our data is collated largely from the NPA which focuses solely on criminal matters, and our collation of civil, family and equality court cases is still done in an ad hoc measure through the registrars of courts. The strengthening of the Court Nerve Centre will provide a framework for the collation, analysis and interpretation of data for informed decision support.

National Treasury has allocated R5 mil in the 2005 MTEF to create the court information management system which will be a central information nodal point for the Department, the judiciary, Prosecution.

Since 1994, 82 major construction works have been completed. The recent and current activities relating to court infrastructure are as follows:

• Courts recently completed in townships / rural areas: Atteridgeville, Tembisa, Bothitong, Khutsong and Atamelang.
• Courts in construction: Benoni, Hatfield, Pretoria North, Madadeni and Motherwell.

• Courts / buildings on tender: The Supreme Court of Appeal, High Court Polokwane, Daveyton, Ekangala, Tsakane and the Child Court Centre in Port Elizabeth.

• Courts / buildings in planning include Pietermaritzburg, a building for the Masters offices in Pietermaritzburg, the old Magistrate's Office in Colesberg, Soekmekaar, Kagiso, Butterworth and Mitchell's Plain.

• Projects at the site identification stage: Galeshewe, Umzimkulu, Lutzville, Mamelodi, Kathlehong, Ntuzuma, Vosman, Diepsloot, Orlando, Port Shepstone, Bekkersdal, Springbok, Enseleni, Vulindlela, Serious Commercial Crime Courts in Cape Town and Bloemfontein.

 Other Infrastructure to the value of R34 million were provided in 2004/2005

• Equipment to 51 centres where sexual offences cases are heard.

• Goods / equipment / services to 198 courts and other offices.

• Vehicles procured to the value of R21 million.

The Department is in its third year of its restructuring programme implemented through the Re Aga Boswa and the model which was designed, piloted and refined in KwaZulu-Natal will be rollout to all provinces in the next 18 months in accordance with the following rollout schedule:

An internal focused impact assessment of the new model was conducted in KwaZulu Natal to ascertain change readiness and to derive lessons for the rollout. A summary of the main findings is presented in a separate report.

An external focussed impact assessment which will target the end users of the justice system (magistrates, prosecutors, members of public) is due to be completed by June this year.

The following pre-rollout activities are underway:

• Collations of statistical data (volumetrics to inform the organisational redesign processes;
• Refinement of the delegation in the light of the adjustment made to the project through the refinement process
• Conducting skills audit process in national and regional offices and court level to assess relevant competencies in line with the new job profiles to guide the redeployment process and re-skilling interventions.

An amount of R69 mil is require to rollout the court management model of which R37 mil has been budgeted for in the current financial year.

The rationalisation of the High Courts and the re-demarcation of magisterial districts are some of the Department’s key priority areas as part of the rebuilding exercise. This exercise entails the rationalisation of the service areas of the Supreme Courts in the former homelands and self governing States to be in line with the new constitutional order. The Superior Courts Bill which seeks to rationalise and align courts with provincial boundaries to enhance access is currently before Parliament. The refinement of the Superior Courts Bill following the Justice Colloquium held on 14 – 15 April 2005 will lead to the establishment of High Courts in all provinces (including Limpopo and Mpumalanga).

Furthermore, new magisterial districts aligned to the new municipal boundaries and in the place of the apartheid-drawn boundaries which denied access of services to the majority of communities will be proclaimed by the Minister during the 2004/5 financial year. A new magisterial district will be proclaimed for Soweto with the main seat of the court being planned for Orlando as the central location to serve the more than 2,6 million population of one of the largest township in the southern Africa.

The Department has advanced the process of bringing the judicial and magistracy professions closer to one another to operate under the same norms and standards, while preserving the hierarchal make-up of the High and lower courts. The promulgation of the Judicial Officers Amendment Act this year, which provides for the determination of salaries of magistrates by the Independent Commission on the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers is one of the highlights of our transformation process. From April 2005 salaries of Magistrates, like that of judges, constitute a direct charge against National Revenue, a step which further enhance the independence of the magistracy from past executive-control. The governance structure of the magistracy will be looked at after the Superior Courts Bill process has been finalised.

To provide capacity to the Chief Justice for judicial leadership the Superior Courts Bill provide for the establishment of a limited administrative structure for the Chief Justice. This administrative component will provide the required support for the Chief Justice to exercise his/her judicial management role, and we have commenced with investigation to design the structure of the office which will be modelled on the following key responsibility areas:

• Liaison and stakeholder interface
• Judicial Education
• Complaints Handling

Though some strides have been made to address the race and gender imbalance in the composition of the judiciary there is still much to be done. Of the 204 judges, 76 are black and 23 are women. With regard to the magistracy, of a total of 1 662, 794 are black, and 428 are women. One of the stiff challenges facing the judicial system is the inadequate female and black candidature for the bench. The development of an extensive judicial education programme biased towards female and black practitioners is part of the intervention the Department is looking at. Justice College is being revamped to provide training for potential judges and magistrates and to offer advanced training programmes for the current serving judicial officers. The revamped Justice College will be capacitated to develop and implement an extensive Human Resource Development strategy to address the skills gaps within the judiciary, prosecution and administration.

The Branch is committed to support the initiatives of developing judicial management and leadership competencies for women judges and magistrates undertaken by the South African Chapter of the International Women Judges (IAWJ) launched during Women’s day this year. The IAWJ has provided a business plan for the consideration of programmes that could be supported financially in this current financial year. The branch also provide administrative and financial support to the Minister’s programme of facilitating the fast tracking of appointment of women judges.

4.3.4 Lay Assessors

The extension of the lay assessor system to some regional courts in Gauteng, Western Cape and Eastern Cape continues to increase public participation in judicial processes. This initiative will narrow the bridge between the judiciary and the community it serves and will demystify judicial processes for easy comprehension by the public at large.

The Department’s contribution to the Integrated Justice System priorities relates mainly to: Improving the effectiveness of the criminal justice system.

Within the Department we are aligning all our activities to correspond to the 63 priority contact crime police stations – which have now been increased to 169. We are also ensuring we address the 21 development nodes in this regard. In addition both the JOINTS and the DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE is currently investigating ways and means to improve cluster coordination – including regular meetings - on the various levels. This process will be finalized in the next few months.

Other specific activities we are dealing with in conjunction with the cluster departments are:

The Department is currently operating 46 caseflow management centres (formerly Integrated Justice Court Centres) throughout the country and a technology solution, the e-scheduler has been rolled out in April 2005 at the above sites for effective management of cases. The aim of the Centres is to improve the co-operation between criminal justice role-players in the way that cases are managed. Case preparation cycle time has been reduced from 105 to 78 days at the centres. Alignment and linkages have been established between the areas where the Centres are located and some of the 63 priority police stations, particularly in the Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, Western Cape and Limpopo. It has been established that 44 courts are served by the 63 priority police stations.

Conviction rates in the district and regional courts increased between 2002 and 2004:

• Specialised courts:

The Department has gradually established specialised courts to deal with specialised and sensitive cases related to sexual offences, equality, family and domestic cases and community courts and these courts has shown significant progress in comparison to the other normal courts. Through the establishment of specialised courts the Department does not intend to have a proliferation of courts and perpetuating an unequal court system from the service delivery outcomes from the specialised and mainstream courts, but to build specialisation around special cases. The Department has initiated a process to review the impact, effectiveness and sustainability of specialised courts within the judicial system. To date the status of the specialised courts are as follows:

1. Umtata (EC),
2. Bloemfontein (FS),
3. Phuthaditjaba (FS),
4. Thohoyandou (1 July 2004), and
5. Kimberley (NC).

1. Point (Durban, KZN),
2. KwaMashu (Ntuzuma, KZN)
3. Hillbrow, (Gauteng)
4. Orlando (Gauteng)

4.5 Review of the Criminal Justice System – the Department, through court services Branch will be leading this process on behalf of the JCPS cluster to take the process beyond the principle approval of the terms of reference. The proposed review procedure with all logistical arrangements including funding issues will be placed before Cabinet soon. This process is will also indirectly evaluate and review the impact of initiatives already put in place through the IJS and NCPS processes.

We have embarked on a cross-cutting project with the assistance of other departments to look at ADR and other restorative justice programmes in the various departments to assist the formal justice systems. Training of magistrates regarding restorative justice aspects is continuing.

4.7 Court Integrity - The Department s in partnership with the UNODC have targeted few courts in Mpumalanga, Gauteng & Northern Cape to conduct an investigation which will lead to the development of an action plan to address those factors found to compromise the integrity of the courts.

The concept of access to justice calls up visions of a social order in which justice is brought within reach of all, both those blessed by their wealth and those depressed by their poverty. Underlying the concept is the notion that justice should be accessible to all equally and effectively, and conversely, that no one should suffer an injustice because she/he could not afford or was deterred from seeking due access to justice. The Branch is endeavoring 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 (after refinement of the model) to all major court centres and promoting legislation to deal with presiding officers of the divorce courts are a priority – in the interim training of existing family court staff is receiving attention and a new focus on ADR and basic counselling skills are planned for the future;
• More appointments of intermediaries and court preparation officers are being promoted for children’s cases;
• Social context training are being promoted for magistrates dealing with sexual offences cases and family law matters;

• Expanding the establishment of Sexual Offences courts;
• Fast tracking the implementation of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention Unfair Discrimination Act due to be promulgated;
• Building new court buildings and upgrading existing ones based on the need to address the unsatisfactory state of courts in previously marginalized areas.
• Family advocacy

• Maintenance improvement project

9. Adequate, modern and secured court facilities

• Integrated Facility Management Framework (Audit, Blueprint compliance)

• Alignment with urban and rural development nodes

• RAMPS

• Capital projects with focus on disadvantaged/ rural areas

• Disability access

• Automation

• Infrastructure

4.10 Development of a language policy for courts

This is receiving attention in order to promote the use of all languages including African languages in court proceedings

The new function on QM for courts will be redefined to be relevant to courts and enhance overall performance. The setting of service standards inline with Batho Pele principles will underpin the new QM role. Relevant bodies/institutes like SABS and TQM Institutes will be interfaced with in this exercise. This will be a paradigm shift from the current policing approach to quality assurance/inspecting

Despite clear indications that the personnel profiles of the Departments are changing, issues of perceived racism and willingness to transform attitudes appear to be an issue. Allegations of racism both overt and subtle were made. It is clear that there is a need to address the transformation of attitudes at a Departmental level with programmes such as diversity training and change management.

A colloquium was held recently to assist with some of the transformation aspects pertaining to the judiciary. The equality courts are also sending strong messages out that transformation is required in society in general and that government and the courts will come down on cases of racism.

Four main areas were found to be problematic:

• The Courts are not readily accessible to disabled persons.
• Demarcation of Magisterial Districts to be fast tracked
• Ensuring that Judicial Officers are trained regarding their duty to inform the accused of their right to legal representation.
• Rape: The high incidence of rape in the areas that were visited is alarming.
• Shortage of interpreters at all courts.
• The issue of court security is of enormous concern.
• Education on diversion, bail and plea bargaining.
• There were reports that some Magistrates are not utilising section 62(f) and section 276(1) (i) and (h) of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977, to their fullest extent.
• Shortage of accommodation and buildings undergoing renovations for a number of years. Building Maintenance Shocking conditions of the court cells and buildings in some instances.
• Magistrates no longer visit prisons or cells on a regular basis.

• The relationship with the traditional courts requires further exploration
• There is an urgent need for co-ordinated programmes to educate the community about legal processes
• There is a high turnover rate of prosecutors
• Courts reported that they lacked personnel, whether magistrates, prosecutors, interpreters or administrative staff.
• Case flow management becomes very difficult when external factors such as the availability of the accused legal representatives, the availability of court rooms, magistrates interpreters etc are taken into account.
• Attorneys appointed by the Legal Aid Board appear to be causing delays in court.
• Courts also reported a shortage of vehicles so that personnel could travel to periodical courts.
• A lack of basic resources, such as telephone lines, computer equipment was reported at police stations and courts alike.
• There are also difficulties in the implementation of Regional Courts, as it is creating pressure in terms of accommodation - there are not enough court rooms and the utilisation of district court structures is having a negative impact on the work of the district courts.
• Delays in finalising cases are also caused by transcription service providers.
• The statistics that are kept do not allow for easy comparison across the Justice cluster and even within the Department of Justice itself.
• The reasons given for cases being withdrawn include poor statement taking on part of SAPS; failure to complete investigation timeously; complainants in domestic violence cases requesting that their cases be withdrawn; failure of witnesses to arrive at court; and a lack of experienced
  prosecutors.
• The failure to provide Magistrates in the District Courts with a stenographer can sometimes compromise the ability to keep an accurate court record.
• The issue of language proficiency is one that needs to be addressed. At present, the language in which legal proceedings are conducted is that of English. This raises the issue of whether or not an accused’s right to a fair trial is compromised.

• The e-scheduler technology to support CFM,
• Court Management Skills Enhancement is receiving attention
• Development of ICFM Guidelines
• Mainstreaming the new Registrars Dispensation

• The type of activities that the IJS (integrated Justice System) has recently been involved in include: facilitating the establishment of electronic data interchange within the IJS departments; the professional management of exhibits and other pieces of evidence to secure the chain of evidence; the effective and efficient management of the offender and his/her case throughout the system; ensuring the availability of previous conviction records at bail and adjudication hearings; the establishment of a management information system for the IJS; the development of a National Photo Identification System for the efficient identification of suspects and accused persons; and the identification of suitable technology for the tracking of prisoners.

• Video Postponements are receiving attention.

Our vision is to meet the challenge of assisting the Government in the creation of a stable society in which all communities are able to live in peace, safety and security.

To achieve this we have been working full steam towards improving the way our courts operate, dealing with the backlogs in cases and in improving the interaction between the various departments in the integrated justice system (IJS). Steps include:

Though there are resource constraints, we are ready for the 21^st century and the challenges of the next five years.