• Representatives of the National Offices of the Independent Complaints Directorate on 9 March to discuss the 2005/06 budget allocation.

• Provincial Heads of the ICD from all nine provinces on 22 June 2005 to discuss their concerns and suggestions.

• Representatives from National Office of the ICD in 22 June 2005 to discuss follow-ups on problems raised by the Portfolio Committee arising from the meeting of 9 March 2005.

A decision was taken by the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security at the meeting on 22 June 2005 to table a report in Parliament for debate, highlighting the concerns of the Committee with regard to perceived problems in the current functioning of the ICD.

The purpose of this report is therefore to :

• Highlight problems , which have been identified by the Portfolio Committee in its interactions with

• the National Office of the ICD. These include problems with the management of the ICD’s budget.

• Highlight problems which have been identified by the Provincial Heads of the ICD. These include problems with the structure of the ICD and the relationship of the National Office to the provincial structures.

• Make recommendations to assist in the resolution of these identified problems

Problems identified by the Portfolio Committee

The following are some of the key concerns highlighted by the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security in its various interactions with the ICD:

Travel Expenditure

According to the ICD, its total travel expenditure for 2004/05 was R2,9 million of which approximately R650 000 was spent by National Office. The remainder was spent by the 9 provincial offices. The Eastern Cape office had the highest travel expenditure (R360 000), and the Northern Cape had the lowest travel expenditure (R130 000). The ICD has said that the expenditure of National Office in terms of travel is largely to cover visits to the provinces for service delivery audits, disciplinary hearings, personnel evaluations, interviews , imbizos and meetings with the Minister , MECs and Portfolio Committee. Discrepancies in provincial expenditure are attribute to the size of the province as well as the caseload and number of investigators that travel to crime scenes.

Concern: The Committee has raised numerous concerns around the high travel budget for the ICD, particularly with respect to the National Office. The National Office spends more than 3 times the average expenditure of an entire provincial office and consists of only 5 managers including the Executive Director. In addition, Committee members are confused by the vast discrepancies in expenditure between provincial offices, both in terms of total expenditure and in terms of line item expenditure.

The Committee is not satisfied with the explanations provided by the National Office, which either lack sufficient detail (e.g. briefing on 9 March 2005), or are confusing and not clearly explained (e.g. meeting on 22 June 2005).

Submission of Reports

In response to a concern raised by the Committee that the ICD is not submitting its reports to the Portfolio Committee, the Executive Director in her written response dated 23 May 2005 stated that:

· Of the 6 reports identified by the Portfolio Committee on 9 March 2005, 4 of these reports were not tabled as they had not in fact been written.

· The 2 Domestic Violence Act reports, which should have been tabled before Parliament, have not yet been tabled.

Concern: In the meeting of 9 March 2005, the Committee raised the concern that the ICD is not submitting its reports to the Portfolio Committee. The Committee raised this concern with respect to the 6 reports (4 research reports and 2 Domestic Violence) mentioned in the Estimates of National Expenditure 2005.

In response to the concern, the ICD promised in the meeting of 9 March 2005, that it would forward these reports to the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee immediately. However; in the response of the Executive Director dated 23 May 2005, she stated that 4 of these reports had not in fact been completed. This written explanation by the Executive Director contradicts verbal explanations given during the meeting of 9 March 2005 as well as information contained in the Estimates of National Expenditure 2005.

The Committee is concerned that this information was not presented accurately to the Committee. This may point to an attempt by the ICD to cover up information that they believe does not positively reflect on the functioning of ICD or may have been a result of ignorance as to the actual deliverables of the ICD.

Presentation of JCD statistics

The Portfolio Committee has periodically raised the concern that the way in which the ICD presents its figures, particularly with regard to deaths in police custody, may play a role in feeding misconceptions with regard to police misconduct. The Executive Director, in her response dated 23 May 2005, has committed herself to rectifying this problem in all subsequent reports. Reports will now include details of cases received as well as the outcomes of investigations in respect of these cases. This will assist in clarifying cases where the police were found to be accountable and those in which they were not

Concern: The Committee has pointed out to the ICD that insufficient detail on these figures allowed for a potentially incorrect interpretation to be formulated. This resulted in an interpretation by the Human Rights Watch Report that there had been an increase in cases of police misconduct while in fact the ICD had attributed an increase in reported cases to outreach programmes. The Committee is frustrated by the fact that the ICD only decided to take action to rectify this problem, after it had been faced with negative media publicity, as this could have been avoided if it had heeded previous concerns voiced by Committee members.

Lack of detail in reports

The Committee has expressed concern that both verbal and written reports submitted to the Committee are not detailed enough. The Executive Director, in her report dated 23 May 2005, has provided the Committee with the additional information as requested. This includes a detailed report of all categories of cases received by the ICD during the 2004/05 financial year in comparison with 2003/04, a provincial breakdown of total cases received for 2004/05 in comparison to the previous year and the outcome of finalised cases. In addition, this same written report details a summary of operational targets for the 2004/05 financial year and the actual performance of the ICD against each of the targets.

Concern: The Committee has expressed concern that both verbal and written reports submitted to the Committee are not detailed enough, especially in comparison to reports by the ICD in the past which have contained more detail. This lack of detail negatively impacts on the ability of the Committee to fulfil its oversight function effectively.

Lack of data for2004105

The Committee has stated that it is not possible to accurately reflect on the forthcoming budget when the figures in terms of expenditure and attainment of operational targets for the previous year are not provided. The Executive Director, in her report dated 23 May 2005, has provided the Committee with the figures as requested. The Executive Director provides a number of reasons in her report for the failure of the ICD to achieve a number of its operational targets for 2004/05.

Concern: The Committee requested that the ICD provide details of expenditure as well as the extent to which operational targets had been met for the 2004/05 financial year, as this information was not provided in the meeting of 9 March 2005. This hampers the ability of the Portfolio Committee to oversee the budget of the ICD effectively.

It is clear from the response by the Executive Director, that the ICD is not meeting its operational targets, particularly in terms of its core function of investigation of complaints. The ICD has determined targets in respect of investigation of cases of deaths and criminality on the basis that 80% of such cases should be finalised in 180 days. With regard to cases of deaths received, the ICD only achieved a finalisation rate of 63%. With regard to criminality, a finalisation rate of only 41% was achieved. Finally with regard to misconduct, a finalisation rate of only 44% was achieved. In addition, the ICD failed to meet its standard of producing 4 research reports and 2 Domestic Violence Act (DVA) reports in 2004/05.

The key concern of the Committee is that this information was only provided after prompting by the Committee and was not shared with the Portfolio Committee during the meeting on 9 March 2005. This information is extremely pertinent and the fact that it was not initially made available is of grave concern to the Committee. It is also of concern that the information provided in the Estimates of National Expenditure (ENE) may not be accurately represented.

Distribution of the budget between national and provincial offices

The Committee has noted a concern that, according to the provincial offices, a large proportion of the budget (approximately 47%) is allocated to the National Office with the remaining allocation divided among the 9 operational provincial offices. As a result of the skewed distribution, the ICD is not fulfilling its mandate effectively. In addition, it must be noted that despite numerous requests, the National Office of the ICD has never provided figures on the distribution of the budget between the National and Provincial Offices or accurate figure on the resources available at provincial offices.

Problems highlighted by Provincial ICD Heads

The Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security met with the Provincial Heads of the ICD from all nine provinces at Parliament on 22 June 2005. The purpose of the meeting was twofold. Firstly, it was an opportunity for Provincial ICD Heads to openly discuss problems that they experience in their provinces with the Members in a closed meeting without fear of victimisation by superiors or media scrutiny. Secondly, in light of the decision announced by the Minister of Safety and Security with regard to the potential restructuring of the Secretariat and the ICD, the meeting provided the Provincial Heads with an opportunity to identify their needs and make recommendations on how the ICD should be restructured to fulfil these needs.

It was clear from the briefing that all provinces experience the same type of problems and that differences are merely in terms of the severity of the problem experienced. The following are the key problems faced by the ICD provincial offices:

A number of problems were identified by the provinces in terms of staff shortages.

· There is a severe shortage of operational staff that reduces the ability of the provincial offices to achieve the mandate of the ICD.

• The shortage of investigators was of particular concern to all provinces. It was noted that the shortage of investigators is related to the number of people that the ICD is required to monitor in terms of its mandate, and the area serviced by the ICD which impacts on the time which it takes to travel to various crime scenes. Due to the shortage of investigators some investigators may have as many as 200 files assigned to them at any time. The shortage of investigators has also resulted in a huge backlog of cases going as far back as 1997 which impacts on the ability of investigators to operate effectively in reaching targets with regard to current cases.

· Provinces complained that even though the ICD received an increase for the 2005/06 financial year, this additional money was not allocated to core functions, such as investigators, but instead allocated to National Office staff.

· High caseloads and shortage of staff negatively effects service delivery and Provincial Heads noted an increase in complaints by the public about poor service delivery.

Accessibility

Many provinces identified the lack of satellite offices as reducing the accessibility of the service especially to rural areas. The lack of satellite offices also impacts negatively on the ability of the ICD to provide an effective and efficient service due to the long distances that must be travelled to reach crime scenes (and thus time delays between the incident and the ICD attending the scene). Marketing of the ICD to distant towns and areas is also hampered by the inaccessibility of its offices.

Community outreach

Provinces complained that the budget constraints that they face with regard to community outreach means that they are unable to market themselves effectively in many of the provinces particularly in outlying areas.

Measures to attract, recruit and retain staff

A number of problems were identified by provinces with regard to the difficulty in attracting and retaining staff. These include:

· The entry level salaries of operational posts is low compared to other bodies, such as the Safety and Security Secretariat, and the ICD thus struggles to compete for staff with this and other investigating bodies.

In addition, low salaries also hampers the ability of the ICD to retain staff.

· Promotional posts have been created at National Office to retain existing staff but not at provincial level where these are most urgently required.

· All investigators need to have an LLB or other legal qualification. This causes a number of problems, including the inability to attract suitably qualified persons as the salaries are not commensurate with these qualifications. This is also a factor contributing to the inability to retain these staff members.

· The legal requirement is applied even to entry-level posts for case workers who fall under the Complaints Registry programme. Case workers hired before this requirement are demoralised as they now cannot compete for other higher level jobs as they do not have the appropriate qualification. New job descriptions are required for these posts (as the initial job descriptions did not require them to do consultations and registration of complainants) but have not yet been forwarded by National Office.

· Some provinces complained that they still experience delays in the filling of posts due to lengthy vetting processes.

· For the last few years National Office has become involved in the recruitment process and the National Office Senior Management conducts interviews and act as chairpersons. The provinces find this disempowering, not cost effective and time consuming. Some provinces noted that the National Director appoints whom she likes regardless of the recommendations of panels in the provinces.

· Provinces complained of the delay in filling vacant posts largely attributed to over centralisation of this function. Delays in approval from Head Office means that recommended candidates find employment elsewhere with the result that the posts need to be re-advertised.

Centralisation of decision-making powers at National Office

All of the provinces raised a number of problems with regard to the centralisation of decision-making powers in a variety of spheres at National Office and the concomitant lack of managerial decision-making powers by provincial managers.

Examples include:

Overtime: Provincial managers may not approve overtime for investigators and all approvals need to be forwarded to the Human Resource Manager at Head Office, the Programme Director at National Office and the National Director who approves these on a case-by-case basis. This results in the late payment of claims and reluctance by investigators to work overtime.

Travel claims: Provincial managers may not approve claims when out of necessity a private vehicle is used for work purposes. Instead each trip must have the advance approval of the National Director.

Appointment of staff: National Office is responsible for approving the appointment of all staff, even interns. It may take up to 6 months to obtain this approval.

Media issues: The provincial offices are not allowed to communicate with the media, even on operational issues. All information has to be relayed to the National Office which is then responsible for liasing with and updating the media. Sometimes the provincial offices are not informed by National Office that provincial cases have been raised in the media and are thus disarmed when approached by the public, legal representatives and complainants on issues in this regard. The inability of the ICD Provincial Head to talk to the media also means that they are unable to market the ICD effectively in their provinces.

Discrepancies between provincial offices

Some Provincial Heads are appointed and function at Deputy Director level while others function at Director level. It was identified by some offices that the responsibilities and accountability of these people are the same and that therefore there should be uniformity in the appointment and functional level of Provincial Head posts.

Policies

Provinces raised a number of problems with policies that impact on the effective running of the provincial offices. Provinces stated that policies are not reviewed frequently enough, which sometimes results in the application of poor or irrelevant policies to staff.

For example:

Overtime: The policy states that there is no payment of overtime for travelling time for investigators to crime scenes after hours. Examples have been given where it may take between 3-6 hours for an investigator to reach a crime scene and thus a large proportion of their after-hours work may be utilised in reaching a particular destination. The policy has a negative effect on the morale of investigators.

National Office

A number of provinces raised the allegation that provincial office staff members have been told by National Office that staff who voice concerns about the way the ICD is run, are being insubordinate and should resign. Some provinces felt that this has mounted to threatening behaviour and intimidation. In addition, allegations were made that National Office has asked employees in the provinces to spy on colleagues.

Additional problems identified by a few of the provinces with regard to National Office include:

· The National Office staff are inaccessible and unapproachable as there is a highly developed sense of 'rank consciousness'.

· Provinces complained that the standards set by National Office for programmes such as Investigations are too high (i.e. investigation of cases is set at 80% investigation of all complaints) and set the provinces up for failure. Failures to meet standards are not sympathetically received even though constraints are faced by investigators, related to the lack of resources.

· A few provinces complained that the National Director undermines team spirit.

· Accusations were made about disorganisation at National Office, including ad hoc and unreasonable requests for information and misplaced documents which result in repeated requests for the same information.

Policing Powers and appointment certificates

Almost all provinces noted the delays in conferring policing powers to newly appointed investigators. Delays mean that in practice, many new appointees often wait for a year before they are able to commission statements and effect arrests. In addition, provinces noted similar delays in acquiring the necessary appointment certificate for new investigators, which identifies them as employees of the ICD. This exacerbates the existing problem of staff shortages.

Training

Training is centralised (the National Training Committee coordinates training) and according to some provinces there is a perception that many staff members in the provinces do not benefit at all from training or else are sent too frequently to Pretoria for training. Even when managers in the provinces identify specific training needs for individual staff members they are unable to ensure that they receive this training or to arrange for this training by local service providers. Provinces have little role to play in staff development.

Anti-Corruption Command

A few provinces noted particular problems with the newly established Anti-Corruption Command which is based at National Office. These include:

· Investigators begin the investigation process in the provinces (i.e. by taking an initial statement) and then leave the provincial investigators with the responsibility of completing the investigation which takes up the time of the provincial investigators concerned.

· They utilise provincial investigators when they are in the provinces effectively hampering the provincial offices from continuing with their day-to-day duties.

· There is an accusation that the Command has a large budget, which is spent on expensive equipment, including vehicles and long distance cameras that are seldom used.

· The sentiment seems to be that these functions can be more effectively fulfilled by the provinces and that the establishment of this function at national level has no impact on the expeditious handling of corruption cases.

Relationship with the SAPS

The following problems were identified by provinces with regard to interactions with the SAPS, which negatively affects on their ability to perform in line with the mandate of the ICD.

Domestic Violence Act: Provinces stated that they receive no or very few applications for exemption by SAPS with regard to compliance with the Act, even though training has been provided to SAPS members. In addition, no monthly returns for non-compliance are submitted by some Area Commissioners. This hampers their ability to fulfil their mandate of monitoring the implementation of the DVA.

Notifications: Some provinces experienced the problem of late notifications of deaths in police custody or as a result of police action. Sometimes no notifications are received at all.

Recommendations