The
Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on
Justice and Constitutional Development, dated 26 October 2011
The Portfolio Committee on Justice
and Constitutional Development, having considered the performance and additional
budget requests for the medium term period of the Department of Justice and
Constitutional Development, National Prosecuting Authority, Legal Aid
1. Introduction
1.1.
The Committee oversees the
activities of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and
other institutions, which all receive their allocation under the Justice and
Constitutional Development Vote. These other institutions include the National
Prosecuting Authority (NPA); Legal Aid South Africa (LASA); Special
Investigating Unit (SIU); South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and
Public Protector (PP).
1.2.
Each year, as part of its oversight
function, the Committee considers and reports on the annual reports of the
Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the other institutions
referred to it.
1.3.
In addition, the Money Bills Procedures and Related
Matters Amendment Act, (Act 9 of 2009), sets out the process that allows Parliament
to make recommendations to the Minister of Finance to amend the budget of a
national department. As part of this process, portfolio committees must compile
Budgetary Review and Recommendation Reports (BRRR) in October of each year,
containing recommendations relating to funding allocations for departments and
other institutions that account to them. The BRRR are also source documents for
the Standing Committee on Finance when it makes recommendations to the House on
the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement (MTBPS). The annual review and analysis
of performance (entailing both financial and non-financial performance
indicators) also forms part of this process.
1.4.
This is the second year that the Committee is
undertaking the BRRR process. The Committee believes that its engagement with
the Justice Department, NPA, LASA, SIU, SAHRC and PP has been robust. However, it
is not enough to engage on performance annually. For this reason, in the past
year, the Committee has met quarterly with the Department to establish how well
it is performing against planned expenditure. The Committee has also met regularly
with the other institutions on their respective performance and related
spending.
1.5.
The Committee was briefed on the annual performance
for 2010/11 of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, NPA,
LASA, SIU and SAHRC. The briefings took place from 11 – 14 October 2011. The
meeting with the Public Protector was cancelled when she did not appear at the
scheduled meeting on 14 October 2011. The meeting was rescheduled to 25 October
2011. The Committee also met with the Auditor-General on the audit outcomes on
18 October 2011. Copies of the presentations are available from the committee
secretary. The Committee has already considered and reported on the respective
strategic plans and budget proposals of the Justice Department, NPA, LASA, SIU,
SAHRC and PP for 2011/12. As mentioned in paragraph 1.4., the Committee has
also reviewed the Department’s performance for the first quarter of 2011/12.
1.6.
The National Director of Public Prosecutions was
unable to be present at the NPA’s meeting with the Committee on 12 October
2011, tendering his apology at a late stage. Although the Committee is grateful
for the presence of the Director General: Justice and Constitutional
Development (in her capacity as accounting officer) and NPA officials to answer
questions, the Committee is of the view that this is last time it will meet
with the NPA on its annual performance without the NDPP being present. The
Committee seriously considered cancelling the meeting but did not as this would
have resulted in wasteful expenditure.
1.7.
This Report comprises five parts:
Part 1
2.
Context and
background
2.1.
Core
functions
Briefly, the core functions of the Department, NPA, LASA, SIU, SAHRC and
PP are as follows:
·
Department
of Justice and Constitutional Development: The Department’s core
function relates to the management of the criminal and civil justice systems.
It is also
responsible for several activities that are not necessarily related to the
management of criminal and civil justice system, for example, the provision of
legal services to government, the management of funding for political parties
and the reparations policy flowing from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(TRC).
·
National
Prosecuting Authority (NPA): The NPA institutes criminal
proceedings on behalf of the State.
·
Legal
Aid South Africa (LASA): LASA provides independent legal
representation to the poor at State expense.
·
Special
Investigating Unit (SIU): The SIU recovers and prevents
financial losses to the state that is due to acts of corruption, fraud and maladministration
and can institute civil legal action to correct any wrongdoing. Its
investigations are mandated by Presidential proclamation.
·
South
African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC): The
Commission’s mandate is extremely broad, encompassing almost every aspect of
civil, political, economic and political rights. It must promote respect for
human rights; promote their protection, development and attainment; and monitor
how well they are observed. The Constitution also provides that the Commission
annually monitor the implementation of the socio-economic rights contained in
the Constitution. The Commission has specific obligations in terms of the
Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 and
the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000.
·
Public Protector: The Office of the
Public Protector (OPP) was established to ensure government’s accountability
and to provide remedies for maladministration and abuse of authority. The
Public Protector is empowered to investigate report on, and suggest remedial
action for a wide range of wrongdoings in the public administration.
2.2.
Overview:
of the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote 2010/11 - 2011/12
Table 1: Overview of Budget and
real percent change - 2010/11 and 2011/12
|
Programme |
Budget
(R million) |
Real
Percent change |
Real
percent change |
|
|
2010/11 |
2011/12 |
2010/11
(%) |
2011/12
(%) |
|
|
Administration |
1 427.4 |
1 625.2 |
13.86 % |
8.64 % |
|
Court
Services |
3 994.2 |
4 341.7 |
8.70 % |
3.72 % |
|
State
Legal Services |
722.1 |
750.7 |
3.96 % |
(0.80 %) |
|
National
Prosecuting Authority |
2 684.3 |
2 640.3 |
(1.64 %) |
(6.14 %) |
|
Auxiliary
and Associated Services |
1 959.5 |
2 055.7 |
13.86 % |
8.64 % |
|
Total (excluding direct charge) |
10
787 5 |
11
413.6 |
4.91 % |
0.10 % |
2.2.1. In 2010/11, the total
adjusted appropriation for the Justice and Constitutional
Development Vote
was R12.7 billion. This included a direct charge against the National Revenue
Fund of R 1.9 billion for judges’ and magistrates’ salaries. Of this amount,
the main appropriation to Programmes was R10.25 billion but an adjustment of
R536 million in October 2010, brought the total adjusted appropriation for the
Vote’s programmes to R10.78 billion.
2.2.2.
The allocation is distributed among five programmes:
·
The Department of Justice and Constitutional
Development administers
three: Administration; Court Services; and State Legal Services. (Together
these three programmes received just less than 55% of the allocation).
·
Programme 4: National Prosecuting Authority received an
adjusted appropriation of R2.7 billion (approximately 25% of the allocation).
As has been the case since 2001, separate financial statements were prepared
for the NPA, although the Director-General: Justice and
Constitutional Development is the Accounting Officer.
·
Programme 5: Auxiliary and Related Services includes two
state institutions supporting constitutional democracy, the South African Human
Rights Commission and Public Protector, as well as the Special Investigating
Unit and Legal Aid South Africa. The Programme received R1.95 billion for
2010/11 (approximately 17% of the allocation).
2.2.3. Unforeseen and unavoidable expenditure (adjustments) in 2010/11: The Vote was adjusted by R536 million
in October 2010 (of this amount, R320 million was allocated to the Department
(Court Services programme), the NPA and LASA for the implementation of Phase 2
of the OSD; R21.9 million was allocated for the Presidential Project: United in
Diversity; and R195 million was allocated for higher personnel remuneration
increases than the main budget allowed for, including increased housing
allowances (This includes
allocations to LASA, the SIU, the PP and the SAHRC).
2.2.4. Virements in 2010/11: There were supplementary virements
between programmes after the Adjustments’ appropriation to fund the following
shortfalls:
·
R36.9 million that went unspent on compensation of employees
was shifted from the court service programme to the goods and services budget
in the Administration programme.
·
R51.2 million that went unspent on compensation of employees
was shifted from the State Legal Services programme to the goods and services
budget in the Administration programme.
·
R175.72 million was shifted from the NPA to the
Administration programme to fund overspending in respect of payments for
security at courts, municipal rates and taxes and
accommodation charges.
2.2.5.
Overall, the Department spent 98.9% of the adjusted budget in
2010/11 compared to 99.8% in 2009/10. The unspent balance of R89.1 million at
the end of the 2010/11 financial year is greater than in 2009/10, when only
R26.8 million went unspent.
·
The underspending can largely be attributed to challenges
relating to earmarked amounts: R40.1 million in the Integrated Justice System
(IJS) went unspent as a result of slow expenditure by the Departments comprising the Justice Crime
Prevention and Security (JCPS) Cluster. The Department reports that the JCPS
cluster has an ongoing challenge with ICT integration which has resulted in
serious under-expenditure. For close to a decade, the IJS Board has worked to
ensure integrated information across the Criminal Justice System. National
Treasury reports that the IJS programme tends to spend the largest part of the
allocation during the last quarter of every financial year, which is regarded
as fiscal dumping and should be avoided in order to prevent a reduction in the
budget in 2011/12. The Department noted in its Strategic Plan 2011-16 that
problems exist between the IJS and State Information Technology Agency (SITA).
·
R44.6 million was ‘saved’ when the public-private
partnership for Third Party Funds was suspended (on1 April 2010).
·
In addition, R4.48 million was not paid to the Safety and
Security Sector Education and Training Authority, as the Department
had not been invoiced.
2.2.6. 2010 Budgetary Review and Recommendation
Report. The Committee had made certain funding
recommendations in its 2010 Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report. The
following amounts were subsequently allocated for:
·
Accommodation, specifically to build a high court in
Mpumalanga at Nelspruit and to address related infrastructure issues, such as
maintenance of buildings. The additional amounts allocated are R240 million and
R250 million in 2012/14 and 2013/14 respectively.
·
Information Communication Technology, specifically to
replace obsolete equipment and to expand its network. Additional amounts of
R100 million in 2012/13 and R110 million in 2013/14 are allocated for this.
·
LASA also received additional funds to improve its
practitioner-per-court ratio, to accommodate OSD funding and to increase
ability to undertake civil work. Additional amounts of R44.6 million, R90.8
million and R106.3 million were allocated for increased capacity, for improved
conditions of service and the implementation of Phase 2 of the OSD for legally
qualified professionals.
·
The PP and the SAHRC received additional funds to support
their mandate: The PP was allocated additional amounts of R18.3 million, R24.1
million and R27.8 million for increased investigative capacity, improved
conditions of service and municipal and accommodation charges. The SAHRC was allocated
R6.2 million and R13 million for increased legal capacity, improved conditions
of service and municipal and accommodation charges.
2.2.7. Budget allocation for 2011/12:
The Justice and Constitutional Development Vote received R13.5 billion for
2011/12. If the direct charges for judges and magistrates salaries are
excluded, the Department received R11.4 billion. The allocation to programmes,
overall, grows in real terms by only 0.96% compared to 2010/11. (It is only the
Administration, Court Services and Auxiliary and Associated Services programmes
that see real growth). An amount of R245 million is added to the baseline for
2011/12: Additional amounts are for the Presidential Initiative (R30 million);
OSD Phase 2 – for the NPA and Department (R45 million and R 5 million
respectively). The baseline was reduced, however, by R114 million and R33.2
million as a consequence of the cancellation of the Third Party Fund Public-Private
Partnership and further savings effected by Cabinet, respectively.
2.2.8. Spending for the 1st Quarter 2011/12: Overall
the Department reported that it had spent R3.08 billion or 25% of the total
available budget (excluding the Direct Charges) at the end of July 2010.
Capital spending, however, is at 39.9% as payments for buildings and other
fixed structures became due earlier than expected.
2.3.
Reported
spending pressures: Over the medium term, the
Department reports the following spending pressures:
·
The Department has identified investment in information
technology as a key enabler. However, budget cuts have affected the IT
maintenance plan with the following consequences: Ageing servers and other
infrastructure; out-of-warranty servers that are a high operational risk; an
inadequate business continuity plan; and a slow network that impacts negatively
on turn-around in service delivery.
·
There have been incidents of serious crime against staff
members and the public (such as intimidation, murder, theft of state assets,
theft of dockets and court records, escapes and robberies with aggravating circumstances.)
To curb the costs of increasing security at service delivery points, the
Department is exploring the possibility of using the South African National
Defence Force to secure service delivery points.
·
The Department has a major challenge in addressing the
historical imbalances of the court infrastructure: prior to 1994, most court
services were not situated in townships or in rural areas. When the Department
decided to increase its services to previously excluded areas; facilities were
unsuitable, requiring major refurbishment. Unfortunately, addressing the
problem is complicated by the: Escalation of infrastructure costs above
inflation, which means the cash flow for building new courts is often
insufficient and results in construction being postponed; the need to take into
account the maintenance and accessibility programmes of existing facilities;
the use of the infrastructure budget for additional accommodation where
necessary; the growth in establishment and new services delivered.
·
There has been a significant increase in litigation against
the state that requires interventions such as the development of a policy to
manage state litigation and increased resources to the Office of the State
Attorney.
·
Other areas affected by budgetary constraints are:
Increasing the establishment of the lower courts and providing the judiciary
with adequate ‘tools of trade’; expansion of support personnel establishment
(interpreters, finance and supply chain management personnel), as well as
personnel performing quasi-legal functions; implementation costs of new and
proposed legislation; document and record management; adequate provision of
library services to the various courts; and the enhancement of constitutional
development programmes.
3.
Key issues raised by the
Auditor-General (AG) relating to the Department of Justice and Constitutional
Development for 2010/11
3.1.
The Department received a qualified
audit outcome for 2010/11, as for previous years, with emphasis of matter and
other matters.
Table 3: Department of Justice and Constitutional
Development:
Audit findings 2010/11
|
Third Party Funds |
|
·
Could not rely on the adequacy of
the Funds financial system and control system. ·
Could not determine whether the
revenue of R306 677 000 had been properly collected and recorded. ·
Could not determine whether
potential claims against the Fund as a result of fraud/theft and losses (R67
108 000) were complete. ·
Could not determine whether the
money collected on behalf of the state and not yet paid to the Department
(R115 261 000) had been properly collected and recorded. |
|
Irregular expenditure |
|
·
Normal procurement policies and
policies were not followed. (The PFMA requires the implementation and
maintenance of an appropriate procurement and provisioning system.) ·
The Department did not have system
for identifying irregular expenditure. The Auditor-General was not satisfied
as to the completeness of irregular expenditure of R81 067 000. |
3.2.
The Department reported the following
key initiatives to achieve an unqualified audit:
·
Debriefing workshops for executive management, regional
heads and regional finance directors.
·
Comprehensive audit action plans, supplemented by regional
audit action plans on identified audit risk areas.
·
Establishment of internal control component for expenditure
management and monitoring, adherence to financial prescripts and reporting.
·
Additional human resource capacity in supply chain
management and asset management.
·
Task teams deployed in regions for training and technical
guidance
·
Focusing on compliance, asset management, irregular
expenditure and supply chain management practices.
·
Enhancing departmental policies and prescripts – especially
three quotes, delegations and tax compliance of service providers.
·
Monthly progress reporting to Executive management on status
of implementation of approved audit action plans.
·
Quarterly financial statements preparation, which are
quality reviewed by the senior manager in financial reporting services.
Exceptions are investigated and followed through.
·
There is a detailed action plan to
resolve the qualification of Third Party Funds.
3.3.
The Department also reports initiatives
to address the quality of performance information:
·
Appointment of two directors to address concerns regarding
the quality of performance information.
·
Implementation of policies and procedures to assist with the
effective management of performance information.
·
Implementation of an electronic performance management
system (TROUX)
·
Implementation to the Barn Owl system to assist management
of forensic, grievance and disciplinary case information.
·
Increased focus on performance management by
internal audit.
Part
2
4.
Overview
of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development’s strategic and
operational environment
4.1.
Outcomes-based
approach to service delivery
In January 2010, Government adopted an outcomes-based approach to
performance. The Justice Department leads the JCPS Cluster, which is
responsible for the outcome ensuring that ‘All People in South Africa are and
feel safe’. Specific outputs and measures have been identified for the JCPS
cluster, and focus largely on measures to combat crime and corruption.
Table 4: Outcome 3 - All People in SA are protected and feel safe
|
Outputs |
Key
spending programmes |
|
1.
Reduce overall level of crime, in
particular contact and trio crimes. 2.
An effective and integrated
criminal justice system. 3.
Corruption within the JCPS cluster
combated to ensure effectiveness and ability to serve as deterrent to crime. 4.
Improve perceptions of crime among
the population. 5.
Improve investor perceptions and
trust by reducing levels of corruption. 6.
Effective and integrated border
management. 7.
Integrity of identity of citizens
and residents secured. 8.
Cyber-crime combated. |
·
Increase police personnel. ·
Establish tactical response teams
in provinces ·
Upgrade IT infrastructure at CS
facilities. ·
ICT renewal in the justice
cluster. ·
OSD for legal professionals. ·
Deploy SANDF soldier to South Africa’s
borders. |
The JCPS Cluster is addressing blockages identified in the Criminal
Justice Review, implementing the recommendations that form part of the
Seven-point transformation plan. Most of these elements have been incorporated
in the Cluster’s service delivery agreements. In addition, the Cluster has
focused on broadening access to justice for all, improved efficiency in courts
and on combating violence and crimes against the vulnerable.
4.2.
Overview
of the Strategic Plan 2010-2014
The
Department’s strategic plan for 2010/11 reflects the Outcome 3 and the related
outputs. The Department has three programmes, directed towards three strategic
goals: Improving the administration of justice (with special emphasis on good
governance and accountability); providing effective and efficient justice
services (facilitate speedy resolution of criminal, civil and family law
matters); and providing for transformed legal services. Within these broad
strategic goals the Department’s Strategic Plan 2010-2014 established certain
core strategic objectives, which were linked to targets and outputs (all of
these were revised in 2011/12 in line with the new Strategic Plan 2011-2016).
The core strategic objectives were to the following:
·
Improve corporate governance to comply with the PFMA.
·
Manage priority projects aimed at improving internal
control.
·
Provide sound management of state resources.
·
Expand justice infrastructure and services to people living
in townships and rural areas.
·
Provide strategic leadership to the JCPS.
·
Increase public understanding of justice and demonstrate
service delivery.
·
Intervene to protect the victims of apartheid and crime.
·
Provide sound support to the judiciary.
·
Review the criminal and civil justice systems.
·
Ensure qualitative and timely justice services.
·
Provide sound administrative support to regional offices.
·
Improve delivery of services to comply with Batho Pele.
·
Protect and promote the rights of vulnerable groups.
·
Promote constitutional development.
·
Improve provision of legal services to the state.
·
Administer deceased and insolvent estates, Guardian’s fund
and trusts.
4.3.
Overview
of the organisational and service delivery environments for 2010/11
4.3.1. The
Department reports the following organisational challenges in 2010/11 that adversely
effected service delivery:
·
A total of 90 days were lost due to public service strike
action (at a cost of R2 415 million). This resulted in reduced court
productivity during 2010/11 compared to 2009/10.
·
The number of fraud and corruption cases increased when compared
with 2008/09 and 2009/10.
·
FIFA cases were dealt with through dedicated resource
allocation in 56 court rooms with infrastructure and security upgrades as well
as additional human resources. (R45 million was allocated for the FIFA courts,
which ceased to operate at the end of July 2010).
·
The Department’s operational budget was reduced by more than
R2.1 billion for the MTEF period.
·
The Department has difficulty in retaining staff in key
areas, such as the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, risk management and
the strategy unit, although in 2010/11 five senior management posts were filled
in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.
4.3.2.
The service delivery environment has
been affected by the following:
·
Three court buildings were completed (Ashton Periodical
court (Western Cape), Ekangala Magistrate Office (Mpumalanga) and Hankey
Magistrates Office (Eastern Cape)).
·
Additional Accommodation was provided at three Magistrates
offices in Stanger (KwaZulu-Natal), Swellendam (Western Cape) and Bredasdorp
(Western Cape).
·
A total of 10 other major capital projects were carried over
from 2009/10.
·
As in 2008/09 and 2009/10, the Department reports that a key
factor contributing to non-completion of the bulk of capital projects was
because of poor contractor performance, as well as labour unrest and
‘unforeseen ground conditions’. These delays have become a major cost driver: Projects
end up costing more than anticipated and hamper delivery on new projects and
the provision of facilities for people with disabilities.
·
An invitation to tender was to be made for one capital
project in 2010/11 - the Nelspruit High Court. Budget issues and the focus on
the construction of the Polokwane High Court led to the lease of alternative
accommodation at the Simunye Building for the Nelspruit High Court for the next
five years. Construction of the Polokwane High Court (R301.7 million) began in
February 2010. The building is expected to be completed by March 2012, although
there have been delays.
·
Maintenance/repair issues continue to be a challenge and
funding never seems to be adequate to address the backlog.
·
The workload of magistrate’s courts, family (divorce) courts
and high courts increased substantially.
·
A total of 61 regional courts were designated for hearing of
civil cases and divorce matters. Nine registrars and 51 assistant registrars
were appointed.
·
Investments were made in building regional capacity (the
Department reports that R75 million was set aside to ensure all courts are
properly capacitated).
·
A report was compiled to investigate the sheriffs sector in
order to address serious capacity and transformation issues.
·
A total of 26 new Small Claims’ courts were opened and there
has been an increase in the number of cases.
·
A total of 15 designated branch courts were monitored and
additional capacity provided depending on increasing case loads.
4.4.
Overview
of (revised) Strategic Plan 2011-2016
4.4.1. The Department has
revised its strategic plan 2011-2016 to comply with the National Treasury
Framework for Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans, which focuses on
outcomes-based planning.
4.4.2. The Department has the
following four strategic goals:
o
Goal 1: To increase the Department’s accountability,
effectiveness and efficiency. (Improved compliance with legal and good practice
requirements in respect of governance across all branches and structures
towards an unqualified audit.)
o
Goal 2: To improve the effectiveness and efficiency in the
delivery of justice service.(Courts and justice service points are supported to
improve finalisation rates, efficiencies and backlogs in respect of all
criminal, civil and family matters.)
o
Goal 3: To transform legal services to protect and advance
the interests of government and citizens and to promote constitutional
development. (The exposure of government to legal risk is reduced, citizens
have access to quality guardian and probate services, the state has access to
legal advice and services and constitutional development is promoted.)
o
Goal 4: To effectively coordinate the JPCS Cluster in the
delivery of Outcome 3.
4.4.3.
The strategic plan refers to three projects that have been
prioritised for 2011/12. These are to achieve an unqualified audit outcome
in 2012/13; service turnaround in maintenance services; and service
turnaround in the Masters’ Branch.
4.4.4. The spending focus over
the MTEF period is on reviewing the civil justice system, implementing approved
legislation (such as, the Children’s Act, 2005; the Child Justice Act, 2008;
and the Sexual Offences Act, 2008). In addition, rolling out the Constitutional
Development branch, repositioning the Master of High Court, turning around
audit qualifications, Third Party Funds accounting systems, building high
courts in Nelspruit and Polokwane and further modernisation of the systems and
procedures in the courts are areas on which spending will focus.
Part 3
5.
Performance information
for each Programme 2010/2011
Department
of Justice and Constitutional Development
5.1.
Programme 1-
Administration
5.1.1.
The Administration programme is responsible for the management of the department, and development
of policies and strategies for the efficient adminstrion of justice. It
facilitates the resolution of criminal, civil and family law disputes by
providing accessible, efficient and quality adminstrative support to the
courts.
5.1.2.
Expenditure on Administration grew at an average annual
rate of 7% from R1.2bn in 2007/08 to R1.4bn in 2010/11. Growth in expenditure
for this programme is expected to be on average 8.7% per annum over the medium
term, reaching R1.8 billion in 2013/14. The growth in both periods is mainly
due to additional allocations for increased municipal and accommodation charges. In 2010/11, the programme spent 99.7% of its allocated
funds.
5.1.3.
Programme performance:
Table 5: Administration: Selected
targets and actual performance 2010/11
|
Administration 2010/11 |
|
|
Selected targets |
Performance |
|
Resolve 90% of top corporate risks |
Target achieved 100% resolved and risk mitigation plans developed |
|
Complete 80% of approved audit plans |
Target achieved
96% completed. |
|
Reduce vacancy rate to 10%. |
Target achieved
9.8% (including judges and magistrates). 5105 posts
filled (1249 permanent appointments, 3520 contract appointments and 336
promotions.)
Three key
senior management positions were filled in the office of the Chief Financial
Officer. A recruitment plan was developed to monitor adherence to the
recruitment turnaround time |
|
Train 4500 people at justice college. |
Target achieved 5841 trained (5613 were trained in 2009/10 ) |
|
Conduct 10 staff awareness sessions in respect of
risk management |
Target achieved 29 sessions held (400 staff attended sessions) |
|
Roll out of ICMS to 250 lower and 12 High Courts |
Target achieved ICMS was rolled out to 478 lower courts and 12 High
Courts. |
|
Respond to 100% of Presidential hotline enquires and
finalise 60% within 30 days of receiving them |
Target not
achieved 62.5% finalised within 30 days |
|
Ensure no repeat of audit findings |
Target not
achieved Only 60% of audit findings resolved because of lack
of integration between financial systems BAS and Justice Yellow Pages. |
|
Ensure 100% of assets captured |
Target not
achieved 80% due to non-compliance by staff with asset
management/ supply chain management procedures. |
|
100% of lost court records to be reconstructed. |
Target not
achieved Only 44% of lost records were tracked and restored
in identified priority courts because of challenges in reconstruction of
records. |
|
100% of leave forms to be captured within 20 days. |
Target not
achieved 69% of leave forms were captured within 10 days due
to non-compliance by staff and problems with the PERSAL system. |
|
Finalise 60% of disciplinary and 70% of grievance
cases |
Target not
achieved 40% of disciplinary cases and 48% of grievance cases
were finalised. For forensic cases, new cases were finalised within six
months against a target of 2 months. |
|
Finalisation of outstanding TRC cases and supporting
regulations. |
Target not
achieved 30% of outstanding no. of victims to be identified
by 2011. Development of regulations delayed due to
consultation with stakeholders. |
5.1.4.
Key challenges arising
during 2010/11
·
Finalisation of disciplinary, grievance and forensic cases:
40% of disciplinary cases and 48% of grievance cases were finalised against the
target of 60% and 70% respectively.
·
Qualification on irregular expenditure and Third Party Funds.
·
The Auditor-General made audit findings on performance
information: The Department’s performance information was found to be deficient
in respect of validity and accuracy.
·
Finalisation of outstanding TRC cases and supporting
regulations: Only 8 (1%) of the 875 beneficiaries were paid in 2010/11.
·
Lost records: Only 44% of lost records were reconstructed
against the target of 100%. An off-site record project was implemented to store
digital copies of case documentation. This project has been implemented at five
courts and a total of 2 877 260 case (75 million pages) digitised.
·
Finalisation of security roll out projects: Only seven
security installations were completed against the target of 127. Challenges include heritage sites and the lack
of building drawings. A plan has been put in place to address the pace of roll
out for 2011/12.
5.2.
Programme 2- Court
Services
5.2.1. The Court Services programme facilitate the resolution of
criminal, civil and family law disputes by providing accessible, efficient and
quality administrative support to the courts and managing court facilities.
5.2.2.
Expenditure on Court Services grew from R2.7bn to R4bn, at
an average annual rate of 14.2%, between 2007/08 to 2010/11. Over the medium
term, the programme is expected to grow to R5.4bn, at an average annual rate of
10.6%. The historical growth can be attributed to the implementation of a
number of projects involving new approved legislation and specialised courts
for the 2010 FIFA World Cup, while growth over the medium term isas a result of
additional allocations for the construction of new courts, implementation of
legislation and improved conditions of service. The programme spent 98.9% of
its allocation in 2010/11.
5.2.3.
Programme performance:
Table 6: Court services -
Selected targets and actual performance 2010/11
|
Court Services 2010/11 |
|
|
Performance indicator and target |
Performance |
|
·
Strengthen establishment in the Office
of the Chief Justice: Finalise the structure and appoint 5 critical staff by
2010 |
Target
achieved The structure was finalised and 5 temporary staff
were appointed. |
|
·
Finalise policy framework on
transformation of the courts, Superior Courts Bill, the Constitution 19th
Amendment Bill and Traditional Courts Bill by 2011 |
Target
achieved 100% complete |
|
Increase finalisation of lower court cases by 2% by
2010 |
Target not
achieved No increase in finalisation of cases |
|
·
Reduce case backlogs in 42 backlog
courts from 11 00 cases to 14 815 (target 14 815 for 2010) |
Target
achieved 15 403 cases resolved |
|
Increase cases currently diverted by 40% from
baseline by 2012/12 |
Target not
achieved 2% increase in adult diversion and 42% decrease in
child diversion |
|
Ensure effective implementation of the Seven Point
Plan: Appoint at least 4 critical staff to the CJS statistics centre |
Target not
achieved No permanent staff appointed |
|
Improve capability of regional offices to improve
delivery of justice services: 80% implementation by 2010 of funded priority
projects to improve internal control systems |
Target partially
achieved Training interventions |
|
Provide sound management of resources provided to
the region: Ensure 65% of staff are trained by 2010 on service delivery, IT
asset and financial and operation management |
Target
partially achieved Training interventions implemented at regional level |
|
Ensure efficient delivery of maintenance services: 80 % of applications resolved within 20 days |
Target not
achieved 0% resolved within 20 days |
|
Ensure efficient delivery of maintenance services: Ensure service delivery within 2 hours of being in a
queue |
Target not
achieved 92.1% of courts served clients within this time.
7.8% could not. |
|
Ensure compliance with Child Justice Act and
Children’s Act: Implement the Child Justice Act and reduce the criminal cases
involving children through diversion by 12% in 2012/13. |
Target not
achieved Diversion of children decreased by 42% |
|
Ensure the effective resolution of sexual offences,
trafficking in persons, domestic violence and gender hate crimes: Develop a
strategy for reduction of gender- based offences and finalise trafficking in
persons bill |
Targets achieved |
5.2.4.
Court services recorded the
following key achievements in 2010/11:
·
A total of 64% of family cases involving children’s matters
were finalised during the period under review, against the target of 50%.
·
A total of 60% of the identified interventions of the
7-point plan of the criminal justice system were finalized in line with the
annual target. These include pre-screening protocol for case readiness and
improved co-ordination between the NPA and the Legal Aid South Africa.
·
The number of backlog cases removed was increased to 15 403,
against the target of 14 815.
·
The Department assisted with the formation of the newly
established Office of the Chief Justice by providing staff. By the end of the
year, 5 key staff members were appointed in line with targets.
·
A total of 962 317 new cases were enrolled and 535 429 cases
were disposed of, resulting in a positive clearance ratio of 2.7%.
·
There was an increase in the use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution Mechanisms (ADRM).
·
Both lower and high courts maintained high conviction rates
– High Courts: 87.8%; Regional Courts: 73.4%; District Courts: 90.7%.
·
The number of cases withdrawn was reduced by 7.1%. This is
due to implementation of improved screening processes.
5.2.5.
Key challenges arising in 2010/11:
·
Case finalisation: There was a 0% increase in finalisation
of lower court criminal cases (against the annual target of a 2% increase). The
finalisation of criminal cases has dropped compared to 2009/10.
·
Indicators for diversions and admissions of guilt have been
a challenge. Further strengthening of processes to ensure more accurate data
recording is being investigated.
5.3.
Programme 3 - State Legal
Services
5.3.1.
This programme provides legal and legislative services to
government,, supervises the administration of deceased and insolvent estates
and the Guardian’s Fund, and prepares and promotes legislation and undertakes
research in support of this.
5.3.2.
Expenditure on State Legal Services increased from R390.3m in
2007/08 to R722.1m in 2010/11, at an average annual rate of 22.8%. The strong
historical growth can mainly be attributed to additional allocations for
improved access to Guardian’s Fund, including deceased and insolvent estates
services, as well as increased capacity in the Master’s and State Attorney’s
offices. The programme spent 100% of its allocation for 2010/11.
5.3.3.
Programme performance:
Table 7: State Legal Services - Selected targets and actual
performance 2010/11
|
Performance Indicator |
Actual Performance |
|
Promotion of the Access to Justice and
Constitutional Rights Programme (in conjunction with the Foundation for Human
Rights). |
Target
achieved Signed service level agreements established
community advice centres. Support services provided to 10413 (refugees, asylum
seekers and migrants. |
|
Develop 12 Bills and 48 pieces of subordinate
legislation |
Target
achieved 15 Bills and 48 pieces of subordinate legislation
developed |
|
Implement counsel briefing policy and ensure 65 % of
value of briefings made to Previously Disadvantaged Individuals (PDIs) |
Target
achieved 69% of value of briefings to PDIs |
|
Improve access to Masters’ office by capacitating at
402 magisterial court district |
Target
achieved All service points reached |
|
Guardians fund. A no audit qualification and ensure
80% of beneficiaries receive payments within 40 days. |
Target
achieved |
|
Establish
a branch responsible for constitutional development |
Target
not achieved The Department has not yet received permission
from the DPSA to establish the branch. |
|
Reduce
legal costs by 25% by 2013 |
Target not achieved Legal
costs have increased by 9% |
5.3.4. Selected achievements for 2010/11 include:
·
All 402 magistrate offices have been designated as service
points of the Master of the High Court.
·
There was a steady increase in the registration of new
matters particularly on deceased matters. Service Delivery statistics show that
Masters’ Offices comply with turnaround times stipulated.
·
A number of initiatives were undertaken to improve the
delivery of services within the maintenance and domestic violence area. A total
of 27 additional maintenance investigators were appointed in response to the
Service Delivery Improvement Plan. Specialised training was conducted for 270
maintenance officers and investigators through the Justice College.
·
Turnaround times in the Masters services: 93% of
beneficiaries of the Guardian’s Fund received payments within 40 days (against
the target of 80%). A total of 99.8% of estate files below the value of R125
000 were finalised within four months and 99.3% of estate files valued at more
than R125 000 were finalised within 12 months.
·
Counsel briefings: A total of 69% of the value of counsel
briefs were awarded to previously disadvantaged individuals and firms, against
the target of 65%.
·
Of the 2 210 cases finalised, 757 (34%) were won, 659 were
lost (30%) and 794 (36%) were settled.
·
Legislative development: 15 Bills were drafted against a
target of 12. In addition, 48 pieces of subordinate legislation were drafted against
a target of 14; 18 research papers were finalised against the target of 15; and
10 rules/amendments to rules were dealt with.
·
The Department received funding from the European Union in
support of participatory democracy and promotion of human rights. This has been
used to capacitate 183 community-based organisations (CBO’s) to offer paralegal
services; establish 18 community advice centres and assist
10 413 asylum seekers, refugees and migrants.
5.3.5.
Key challenges arising during 2010/11
·
Reduction in legal costs: The Department’s legal costs
increased by 9% in 2010/11 when compared to the target of a 25% decrease by
2013.
·
Reduction in the
turnaround time for legal opinion: Only 60% of legal opinions were finalised
within the 21 days stipulated. The target was 100%.
5.4.
Additional funding requests MTEF
Table 8: Department of Justice anD Constitutional
Development – Additional funding requests MTEF
|
(R
million) |
2012/13 |
2013/14 |
2014/15 |
Total |
|
Infrastructure bid |
|
|
|
1200 |
|
o
Maintenance and rehabilitation programme |
200 |
200 |
200 |
600 |
|
o
Provision for persons with disabilities |
150 |
200 |
250 |
600 |
|
Security services (including
cash in transit) |
100 |
100 |
100 |
300 |
|
PPP – Constitutional Hill
and Justice precinct |
40 |
|
200 |
240 |
|
Total |
490 |
500 |
750 |
1740 |
6.
Programme 4 - National
Prosecuting Authority
6.1.
The National Prosecuting Authority provides a co-ordinated
prosecuting service to ensure that justice is delivered to the victims of crime
through general and specialised prosecutions, protects certain witnesses and
removes the profit from crime. Although the Director-General: Justice
Constitutional Development is the accounting officer, the NPA reports
separately on its perfomance.
6.2.
The NPA spent 99,5% of its appropriation. ‘Savings’ were as
a result of delays in filling vacancies and the lower than anticipated
expenditure relating to the implementation of the OSD Phase II for the legally
qualified personel. However, R175.7 million was transfered in the form a
virement to the Department. The virement was for overspending in the Administration
programme on operational expenditure and payments for security at courts, municipal
rates and taxes and accommodation charges. If the virement is excluded, the the
NPA would have spent 93% of its budget.
6.3.
Programme performance:
TABLE 9:
NPA Achievement of ENE Targets and Indicators 2010/11
|
Indicator |
Target 2010/11 |
Actual 2010/11 |
Deviation |
|
Number of
cases finalised including ADRM |
482 491 |
460 891 |
Target not achieved (4.5%) |
|
Number of
cases finalised excluding ADRM |
357 928 |
331 045 |
Target
not achieved (7.5%) |
|
Number of
complex commercial crime cases finalised |
1 465 |
742 |
Target not achieved (49.4%) |
|
Conviction
rate: High Courts |
87% |
87.8% |
Target achieved 0.8% |
|
Conviction
rate: Regional courts |
74% |
73.4% |
Target not achieved (0.6%) |
|
Conviction
rate: District courts |
87% |
90.7% |
Target achieved 3.7% |
|
Conviction
rate: Sexual offences courts |
66% |
68.6% |
Target achieved (2.6%)
(Only dedicated courts) |
|
Number of
TCCs |
25 |
27 |
Target achieved 8% |
6.4.
Key achievements for 2010/11 include:
·
The NPA achieved an unqualified audit opinion for 2010/11.
This is an improvement on the qualified audit findings in 2009/10. There are,
however emphasis of matters and other matters.
·
Courts attained a positive clearance ratio of 2.7%. A total
of 962 317 new cases were enrolled and 988 451 cases disposed of.
·
There was a reduction of 7.1% in the withdrawal rate of
cases through the implementation of proper screening mechanisms. A total of 224
983 cases were withdrawn in 2010/11 compared to 242 103 in 2009/10.
·
The outstanding court roll was reduced by 5.1% at the end of
the financial year (218 660 compared to 230 477 during 2009/10).
·
High conviction rates were retained in courts (High courts: 87.8%;
Regional Courts: 73.4%; and District courts: 90.7%).
·
A total of 605 442 decision dockets were dealt with before
enrolment. This is 9.1% more than the 554 806 dockets dealt with in 2009/10.
·
Thuthuzela Care Centres increased from 20 to 27.
·
The number of children diverted has increased by 1.8% from
2009/10 – from 16 173 diverted in 2009/10 to 16 462 during 2010/11.
·
A total of 604 section 105A plea and sentence agreements
were successfully concluded. In 184 (36%) of these cases, sentence comprised direct
punishment.
·
A total of 180 prosecutors were trained on the comprehensive
manual on maintenance matters in line with the Maintenance Act and latest
developments in law.
·
There was a reduction in the number of grievances by
witnesses in the Witness Protection Unit
from 10% to 3%.
6.5.
Key challenges identified during 2010/11:
·
There has been an improvement in the vacancy rate among
prosecutors from 16% in 2009/10 to 11.89% as at 31 March 2011. Overall the
vacancy rate remains high at 16.8%.
·
Case flow- related problems and absence of key role players.
The NPA has met with the judiciary and the JCPS cluster to see what can be done
to solve problems.
·
Ineffective court utilisation. Of the 962 317 new cases
enrolled, 535 429 were removed from the roll.
·
There is a shortage of critical resources.
·
There is a lack of alignment in objectives and targets
across the criminal justice value chain.
6.6.
Request for additional funding
in the MTEF period:
Table 10: NPA – ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUEST MTEF
|
Unfunded MTEF options submitted
to National Treasury |
2012/13 (R’000) |
2013/14 (R’000) |
2014/15 (R’000) |
Total (R’000) |
|
AFU – curator fees and increase in capacity |
39 000 |
44 000 |
50 000 |
133 000 |
|
Roll out of TCC and institutionalisation of donor-funded
positions |
23 591 |
25 271 |
26 504 |
75 366 |
|
SOCA – training on Sexual Offences Act, Child Justice,
Human Trafficking, Domestic Violence and Maintenance |
4 500 |
3 500 |
4 000 |
12 000 |
|
Job creation – Aspirant prosecutor programme |
44 658 |
47 113 |
49 704 |
141 475 |
|
Total |
111 749 |
119 884 |
130 208 |
361 841 |
7.
Programme 5 Auxiliary and
Related Services
7.1.
This programme includes Legal Aid South Africa, the Special
Investigating Unit, the South African Human Rights Commission and Public
Protector.
Table 11: Budget allocation and Audit Opinion 2010/11
|
Institution |
Audit opinion |
Budget allocation
2010/11 (R million) |
Budget allocation
2011/12 (R million) |
|
South African Human Rights Commision |
Unqualified |
73.5 |
89.1 |
|
Public Protector |
Unqualified |
112.8 |
143.4 |
|
Legal Aid South Africa |
Unqualified |
991.9 |
1 145.1 |
|
Special Investigating Unit |
Unqualified |
165.8 |
331.1 |
7.2.
Legal Aid South Africa
7.2.1. Selected achievements, as reported, for each
institution for 2010/11 include:
·
Provided services at all criminal courts in the country
through a national footprint of 64 Justice Centres and 64 Satellite Offices.
·
Delivered quality legal services in 421 365 new legal
matters (there were 419 149 new matters in 2009/10.
·
A total of 405 891 legal matters were finalised in 2010/11,
compared to 416 149 in 2009/10 (both criminal and civil matters).
·
Provided legal assistance in 31 451 civil legal matters,
compared to 29 028 in 2009/10. A total of 257 619 clients received general
legal advice, compared to 211 874 in 2009/10.
·
Assisted 28 115 children in 2010/1, compared to 59 266
children in 2009/10. There has been a decrease in the number of children
awaiting trial in detention for more than a month.
·
All categories of practitioners exceeded their quality
assurance targets.
·
The number of matters taken on automatic review (this occurs
when accused are unrepresented in the lower courts) reduced from 30 306 in
2002/03 to 7 094 in 2010/11 (8 770 in 2009/10).
·
Launched a Client Call Centre (in November 2010).
·
Project to assist children beneficiaries in estate matters
with the Master’s Office rolled out to all provinces.
·
Implemented five agency agreements to serve rural courts.
·
Exceeded its legal and non-legal training targets.
·
Established civil units at 13 Justice Centres.
·
Ensured a recruitment level of 96%, compared to 94% in
2009/10.
·
Successfully implemented the OSD.
·
Successfully continued with the implementation of the
Leadership Development Programme for the second year.
·
Wide area network of IT further enhanced by the rollout of
the Virtual Private network platform.
·
Spent 99.2% of the allocated budget (99.5% spent in
2009/10).
·
Received an unqualified audit opinion for the past 10 years,
with no matters of emphasis for the past five years.
·
Has been accredited as a ‘Best Employer’ for the second
year.
·
The LASA Board is appraised by an external evaluator as
being in the top quartile of similar institutions assessed and would rank as
among the best of public sector assessed.
7.2.2.
Key challenges arising during 2010/11:
·
The practitioner-per-court ratio remains a challenge (in the
district courts, there is one practitioner-per-court but courts are only
covered for four out of five days per week (83% coverage); in the regional
courts, most courts are covered all 5 days of the week (96% coverage); and in
the High Courts, coverage is as per the court roll). Ideally, there would be
additional capacity to increase coverage to 100% in the district courts, 110%
in the regional courts and 125% in the high courts, as well as greater relief
capacity, for both improved case flow and to reduce the high caseloads of many
practitioners.
·
Expanding access, especially in rural areas, remains a
challenge, although LASA has concluded agency agreements to increase access in
remote rural areas. LASA has requested funding for the conversion of six
existing satellite offices to full justice centres, establish one new justice
centre and four new satellite offices to increase the national footprint.
·
Although capacity to render civil legal aid services has
increased, this service remains limited.
·
The number of children assisted in criminal matters has
reduced dramatically in the past year since the implementation of the Child
Justice Act, possibly as a result of more children being diverted or not being
arrested and charged by the police.
·
Difficulties accessing clients for consultations and
accommodation shortages resulting in consultations in court corridors.
·
Contractual escalations have increased at rates that are
higher than the macro budget increase, especially for office
leases.
7.2.3. Additional
funding requests for the MTEF:
TABLE 12: LASA
– ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUEST MTEF
|
Description |
2012/13
(R) |
2013/14
(R) |
2014/15
(R) |
MTEF (R) |
|
Increase in practitioner per court ratio |
41 900 785 |
44 414 832 |
47 079 722 |
133 395 339 |
|
Increased civil capacity |
7 205 560 |
18 237 894 |
19 332 167 |
54 775 621 |
|
Expansion of the national footprint |
17 000 000 |
12 720 000 |
7 865 200 |
37 585 200 |
|
IT infrastructure (upgrading of) |
5 250 000 |
1 100 000 |
1 166 000 |
7 516 000 |
|
Total (R) |
81 356 345 |
76 472 726 |
75 443 089 |
233 272
160 |
7.3.
Special Investigating Unit
7.3.1. The SIU is
an independent, statutory body that investigates corruption and
maladministration and can institute civil legal action to correct any
wrongdoing. Each investigation it conducts is mandated by a proclamation from
the President.
7.3.2. The SIU is
funded by way of a transfer payment from the Vote. In 2010/11, the SIU received
R171 million. The 2011/12 budget (of R193 million) provides for additional
allocations for the MTEF for investigative capacity and inflation. The SIU also
generates income by charging client departments for its investigations. In
2006/07, its projects accounted for 60% of its total income. This has decreased
to 44% in 2010/11: In 2010/11, it generated revenue to the amount of R143.2
million.
7.3.3. Expenditure at the SIU
has increased from R199.1 million in 2007/08 to R301.1 million in 2010/11, at
an average rate of 15%. The growth is largely due to a 68.5% increase in
expenditure on goods and services in 2008/09 as a result of the appointment of
consultants for the SIU’s organisational design process. Expenditure is
expected to increase over the MTEF, at an average rate of 7.6%, to reach R375.2
million in 2013/14. This is largely because of spending on personnel as the SIU
expands its establishment.
7.3.4. The SIU’s
strategic environment takes into account the following:
·
In 2009/10, the SIU found itself largely dependent on
partner funding. Given the global recession, this was risky. The SIU concluded
an intensive organisational development process to better capacitate it and
adopted a 3-5 year approach to strategic planning. A key focus was to position
the SIU as the forensic service provider to the state and to increase projects
and funding.
·
In 2010/11, the SIU formed part of the new government
initiatives to combat corruption. This has had a significant impact, increasing
its workload and funding. The SIU has also aligned its strategic plan with
outcomes-based approach of government and linked its work to Outcome 3 (Output
3) and Outcome 12 (Output 4).
·
A major focus has been to build more capacity through
recruitment and development initiatives to deal with investigations of
corruption. It also sourced additional forensic investigators from the private
sector as a short term intervention and skills transfer initiative.
7.3.5. Overall,
regarding performance, there has been a significant change in the SIU’s focus
from small, multiple cases to fewer, complex, long term investigations into
procurement. This coincides with government’s new focus on procurement
irregularities. The SIU is participating in initiatives like the
Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT), Multi-Agency Working Group on Procurement
(MAWG) and the Special Anti-corruption Unit in the Department of Public Service
and Administration (Wasps).
7.3.6. Government
has set a target of successfully convicting 100 people who have assets of more
than R5 million obtained through illicit means. This is a difficult target to
achieve as there have been approximately five such cases in the past 10 years.
In 2010/11, there were 16 new proclamations – the most ever in a single year.
Two proclamations relating to ongoing investigations were also extended.
7.3.7. The
following challenges were identified in 2010/11:
·
The PFMA provides accounting officers with control of the
investigation, disciplinary action, possible civil action or referral for
criminal actions, and the implementation of recommendations. This can be a
problem where the accounting officer fails to take action or is even
implicated.
·
Delays in amendments to the SIU’s enabling legislation that
address, among others, the issue of the SIU’s locus standi in pursuing civil litigation, restricts the SIU’s
overall impact.
7.3.8.
Additional funding requests for the
MTEF:
The SIU has legal advice that
prevents it from entering into new co-operation agreements, as the Special
Investigating Unit Act is silent on this issue. For this year, the SIU can
continue to receive payment for work done, provided that a proclamation exists
and an agreement is already in place. It can also renew agreements that expire
in the present financial year (2010/11). This is on the condition that there is
a process to regularise the situation through an amendment to the Special
Investigating Unit Act. Amending legislation has been drafted. At present, the
SIU cannot enter into new co-operation agreements: This has led to loss of
revenue - it was expecting to invoice an additional R90 million in 2011/12. The
National Treasury has agreed to support the SIU providing R97 million
additional funding for 2011/12 to compensate for the loss of revenue and to
allow the SIU to take on additional work. The SIU, however, has requested that
its baseline is increased by R150 million in the MTEF period to reduce reliance
on funding from co-operation agreements and to allow it to increase capacity
(200 new positions over the MTEF).
7.4.
South African Human Rights
Commission
7.4.1. The Commission received
an allocated budget of R73 474 million for 2010/11. Additional funding of R894
000 and donor funding of R608 000 brought the budget to R74 958 million. R50.3
million (67%) of the Commission’s budget is spent on compensation of employees.
The 2011 Budget sets out additional amounts for additional capacity in the
Legal Services programme, improved conditions of service and municipal and
accommodation charges - R6.17 million (2011/12), R10.16 million (2012/13) and
R12.9 million (for 2013/14).
7.4.2. Over the
reporting period financial constraints have meant certain programmes have been
put on hold including the acquisition of a new human resources system, a review
of the performance management system and staff/management development
initiatives. The recruitment for and filling of vacant positions were also
suspended. The fact that the PAIA and PEPUDA mandate is largely unfunded
continues to hamper delivery.
7.4.3.
Key achievements as reported by the Commission for 2010/11:
·
In 2009/10 the Commission achieved only 52% of its strategic
objectives. In 2010/11 this figure improved to 67% of strategic objectives.
·
The Commission achieved an unqualified audit with no matters
of emphasis. However, the Auditor-General raised concerns regarding the
Commission’s performance targets.
·
The SAHRC released the Seventh Economic and Social Rights
(ESR) Report (2006-2009), which was submitted to Parliament in December 2010.
The report focuses on an assessment of how far South Africa has come in
attaining the Millennium Development Goals. The ESR reports have been
criticised in the past. owever,
the seventh report appears to be much more analytical and points to a
‘conceptual misunderstanding by the government of its constitutional obligation
to progressively realise economic and social rights.’
·
The Commission published a Review of Equity and Child Rights
(with UNICEF).
·
In total, 5 626 complaints were handled during 2010/11. A
total of 2 328 of the complaints were accepted as prima facie human rights violations and are current and active
matters under investigation. The total number of complaints that were finalised
during this period was 886. Complaints typically relate to equality (30%);
human dignity (25%); just administrative action (20%); arrested, detained and
accused persons (15%); and labour disputes (10%). The Commission litigated 24
matters in the Equality Courts.
·
Relocation of the Head Office and the Gauteng Provincial
Office to new premises in Braamfontein by end March 2011. This will save the
Commission approximately R1.5 million each year.
·
More than 1000 public officials were trained on the
Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA).
·
Noteworthy interventions include: Xenophobic attacks (post-World
Cup); sexual-orientation matters involving DIRCO; universal periodic review
process; focus on the ratification of the International Convention on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights; and engagement with national and provincial
government on the ‘open toilets’ cases,
7.4.4.
Key challenges for 2010/11:
·
Current administrative challenges include the restructuring
process (to be completed by March 2012), financial constraints and human
resource constraints related to the restructuring and to skills.
·
Substantive challenges identified include the tendency for
government to approach human rights by focussing on meeting the indicators
(compliance-driven), rather than the ensuring that the right, itself, is fulfilled.
·
Government’s failure to respond to requests for information
in terms of section 184(3) of the Constitution (for the ESR report).
7.4.5. Additional
funding requests for the MTEF:
·
A restructuring process was initiated in September 2010
resulting in the development of a new mission, vision and strategic plan and
the realignment of the Commission’s structure. The implementation of the new
structure, which creates 33 new positions will commence during the third
quarter of this fiscal year. The majority of the new posts will be based in the
Commission’s provincial offices and relate primarily to the provision of legal
services. The total cost of creating the 33 new positions, amounts to R15 871
969.
·
The settlement of the outstanding debt to the Institute for
Democracy in Africa (IDASA) stemming from the European-Union (EU) -funded
project referred to as CSAP (to which the Human Rights Commission, Public
Protector and the Commission on Gender Equality are parties). The Commission
has already engaged with the Deputy Ministers of Finance and Justice and have
been advised that assistance will be provided to settle the debt of R1.2
million.
·
The Human Rights Commission was appointed as the Chairperson
of the Network of African National of Human Rights Institutions (NANHRI). The
Chairpersonship will commence in October 2011 and run for a period of two
years. In order to successfully manage the responsibilities associated with
this prestigious position, additional funding amounting to R1 833 700 is
required.
·
The Human Rights Advocacy Programme is primarily responsible
for discharging the Commission’s ‘promotion mandate’. It currently has a budget
of R551 400, which translates into R50 000 for each Province for all advocacy
awareness interventions for the whole financial year. Funds to the value of R2
million is needed for two specific outputs of the Human Rights Advocacy Programme,
namely: Training of Trainers and Human Rights Month Campaign. (Training of
Trainers - Additional funds to the value of R700 000 will be required to
conduct Training of Trainers for Community Development Workers and other
providers of human rights in rural communities in 10 offices of the Commission.
Human Rights Month Campaign - Additional funds of R1.3 million are required to
enable the Commission to design, plan and implement high impact, nation-wide
Human Rights Month Campaigns to commemorate National Human Rights Day on March
21st, 2012.). Over the MTEF, the following additional funds are needed: R2
million for 2011/12; 2.5 million for 2012/13 and R3 million for 2013/14).
·
The PAIA mandate requires R5.2
million for 2012/12 (R1 172 000 is needed for awareness and education; while
monitoring and compliance requires R3 899 395).
7.4.6.
Additional funding requests for the
MTEF:
TABLE 13:
SAHRC – ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE MTEF
|
Categories |
2011/2012 |
2012/13 |
2013/14 |
2014/15 |
|
|
R’000 |
R’000 |
R’000 |
R’000 |
|
Accommodation: Rentals |
|
1 771 |
1 992 |
2 241 |
|
Video Conferencing |
|
500 |
550 |
600 |
|
Central Registry |
|
350 |
400 |
450 |
|
Security Services |
|
250 |
300 |
350 |
|
Public Works |
2 873 |
|
|
|
|
Civil Society Advocacy Programme |
1 200 |
|
|
|
|
NANHRI |
1 833 |
- |
- |
- |
|
Advocacy Programme |
700 |
742 |
787 |
833 |
|
Access to Information |
5 250 |
5 565 |
5 899 |
6 253 |
|
Legal Services |
2 300 |
2 438 |
2 584 |
2 739 |
|
Restructuring |
15 872 |
20 004 |
21 205 |
22 477 |
|
TOTAL |
30 529 |
31 620 |
33 717 |
35 943 |
7.5.
Public
Protector
7.5.1.
Key achievements as reported by the Commission for 2010/11:
·
Total of 16 251
complaints were received or initiated and 14 148 cases were finalized. 52 % of
them were finalised within 1-3 months.
·
The Public Protector published 41 reports during the year
under review.
·
A total of 616 outreach clinics were conducted out of an annual
target of 720 clinics.
·
The Public Protector had 102 radio slots out of a target of
40 and 48 newspaper articles out of a
target of 40 were published.
·
Hosted the Public Protector Good governance Week.
7.5.2.
Key challenges for 2010/11:
·
Investigative capacity remains the main challenge.
Additional investigators were appointed and 18 Senior Investigator posts are to
be advertised. The shortage of investigative capacity impacts on attempts to
balance rigor with promptness in the conduct of investigations or
implementation of alternative dispute resolution.
·
Staff retention remains a problem. Remuneration is the main
reason given in exit interviews. The internal strategy alignment process is still
at a rudimentary phase.
·
Finalisation of rules required.
7.5.3. The Public
Protector reported the following spending pressures for the MTEF:
·
Increased investigative capacity.
·
Operating lease expenses.
·
Implementation of integrated human resources and
financial management and accounting systems.
·
Administrative expenses
·
Implementation of approved structure.
7.5.4.
Support requested from Parliament
·
Support for additional resources, including the Deputy
Public Protector’s remuneration package, OSD-review for investigators, expanded
footprint and review of number and remuneration for outreach facilitators.
·
Support of structure currently being reviewed by DPSA.
·
Facilitate conclusion of PP rules process.
·
Holding to account organs of state, who unjustifiably
do not implement PP’s findings made in terms of section 182(1) of the Constitution.
·
Assistance with outreach by including
PP in parliamentary public participation projects.
7.5.5.
Additional funding requests for the
MTEF:
Table 14: PP - ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUEST MTEF
|
Description |
2012/13
(R’000) |
2013/14
(R’000) |
2014/15
(R’000) |
|
Additional capacity |
28 041 |
42 004 |
50 818 |
Part
4
8. Committee’s observations
The
Committee has a number of observations and recommendations after considering
the annual reports of the Department, the NPA, LASA, SIU, PP and SAHRC. These
also take into account the detailed information from the Department received in
the year that has past:
Department of Justice and
Constitutional Development for 201011
8.1.
The Committee
has broadly categorised its observations as relating either to the Department’s
operations and governance, and to performance. The Committee is, however,
acutely aware of the close relationship between operations and performance –
and, in that sense, the distinction is ‘artificial’.
8.2.
The Department’s
Annual Report for 2010/11, although much clearer and accessible in presentation
than in 2009/10, has several shortcomings: A specific concern is that important
data relating to court performance, found in previous annual reports, appears
to have been been omitted (For example, there is no data
for the children’s courts, sexual offence cases, Constitutional Court cases,
Supreme Court of Appeal cases, the labour courts and the land courts). Overall,
this makes the Committee’s assessment of the Department’s performance for
2010/11 considerably more difficult. The Committee also notes the inconsistency
in the collation of information between the Department and other departments
and institutions within the Cluster, which makes it very difficult for the
Committee to assess
8.3.
The Committee has previously stated that the Department’s
strategic and operational planning needed considerable refinement: ‘Overall,
within the context of the Department’s strategy there should be a limited, more
definable, measureable set of targets with clearer deadlines that are
prioritised and that serve as a “building block” to develop greater capacity to
identify and more effectively achieve other targets within its mandate’ (BRRR,
2010). The shift to an outcomes-based approach to service delivery, has required
that the Department rethink its strategy to comply with the new Treasury requirements
for ‘outcomes-based’ strategic plans and annual performance plans. This should
address the Committee’s concerns. The Committee has already considered the
Department’s strategic plan for 2011-2016. The Committee notes that the Department’s
annual performance plan for 2011/12 is supposed to have performance indicators
that adhere to SMART principles but has yet to formally consider it, as it had
not been tabled when the Committee considered the budget. (There was some
consideration, however, of the annual plan at the 1st Quarterly
review in August 2011).
8.4.
The Committee also notes that
the Auditor-General identified the quality of performance information audited
as a problem. The Department acknowledges this and has reported that it has
plans to address the problem. The Committee believes that the usefulness and
reliability of performance information is strongly related to the soundness of
the strategic planning, monitoring and reporting systems. Where planned and
reported targets and indicators are not sufficiently clear, the likelihood is that
information collected and reported may not be useful as a measure of
performance.
Governance
and operational issues
8.5.
The Committee notes the recurring qualified audit opinion,
although it acknowledges the Department’s ongoing efforts to address the underlying
causes. The qualification continues to relate to the adequacy of the Third
Party Funds’ financial and control system and to irregular expenditure.
8.5.1.
Management
of Third Party Funds. The Department indicated in 2010 that it did not have the
necessary knowledge and capacity to prepare annual financial statements for the
Third Party Funds. The Department processes approximately nine million payments
to beneficaries annually to the value of almost R3 billion. Third Party Funds
are administered at more 490 locations with 501 bank accounts. Each of these locations
has its own JDAS 4 (Justice Deposit Account System) database and is responsible
for all aspects of accounting. JDAS 4 was built as an administrative and not a
financial management or accounting system, with resulting reporting challenges.
The Department’s strategy to achieve a ‘no-audit qualification’ for the Funds led
to the appointment of a service provider to initially prepare baseline annual
financial statements (baseline financial statements for 2009/10 and 2010/11 are
being prepared, with a submission date of 31 October 2011) and then to assist
the Department to prepare its own annual financial statements for the Funds for
2011/12. A skills assessment was done of staff working in the Third Party Funds
environment and various training interventions launched. In addition, to improve
service delivery to beneficiaries and to reduce the volume of cash payments, an
EFT payment system was introduced at court level.
The Committee notes that
the legal status of the Third Party Funds has not been resolved. The Department
had reported that it would introduce legislation for the separate
administration of the Funds. After informally consulting with National
Treasury, it was advised that a trading entity would be enough to ensure that
the Fund becomes a separate reporting entity. The Committee was told that a
request to Treasury to establish a trading entity was forwarded in November
2010, but despite discussions in March 2011 and subsequent reminders there has
been no formal response. The Department told the Committee at the 2011 Budget
briefing that it has reverted to its original plan to bring legislation in order
to finally resolve the Fund’s status.
8.5.2.
Irregular expenditure. The Committee notes that Auditor-General’s qualification relating to
irregular expenditure: Inadequate systems for identifying and recognising all
irregular expenditure contributed to a situation where the completeness of the
irregular expenditure could not be assured. Irregular expenditure to the value
of R420.7 million also featured as a matter of emphasis relating mainly to supply
chain management. These all point to weakness in the internal audit function.
The Auditor-General commented that while the Department has an internal audit
function, its capacity needs increasing, especially as the Department operates
from more than 500 locations.
8.5.3.
On the qualified
audit opinion, the Committee specifically recommends that, by 20 November 2011:
·
The Department provide written details of all its audit
action plans.
·
The Director-General provide the Committee with details of
the formal commitments made to address the audit findings.
·
The Department provide a progress report on how far the Department
has come in drafting legislation to resolve the status of the Funds.
·
The Department detail its plan to increase capacity within
its internal audit component.
·
The Department provide it with written details of initiatives
to improve the quality
of performance information and progress made.
8.6.
Vacancies in critical posts
The
Committee is aware that vacancies in critical areas (such as finance, risk management, internal audit and strategy) are
an ongoing problem for the Department. For some time, the Committee has
expressed its concern at the high vacancy rate within the Department, although
it acknowledges that overall there has been some progress – the vacancy rate is
9.8%, if the judiciary is excluded). However, unacceptably high vacancy rates
at the senior management level and in critical occupations remain. Given the
Department’s focus on achieving a ‘no qualification’ audit opinion by 2012/13,
the Committee is especially concerned at the high vacancy rate in the Chief
Financial Officer’s office, which was at 24% at the end of February 2011. It
welcomes the appointment of three Chief Directors to that office in April 2011. The Committee requests that the Department report to it in
writing by 20 November 2011 on progress made in filling vacancies at senior
management level and in critical areas; its retention strategy; and interventions to increase the
pool of skilled capacity and to ensure that officials are adequately trained, especially
in the regions.
8.7.
Performance
agreements
The
Committee notes that not all senior managers entered into performance
agreements for 2010/11, contrary to the relevant Public Service regulation. The
absence of performance agreements creates difficulties for officials, who are
unclear about the standard of performance expected and creates difficulties for
leadership when holding officials to account. The Committee requests that the
names of the managers are provided, together with an explanation for this
failure and whether there has been any consequential disciplinary action by 20
November 2011. Were performance bonuses paid in the absence of a performance
contract? What steps, if any, have been taken to ensure that all senior
managers sign their performance contracts for 2011/12?
8.8.
Infrastructure
and maintenance of facilities
The
Committee has observed first hand the state of disrepair that prevails at many
courts. It has learn that, in some cases, working conditions are so compromised
by the state of the buildings that officials are unable to carry out their
duties effectively and efficiently. The Committee established that the
Department of Public Works is responsible for maintenance of facilities,
although court managers do have a role to play in the daily maintenace of
courts. The Committee felt that maintenance of courts and facilities might be
better achieved were the Department to assume responsibility and would like the
Department to investigate this possibility. The Department informed the
Committee that this item was a concern for all departments within the JCPS
Cluster and is being addressed at that level: A proposal is being prepared for
submission to Cabinet on how to move forward. The Committee requests a written
report on progress made by 20 November 2011.
The Committee
is sympathetic to the Department’s request for R 1.2 billion in additional
funds for the MTEF period for the repair and maintenance programme and to
provide for persons with disabilities.
8.9.
Additional
accommodation
The Committee has been briefed on the events surrounding the lease of
the SALU and Birhati buildings in Pretoria, resulting in fruitless and wasteful
expenditure. The Committee believes that the Department should investigate to
determine where responsibility lies for the wasted costs and, if appropriate,
hold the officials to account and requests a written report on this by 20
November 2011.
The
Committee, overall, can understand the rationale for consolidating operations
at its Head Office - the Department’s head office component is currently occupied
in three different buildings in Pretoria. There are also associated efficiency
gains in terms of reduced security and infrastructure costs. It understands
that the Department’s Head Office will be accommodated in the refurbished SALU
building, which will be ready for occupation shortly (November 2011). The
Committee asks that it is provided with a progress report on how far the
relocation has come at the next quarterly meeting in January – February 2012.
8.10.
Security
at courts
Security at Courts has become a high priority as a result of increased
criminal incidents relating to the Department’s property and personnel. The
Department has calculated that it needs R300 million for improved security for
courts and justice offices over the MTEF. The Committee shares the Department’s
concern and is supportive of the Department’s bid for this amount. It, however,
feels that it should be given more information on security at courts, and
requests that the Department provide it with the necessary information in writing.
It also urges the Department to look at measures to increase co-ordination and
collaboration with the SAPS to improve security at courts.
The
Committee recommends that –
·
The Department is given additional funding in the amount of
R300 million for security for courts and justice offices.
·
The Department brief it on security at courts and other
justice facilities before the end of November 2011. The Committee is
specifically interested in hearing of the extent of the problem, how the
Department is addressing the problem at present at identified high risk courts,
as well as its plan to secure all its courts and other facilities
adequately in future.
8.11.
Information
Technology (IT) infrastructure
The
Committee’s learnt on its oversight visit to Manguang that the Department’s IT
systems are extremely slow, affecting turnaround in service delivery The
Committee acknowledges that the Department has indicated that budget cuts have
affected its IT maintenance plan and that its IT infrastructure urgently needs
upgrading. (Additional funds have been allocated for upgarding IT
infrastructure for 2012/13 and 2013/14). The Committee requests that the Department
provides it with a detailed report on the nature of the problems, with its IT
maintenance plan by 20 November 2011.
8.12.
Integration
of IT systems
The
Committee is dismayed that, despite the recommendations of the Criminal Justice
Review and the Seven-point plan, intended to address blockages in the system,
the IT systems of the JCPS Cluster departments continue to operate in silos.
The intention was that these sysems be integrated to allow for seamless
tracking of offenders as they progress through from arrest to conviction (and
beyond). The Department conceded that this is a challenge, that sufficient
progress has not been made, and that it intends to address the problem. The
Committee requests that the Department provide it with a detailed action plan,
together with targets and timeframes, by 20 November 2011.
Performance
8.13.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission process
Parliament approved
assistance measures for victims identified in terms of the Truth and
Reconciliation process. The Committee, however, has been extremely disappointed
at the Department’s ongoing delay in giving effect to those assistance measures
which it must implement and had said so on previous occasions. The Committee
welcomes the progress this year in identifying and locating beneficiaries,
while some regulations are close to being finalised. But the lack of finality -
after so long – remains unacceptable. The Committee requests that the
Department provide it with a comprehensive written report of how many
beneficiaries have been and still need to be reached, as well as on progress
made to resolve the outstanding recommendations (with targets and timeframes).
In addition, the Committee would like to be informed of the progress relating
to the finalisation of related Regulations. The Department should also indicate
any difficulties it may be experiencing in obtaining the necessary co-operation
from other roleplayers. The Department should also be prepared to brief the
Committee on progress at the next quarterly meeting early next
year (January – March 2012).
8.14.
State litigation and briefing patterns
Litigation against the state has increased significantly recently for
reasons that include citizens being more aware of their rights, opportunism, a
fragmented approach to the management of state litigation and the absence of a
framework making use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. The Committee
learnt recently that the Department also has difficulty in collecting monies it
disburses on behalf of client departments in legal proceedings and is extremely
concerned at the negative effect this has on the Department’s budget. The
Committee requests that it receives a full written report on monies disbursed
on behalf of other departments and the progress made in recovering these costs.
The Committee believes that the absence of a policy framework to manage
state litigation creates many problems, and has expressed itself accordingly in
the past. In addition, the Committee remains of the view that it is difficult
to address briefing patterns to ensure representativity and encourage the
passing of knowledge and skills from senior to junior practitioners, in the
absence of a specific policy on this that applies to all state departments
conducting litigation. The Committee was not especially satisfied by the
response to previous requests for the names of practitioners being briefed and,
specifically, requests that this is provided, in writing, by 20 November 2011.
8.15.
Vulnerable groups
8.15.1.
Increased access to justice of
women, children and persons with disabilities is a priority of government and
of the Department. As such, the Committee welcomes the prioritisation of
maintenance matters in the Department’s revised strategic plan and the many
planned initiatives to ensure improvement in the delivery of maintenance
services – Committee members receive many requests for assistance from the
public relating to maintenance. The maintenance statistics for 2010/11, however,
show not only an increase in enquiries, but a worrying failure to meet their
targets, indicating a decline in performance. Even where targets are met,
service delivery is not good enough: In the Committee’s view, having to wait
two hours in a queue to be helped with a maintenance matter, is too long. The
Committee, therefore, asks that the Department provide details of its
turnaround strategy, with timeframes and targets, as well as progress to date,
by 20 November 2011.
8.15.2.
The Committee notes that there has
been an increase in the number of domestic violence cases struck off the roll
accompanied by a decline in the number of protection orders issued. The
Committee is interested in the explanation for this trend. Has the
Interdepartmental Domestic Violence Task Team been able to identify specific
challenges that may be contributing factors? The Committee asks that the
Department provide the information requested by 20 November 2011.
8.15.3.
The Committee is not satisfied overall
with progress in implementing the Child Justice Act or that it is receiving adequate
attention from the Department’s leadership. LASA reports a dramatic decrease in
the number of child accused being assisted, which is puzzling, especially as
the NPA reports only a slight increase in children being diverted. In addition,
there is a recent newspaper report that alleges serious shortcomings in the
collection of data. In terms of spending, child justice does not appear to be a
priority - the Committee also learnt on a recent oversight visit to Manguang
that the One-Stop Child Justice there, which is internationally acclaimed as a
model of best practice, receives minimal funding support from the Department. The
Committee intends to call the Department with other role-players before the end
of this quarter to brief it on the progress to date and on any specific challenges
experienced. The Department is requested also to provide a written report on
the diversion statistics.
8.15.4.
Dedicated
sexual offence courts. The Committee has expressed its view
previously that sexual offence matters require specialist skills and that, for
this reason, it supports dedicated sexual offence courts. The trend, however,
has been to ‘mainstream’ these courts with the result that there are now only six
dedicated courts. The Committee does not properly understand the reasons for
the reduced number of dedicated courts, nor the resistance among role-players
to the need for specialisation. (The Committee has been told that the judiciary
is not in favour of specialist courts, as it can lead to unequal provision of
services and for reasons of career-pathing.) The Committee feels that it should
look at the management of sexual offence case in a more focused way. It intends
to meet with all role-players in the next quarter.
8.15.5.
In addition, the Committee requests
that the Department specifically provide a break-down of expenditure (against
planned expenditure) for vulnerable groups quarterly.
8.16.
Judicial
training
The Committee was told that challenges in
establishing the South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI) had severely
impacted on training of judicial officers. This includes the training of
magistrates, who previously received training at Justice College. This practice
changed in April 2011 when the responsibility for training magistrates was
transferred to SAJEI. The Committee, however, was told, during
discussions with the Magistrate’s Commission and with the Judges of the Supreme
Court of Appeal in September 2011 that, in fact, there is no judicial training programme
at present. The Committee has subsequently heard that training is taking place.
The consequences for the delivery of justice services are potentially grave, as
there are many newly implemented Acts, such as the Child Justice Act that
require judicial training. In addition, given the problems that magistrates and
judges appear to have in gaining access to research materials, such as cases
and legal textbooks, the need to ensure that there is ongoing training, becomes
more critical. Of course, another function of SAJEI is to drive a
transformation agenda through continuous training of incumbents and aspirant
judges – this cannot occur while the Institute is not operational. The
Committee requests that the Department clarify the current situation regarding
the training of magistrates; provide an explanation of the difficulties being
experienced in establishing SAJEI, as well as an action plan to address the
problems (with targets and timeframes). This is requested by 20 November 2011.
8.17.
Training of magistrates to adjudicate in Promotion
of Access to Information Act (PAIA) matters
The Committee understands that, despite the Rules allowing
magistrate courts to hear PAIA cases having come into operation, a lack of
training as required by the Act has prevented these courts from being used to
adjudicate PAIA matters. The Committee asks the Department to explain why this
is so and what remedial action it is taking.
8.18.
Resourcing of judicial officers
The Committee notes that LASA’s practitioners and the NPAs’ prosecutors have
access to up-to-date case law and law reports but that judicial officers,
especially magistrates, do not have similar resources available to them. At
present, the amount allocated for library services is approximately R60
million. The Committee has been told that the Constitutional Court has a ‘state
of the art’ library, many librarians and researchers. It understands that some
of this is funded by trust monies, but the resources at its disposal, when compared
to those available at most other superior and lower courts in this country,
appear disproportionate. The Committee understands that the comparatively large
allocation to the Constitutional Court subprogramme is also to fund the new
Office of the Chief Justice but believes that, even so, care should be taken to
ensure that all courts have sufficient resources so that their judicial
officers are equipped with the necessary legal reference materials to perform
their functions effectively and efficiently and are, therefore, have adequate research
and library support services for them to perform their duties optimally. The
Committee feels strongly that there needs to be funds for this. It also requests
that the Department provide it with a written action plan (with targets and
timeframes) addressing the needs of judicial officers for up-to-date statutes
and law reports, as well as related support services (researchers and
librarians) by 20 November 2011.
8.19.
Masters’
services
The
Committee is pleased at the appointment (finally) of a Chief Master of the High
Court. It looks forward to receiving regular updates at the quarterly meetings
from the Chief Master of initiatives to to ensure that delivery Masters’ services
is increasingly more efficient and effective. The Committee is also interested
that there is to be a revised policy for the appointment of liquidators and
would like to be kept updated on this.
8.20.
Traditional
Courts Bill
The
Committee requested that the Traditional Courts Bill be introduced in the National
Council of Provinces. This has not happened yet as a result of procedural
diffciulties. In the meantime, the Committee has learnt that traditional
leaders require letters of conferment to allow them to adjudicate matters but
that recently these have not been issued. The Committee requests the Minister
to look into this urgently.
9.
National Prosecuting
Authority
9.1.
The Committee congratulates the Director-General: Justice
and Constitutional Development for the excellent effort to ‘turnaround’ the
audit outcome.
9.2.
The Committee is reminded that the
Thuthuzela Care Centres are largely donor-funded; as are the NPA staff there
(there are now 27 TCCs, compared to 20 in 2009/10). Given the priority on
combating violent crime, especially sexual violence against women and children,
the Committee fails to understand how the establishment of more TCC’s can form
an integral part of the justice sector’s strategy, when this is an unfunded
mandate. The Committee strongly supports the NPA’s request for additional funding
of R75.3 million for the rollout of more TCC’s and the institutionalisation of
donor-funded positions, as well as an additional R12 million of the MTEF for
training on sexual offences, child justice, domestic violence, human
trafficking and maintenance legislation.
10.
Legal Aid South Africa
10.1.
The Committee congratulates LASA on
receiving an unqualified audit for the past 10 years, with no matters of
emphasis for the past-six years. Once again, LASA impressed the Committee
greatly with its strategic vision and planning, management of resources and
considerable achievements.
10.2.
The Committee supports the need
for more practitioners to increase coverage in all courts. Recently, the
Committee conducted oversight of courts in the Free State, where it was made
clear that insufficient capacity (including relief capacity) has a considerable
adverse effect on case-flow, contributing to backlogs and, generally, to delays
in the criminal justice system.
10.3.
The Committee also supports LASA’s
goal of expanding expand its civil work and impact litigation, despite the
financial constraints that it faces in this regard.
10.4.
LASA has been extremely
innovative in expanding its reach. It has launched a call centre with toll-free
number, which provides free legal advice to everyone, regardless of means. The
Committee welcomes this, and would like to be kept informed of the impact that
the call centre is having, as well as any challenges that the LASA may
experience, if any.
10.5.
The Committee notes the sharp
decrease (about 50%) in the number of children being assisted. As research has
not been done into why this is the case, the Committee is unable to comment on
the significance of the trend. However, it would be interested in establishing
why the decline and whether this is a positive development. It intends to closely
monitor all data relating to child justice and, in the new year, will call a
meeting with all role-players to evaluate the second year of the Child Justice
Act being implemented.
10.6.
The Committee supports the LASA’s
aim to reach to the rural poor. In addition, LASA has entered into agency
agreements to service remote courts and co-operation agreements that will
expand its national footprint. The Committee is interested in how effective
these are and would like to be informed of developments
at quarterly meetings.
10.7.
The Committee welcomes LASA’s
agreement to look into expanding its services to provide support in maintenance
disputes.
10.8.
The Committee wishes to thank Judge
Mlambo, whose term of office is due to expire shortly, for his outstanding
contribution to the provision of legal aid services. With Judge Mlambo as
Chairperson of the Board, LASA has become a centre of excellence. The Committee
is extremely grateful and his presence will be sorely missed.
10.9.
The Committee therefore recommends that -
·
LASA is provided an additional R133 million and R54.7
million in the MTEF period to improve its practitioner capacity and to continue
to increase its civil work, respectively.
·
LASA is allocated an additional R37.5 million over the MTEF
period to expand its national footprint, making its services more accessible.
·
LASA receives an additional R7.5 million over the MTEF
period for the upgrade of its IT servers.
·
LASA continue to provide
information quarterly on:
11.
Special Investigating
Unit
11.1.
The Committee commends the SIU for
the exceptional work it is doing in tackling fraud and corruption within
government.
11.2.
The Committee congratulates the SIU
on its unqualified audit.
11.3.
The Committee is concerned at the
levels of fraud and corruption in government departments and other bodies,
suggested by the SIU’s workload. It agrees with the SIU that it is encouraging
that the government has accepted that corruption is a problem. The fact that
targets were set for the JCPS cluster reveal determination to root out this
problem.
11.4.
The Committee is pleased to see the
capacity expansion and the range of multi-disciplinary skills at the SIU.
However, the Committee is concerned that a large number of employees are
employed on a contract-basis.
11.5.
The Committee understands that the
Justice Department is bringing legislation to amend the SIU’s enabling
legislation to address any challenges when it pursues civil litigation to make
recoveries. It intends to follow up with the Department precisely when the
amending legislation will be tabled.
11.6.
The Committee learnt that the SIU is
unable to enter into new co-operation agreements, as the Special Investigating
Unit Act is silent on this issue. Amending legislation has been drafted but, at
present, the SIU cannot enter into new co-operation agreements: This has led to
loss of revenue - it was expecting to invoice an additional R90 million in
2011/12. The National Treasury has agreed to support the SIU providing R97
million additional funding for 2011/12 to compensate for the loss of revenue
and to allow the SIU to take on additional work. The SIU, however, has
requested that its baseline is increased by R150 million in the MTEF period to
reduce reliance on funding from co-operation agreements and to allow it to
increase capacity (200 new positions over the MTEF).
11.7.
The Committee supports the SIU’s
request for additional to increase its baseline allocation for the medium term
by R150 million. Although the exact amount that is lost through fraud and
corruption in the public sector is unknown, estimates place the amount at
approximately R30 billion each year. The consequences of the loss of this money
are significant, impacting on funds available for service delivery and
contributing to loss of investor confidence with a ‘knock on’ effect to the
economy, job creation, etc. The demand for the SIU’s service testifies to a
willingness to tackle problem. The Committee notes that at present the SIU’’s
investigative capacity is stretched, with plans to expand its establishment in
the MTEF period. For the SIU to do this, it needs assurance that it can pay its
permanent staff establishment. (The Committee notes that, at present, a large
number of staff is employed on a contract-basis, which is largely because of
the uncertain nature of project-funding). The Committee agrees that co-operation
agreements, while providing useful additional income, are not sufficiently
reliable, and that the SIU would need to continue to employ contract staff to
supplement its capacity. This potentially has adverse implications for case
management should contract workers leave in the middle of an investigation and
for the development of ‘in-house’ forensic and investigative skills.
11.8.
The Committee will also follow-up
with the Department on when it is the necessary amending legislation is likely
to be introduced.
12.
South African Human
Rights Commission
12.1.
The Committee congratulates
the Commission on receiving an unqualified audit opinion for 2010/11. It
acknowledges that capacity constraints remain a challenge for the Commission,
and that budget plays a significant role in this regard. The Committee commends
the Commission on its efforts to save costs. It also congratulates the Commission
on its 7th Socio-Economic Report and Review of Equity and Child
Rights.
12.2.
The Committee will also engage with
the Office on Institutions Supporting Democracy and Related Institutions in the
Deputy-Speaker’s Office to clarify its role in supporting these institutions.
12.3.
The Committee recommends that:
·
The Commission brief it on its
Report on Access to Information separately.
·
Consideration is given to
identifying ways to generally increase support for the Commissions work,
especially where there is non-compliance by government departments with their
reporting obligations.
·
The additional resources be
allocated to it to be able to deliver on its mandate.
13.
Public Protector
13.1.
The Committee congratulates the
Public Protector on its unqualified audit opinion.
13.2.
The Committee was told that the PP
needs more investigators and to improve access to its services by expanding its
footprint in the medium term. On the matter of opening more offices, the PP
informed the Committee that people prefer to bring their cases in person. This
is compounded by high illiteracy rates and a strong oral tradition. The
Committee acknowledges the excellent work done and the importance of the PPSA’s
interventions in making a difference and to improved service delivery. It,
however, feels that, given the scarcity of resources, the Public Protector
needs to investigate alternative ways of expanding the PPSA’s footprint.
13.3.
The Committee intends considering
the adjustment of the Deputy Public Protector’s salary as soon as a mutually
convenient date can be arranged (before the end of the year). Provision may
need to be made in the budget allocation for increased funding for this item.
13.4.
The Committee will meet with the
Public Protector before the end of the year to consider the Public Protector’s
Rules.
13.5.
The Committee needs more information
on the request for additional funding should OSD be applied to PPSA staff in
the manner proposed and the implications for the medium term.
Part 5
14.
Summary of Department’s
reporting requirements
|
Reporting matter |
Action required |
Timeframe |
|
Audit outcomes - strategy
and action plan to address audit outcome, including: ·
Details of audit action plan. ·
Details of formal commitments to address
audit findings. ·
Report on status of legislation to address
legal status of TPFs. ·
Action plan to strengthen internal audit
component. ·
Detailed progress report of strategy to
improve quality of performance information. (See paragraphs 8.4
and 8.5) |
Written report Briefing |
20 November 2011 At next quarterly
meeting in January – March 2012 (see Committee programme) |
|
Vacancies and
increased skills base: Action plan to address vacancies at senior management
level and in critical occupations and retention plan; and interventions to
increase skills within Department, especially in regions. (See paragraph 8.6) |
Written report with
targets and timeframes |
20 November 2011 |
|
Details of managers
who failed to sign performance contracts and details of remedial action taken
for 2011/12. Have any of these
cases been taken up as grievances. Were performance
bonuses paid in absence of performance contract? (See paragraph 8.7) |
Written report with
targets and timeframes |
20 November 2011 |
|
Progress report on
feasibility of Department assuming responsibility for maintenance and repair
of buildings. (paragraph 8.8) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Report on
investigation of responsibility for wasted costs for SALU and Birhati buildings
leases (see paragraph 8.9) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Relocation of
Department’s Head Office to SALU building – progress report on relocation
(paragraph 8.9). |
Written progress
report (with targets and timeframes) Briefing |
20 November 2011 At next quarterly
meeting in January-March 2012. (refer to Committee programme) |
|
Strategy and action
plan to address security at courts (see paragraph 8.10. |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
IT infrastructure –
Explanation of IT problems/challenges and written plan to address IT
maintenance (see paragraph 8.11). |
Written report with
targets and timeframes |
20 November 2011 |
|
JCPS IT integration
– Detailed strategy and action plan with targets and timeframes (see
paragraph 8.12) |
Written report (with
targets and timeframes) |
20 November 2011 |
|
Strategy and action
plan to address the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (see paragraph 8.13) |
Written report Briefing |
20 November 2011 At next quarterly
meeting in January-March 2012. (refer to Committee programme) |
|
State litigation –
Details of monies disbursed on behalf of client departments and monies
recovered (see paragraph 8.14) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Briefing patterns - Details
of legal practitioners briefed by the Department in state litigation (see
paragraph 8.15.) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Maintenance – Strategy
and action plan maintenance turnaround plan (with targets and timeframes)
(see paragraph 8.15.1.) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Domestic violence –
written report on finding of interdepartmental domestic violence task team
(see paragraph 8.15.2) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Child Justice –
Progress plan for implementation of Child Justice Act (see paragraph 8.15.3) |
Meeting with
roleplayers Briefing |
See committee
programme At next quarterly
meeting (January – March 2012) |
|
Strategy and action
plan for improved management of sexual offence cases (see paragraph 8.15.5 ) |
Briefing together
with roleplayers |
Refer to Committee
programme |
|
Spending plan on
vulnerable groups (see paragraph
8.15.5) |
Written report Quarterly Briefing |
20 November 2011 At next quarterly
meeting (January – March 2012) |
|
Judicial training – Strategy
and action plan to address magistrate’s training needs. Strategy and action
plan to train Magistrates in PAIA (see paragraph 8.17). Progress report on
establishment of SAJEI (see paragraph 8.16) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Resourcing of
judicial officers – strategy and action plan (with targets and timeframes)
(see paragraph 8.18) |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
|
Constitutional Hill
and Justice Precinct public private partnerships – written strategy and
action plan (with targets and timeframes) on progress made. |
Written report |
20 November 2011 |
15.
Summary of
recommendations relating to requests for additional funding for the MTEF
15.1.
The Committee recommends that
the Department of Justice be provided with the following additional funds for
the MTEF period:
·
Infrastructure for the maintenance and rehabilitation to
provide for persons with disabilities.
·
Improved security services.
|
Description (R million) |
2012/13 |
2013/14 |
2014/15 |
Total |
|
Infrastructure |
350 |
400 |
450 |
1200 |
|
Security
services including cash in transit |
100 |
100 |
100 |
300 |
15.2.
In addition, after its recent oversight visits to the
Supreme Court of Appeal and to the High Court and magistrates’ courts at
Manguang, the Committee feels strongly that there should be additional funds
for library materials so that judicial officers have access to up-to-date case
law and law reports, as well as the legal text books necessary for them to make
rulings and write judgements. After its visit to the Supreme Court of Appeal,
the Committee also feels that presiding officers would benefit from additional
capacity in the form of librarians and researchers. The Department has not
specifically asked for additional funds for these items, but the Committee has
learnt that an additional R20 million each year is needed. A further
consideration is that there are funds for the appointment of more judges and
magistrates: These judicial officers will also need to be equipped with the
necessary ‘tools-of-trade’.
15.3.
The Committee recommends that the
National Prosecuting Authority be provided with the following additional funds
for the MTEF period to
·
To pay curator fees and to increase capacity at the AFU.
·
To roll out the TCCs and to institutionalise donor-funded
positions.
·
To provide training on the new sexual offences legislation,
child justice, human trafficking, domestic violence and maintenance.
|
Description |
2012/13 (R’000) |
2013/14 (R’000) |
2014/15 (R’000) |
Total (R’000) |
|
AFU – curator fees and increase in capacity |
39 000 |
44 000 |
50 000 |
133 000 |
|
Roll out of TCC and institutionalisation of donor-funded
positions |
23 591 |
25 271 |
26 504 |
75 366 |
|
SOCA – training on Sexual Offences Act, Child Justice,
Human Trafficking, Domestic Violence and Maintenance |
4 500 |
3 500 |
4 000 |
12 000 |
15.4.
The Committee recommends that
the Legal Aid South Africa be provided with the following additional funds for
the MTEF period to:
·
Increase its practitioner per court ratio.
·
Increase capacity to undertake civil work.
·
Expand its national footprint.
·
Upgrade its IT infrastructure.
|
Description |
2012/13
(R’000) |
2013/14
(R’000) |
2014/15
(R’000) |
MTEF
(R’000) |
|
Increase in practitioner per court ratio |
41 900 |
44 414 |
47 079 |
133 395 |
|
Increased civil capacity |
7 205 |
18 237 |
19 332 |
54 775 |
|
Expansion of the national footprint |
17 000 |
12 720 |
7 865 |
37 585 |
|
IT infrastructure (upgrading of) |
5250 |
1 100 |
1 166 |
7 516 |
15.5.
The Committee recommends that the South
African Human Rights Commission be provided with the following additional funds
for the MTEF period to:
·
Provide for additional capacity, mainly for the provinces
(legal services) and related administrative costs.
·
Expand the Legal Services programme.
·
Fulfil the Commission’s advocacy mandate.
·
Fulfil the Commission’s access to information mandate.
|
Description |
2012/13 R’000 |
2013/14 R’000 |
2014/15 R’000 |
|
Accommodation: Rentals |
1 771 |
1 992 |
2 241 |
|
Video Conferencing |
500 |
550 |
600 |
|
Central Registry |
350 |
400 |
450 |
|
Security Services |
250 |
300 |
350 |
|
Advocacy Programme |
742 |
787 |
833 |
|
Access to Information |
5 565 |
5 899 |
6 253 |
|
Legal Services |
2 438 |
2 584 |
2 739 |
|
Restructuring |
20 004 |
21 205 |
22 477 |
15.6.
The Committee recommends that the
baseline of the Special Investigating Unit be increase by R150 million in the
MTEF period to reduce reliance on funding from co-operation agreements and also
to allow it to increase capacity.
Report to be considered.