Questions and Replies

Reply:

a) The Committee on the Rationalisation of Areas and Judicial Establishments of the Division of the High Court of South Africa held the following meetings:

(i) Virtual meeting held on 13 July 2021. Introductory meeting with Deputy Director-General Court Services.

(ii) Virtual meeting held 29 September 2021: Discussion of the draft Road map with the DDG Court Services

(iii) Physical meeting 5 November 2021 at Protea Hotel Fire and Ice, Pretoria: Department’s detailed submission to the Committee outlining the following aspects:

• The challenges pose by pre-1994 areas of jurisdiction of the high courts; in particular, the Eastern Cape and Gauteng divisions
• Proposed changes to the current areas of jurisdiction of the high courts; and
• Proposed additional local seats with a view to increase access to justice.

(iv) It is expected that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) will present their submission regarding the above, at the date to be confirmed.

(ii) The Committee was expected to submit its Interim Report on or before 15 October 2021 and its final report by 31 December 2021. Subsequent to the presentation by DoJ&CD the Committee then had a sense of the work to be completed and then it was agreed that the Terms of Reference be amended to provide for new dates for submission. In terms of the Committee’s roadmap the OCJ and NPA were supposed to make similar submission to the Committee. There was hesitation from both the OCJ and NPA which derailed the commitments made on the roadmap. The Terms of Reference (ToRs) were thus amended to provide for new dates regarding the submission of reports by the Committee. The dates in the new ToRs were revised to 15 April 2022 for the submission of its Interim Report, and 30 July 2022 for the submission of its Final Report.

b) (i) (ii) Expenses incurred to date

Item	Amount
Venue for meeting (Protea Fire and Ice, Pretoria)	R16 524.00
Accommodation	R4 478.77 (Only done for one members for 2 nights. Others members did not require accommodation)
Flights	R9 233.49 (for 2 members)
Shuttle	R2 732.24
Ten (10) Laptops	R232 387.10
Ten (10) Wi-Fi Routers	R53 880.00
Printers	R56 575.00
Payments to Members of the Committee	R767 103.95
Total	R1 142 914.55

Reply:

1. (a) a total of 285 inmates escaped from custody over the past six years (2017/2018 to 2022/2023 financial years). There was an average of 151 495 inmates in custody at any given time during the mentioned period. The escape rate can be averaged at forty eight (48) inmates per year. This translates to an average of 0.032% inmates escaping from custody per annum.

(b) Type of crimes committed by escapees over the past six financial years:

• Attempted murder
• Theft
• Armed Robbery
• Business Robbery
• Escape
• Robbery
• Robbery aggravating
• Housebreaking
• Housebreaking and theft
• Housebreaking with intent to rape
• House breaking with intent to commit robbery
• House Robbery
• Intercourse with a minor
• Kidnapping
• Possession of drugs
• Car theft
• Murder
• Murder and Robbery
• Malicious damage to property
• Attempted murder
• Dealing or smuggling of ammunition, firearms, explosives or armaments
• Assault common
• Assault with GBH
• Assault Serious
• Arson
• Stock theft
• Escape
• Rape
• Rape and kidnaping
• Attempted rape
• Robbery
• Illegal immigrant
• Indecent assault
• Intimidation and crimen injuria
• Possession of stolen property
• Possession of marijuana
• Pointing of a fire arm
• Stock Theft
• Suspected stolen goods

2. (a) (b) Total number of inmates who escaped, rearrested and/ or remain at large as at 30 April 2022.

Region	Un-sentenced Escaped	Total Re-Arrested	Un-sentenced still at large
Eastern Cape	08	08	00
Gauteng	28	13	15
Free State Northern Cape	16	14	02
Western Cape	82	80	02
KwaZulu- Natal	11	10	01
Limpopo Mpumalanga North- West	01	01	00
NATIONAL	146	126	20

Total number of sentenced inmates who escaped, re-arrested and/ or are still at large.

Region	Sentenced Escaped	Total Re-Arrested	Sentenced still at large
Eastern Cape	22	21	01
Gauteng	26	13	13
Free State, Northern Cape	20	17	03
Western Cape	18	17	01
KwaZulu- Natal	16	11	05
Limpopo, Mpumalanga, North – West	37	21	16
NATIONAL	139	100	39

4. Escapes are reported to the South African Police Services (SARS) and criminal cases are opened against the perpetrators. SARS track and tracing unit together with the DCS EST (Emergency Support Teams) conduct manhunt and search operations.

Due to the violent nature of most escapees. For all foreign national who escape, DCS and SAPS also engage with to the SADC countries law enforcement agencies.

END.

Reply:

• Department of Correctional Services officials are continuously sensitised to comply with Security policies and procedures by ensuring that proper and regular searches of inmates, officials, visitors and services providers are conducted at access control points and in and around Correctional Facilities. For any non-compliance, consequence management which includes disciplinary cases and opening criminals cases with South African Police Services (SAPS) is undertaken.
• The Department is in the process of finalising the Intergrated Security System maintenance and repair programme in the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF). The programme will ensure that Integrated Security Systems work effectively and efficiently.
• A bag-less society is implemented in all Correctional Facilities and this is reinforced during morning parade and at security forum committee meetings. Lockers fare installed outside the Correctional Facility for officials to leave their bags.
• Frequent patrolling of outer perimeter fencing is conducted on a daily basis, including foot patrols during the day and night. Vehicles are also fitted with spot lights for good visibility during night patrols.
• Tower posts around Correctional Facilities are manned.
• Searching of official vehicles, service providers and visitors using metal detectors search mirrors, scanners and body scanners at entry points is conducted.
• The use of Emergency Support Team (EST) officials to conduct random surprise search operations at all access points of the Correctional Facility are a constant feature.
• The assistance of SAPS, Metro Police (Sniffer dogs), South African Revenue Services (SARS) inspection services (illegal imports) and Crime Intelligence Unit are requested at different intervals.
• the use of DCS K9 Unit (sniffer dogs & corridor dogs) during surprise searching operations.
• The use of walkthrough, hand held metal detectors, scanners serves to help detect contrabands.

END

Reply:

On 17 February 2022, the Director-General (DG) of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) approved the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)’s request to establish a multi-disciplinary Task Team to Develop / Review the Draft Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Donor Review Committee prepared by the NPA.

The Task Team met on 8 March and 25 March 2022, and is currently in a process of compiling a detailed report to the National Director of Public Prosecutions and DG of the DoJ&CD in which certain recommendations will be made on its purpose as well as the rules and procedures that will govern its operations.

The target date for the implementation of the protocol is 30 June 2022.

Reply:

1. I have been informed by the Magistrates Commission that its Executive Committee (EXCO) resolved to appoint two (2) private practitioners to lead the evidence on behalf of the Commission. This resolution was taken with consideration of the duration of the hearing/inquiry, and the fact that if magistrates were to lead the evidence, those magistrates would have to be replaced in their courts. The two private practitioners were duly appointed as Persons to Lead the Evidence (PLEs) on 23 September 2021.

I have further been informed that dates have been proposed for early in the 2nd half of 2022 to commence with the Inquiry.

2. No. The Magistrates Commission is an independent statutory body and any requests for statements should be referred to the Chairperson of the Magistrates Commission.

Reply:

The placement on parole of offender Morné Harmse’s was not approved by the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services as the Minister is responsible for parole consideration of offenders that are sentenced to life imprisonment (lifers). Offenders serving determinate sentences are considered by the Case Management Committees and the Correctional Supervision and Parole Boards (CSPB) without the intervention of the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services.

Offender Morné Harmse was first considered on 16 November 2019, by the CSPB for possible placement on parole after completion of his minimum detention period on 09 June 2019, and was found not suitable for placement. Subsequently five (05) further profiles were approved by the CSPB and he was referred for further interventions.

Offender Morné Harmse was reconsidered by the CSPB on 24 February 2022, and this time parole placement was approved effective from 03 March 2022, subject to compliance with parole conditions. The decision to place offender Morné Harmse on parole was taken after considering multi-disciplinary reports including the Social Work report. Offender Harmse still continues with rehabilitation efforts under the system of Community Corrections. The offender is complying with his placement conditions since he was placed out.

END

Reply:

1. No
2. (b) and (c), Falls away

END

Reply:

No. I did not receive any correspondence in any format whatsoever.

END.

Reply:

1. Indeed, there was a security incident at Tswelopele Correctional Centre on 05 March 2022, wherein one (01) official was injured and two (02) offenders died. It can be confirmed that eight (08) and not seventeen (17) officials were immediately placed on precautionary suspension pending outcome of the investigation. The investigation has been finalised and consequence management is to be applied following departmental protocols including the review of suspensions.

2. Trauma management is provided to the officials who are exposed to acts of violence from offenders. Trauma counselling is provided by the Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) officers of the Department.

END

Reply:

1. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) has implemented a wide range of security measures within its information processing environment, intended to prevent any unauthorized access to and/or use of sensitive information and ensure that the confidentiality, integrity and availability of personal information remain protected. These security measures are categorized into two (2) groups as follows:

a) Managerial controls, including a set of approved, published and implemented information security policies, standards, procedures and guidelines. Awareness of the existing information security policies and cybersecurity risks within our information processing environment is proactively and regularly being promoted amongst DoJ&CD’s users to ensure positive security behaviors and adherence to prescribed rules.

b) Technical Controls – In addition to the native security features provided by our systems and platforms, we have deployed a set of automated security tools and processes to improve our defensive capabilities and safeguard our ICT infrastructure and systems. These technical tools enable us to effectively restrict and control access to our ICT systems, applications and services, manage vulnerabilities, proactively monitor, protect and respond to security threats and incidents. We have also deployed disaster recovery capabilities to ensure continued availability of business-critical information in case of any adverse event impacting DoJ&CD’s services. Technologies that are currently implemented include:

1. Antivirus – Endpoint (PCs) Antivirus Software. All endpoint devices were equipped with Antivirus software which offers advanced automated threat detection and response against an ever-growing variety of threats and malware.
2. Advanced Threat Protection – A limited number of critical servers have protection against attacks, advanced threats and ransomware, giving the Departments the power to detect, analyze and respond today’s stealthy attaches in real time.
3. Network Discovery and Analysis – A limited number of critical services have advanced tools installed that provides 360 degrees of visibility by monitoring and reporting on all network ports network traffic. This detects targeted attacks designed to evade standard security solutions.
4. Mail Security Gateway – providing Integrated-tiered spam prevention and anti-phishing spyware. The appliance provides a comprehensive gateway email security.
5. Web Security Gateway – Provide a proactive web traffic detection and blocking services based on reputation services.
6. Firewalls – Network security appliance that monitors and controls incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predetermined security rules. This device typically establishes a barrier between a trusted network and untrusted networks such as the internet. The firewall provides protection against outside cyber-attackers by shielding the Department’s computers or network from malicious or unnecessary network traffic.
7. MIMECAST – Provides the Department with email security services. It is used to protect the Department’s email system, ensure access and simplify the tasks of managing emails system.
8. Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) – A Software solution that aggregates and analyzes activity from many different resources across your entire IT Infrastructure. SIEM collects security data from network devices, servers, domain controllers, and may more log sources. SIEM provides real-time analysis of security alerts generated by applications and network hardware.
9. Proxies – This solution offers the Department reverse proxy services. A reverse proxy ultimately forwards user/web browser requests to the web servers. However, the reverse proxy server protects the web server’s identity. It helps increase performance, security and reliability.
10. Vulnerability Scan Tools – These tools were deployed in the environment to scan and report on a quarterly basis the vulnerability levels of the Department in terms of missing patches.
11. Virtual Private Network Technology – This tool grants complete access to the Department’s Local Area Network to authorized users via encrypted secure tunnels.
12. User awareness and training tools – These tools allow the Department to provide target security awareness messages to end users. It also allows for simulated attacks and end user training in the event where awareness is lacking. Post the breach, this tool was deployed to 2000 users in the Headquarters, with plans to roll it out to all users in this financial year.

a) In addition to the already implemented security tools, the Department has, post the ransomware, enabled the following additional security measures:

(i) Zero Trust Network Tool – The Zero Trust Network Access Tool will help the Department to provide secure remote user access to applications and services based on defined access control policies, the tool defaults to deny, providing only the access to services the users has been explicitly granted. With this Zero Trust Network Tool, access is established after the user has been authenticated to the tool first. The tool then provisions access to the application on the user’s behalf through a secure, encrypted tunnel. This provides an added layer of protection for the Department’s applications and services by shielding otherwise publicly visible Internet Protocol (IP) addresses. With this solution, users will only see applications that they have access to. This tool is to replace the current VPN tools which grant complete access to all applications.

(ii) The Department also implemented a tiered administrative model on the active directory and that will help the Department to better secure its ICT environments. The model defines three (3) tiers that create buffer zones to separate administration of high-risk PCs and valuable assets like domain controllers.

(iii) We have also reviewed and/or enhanced our security policies on all our security appliances to safeguard against future security attacks.

b) Going forward, the following technologies are to be implemented to further enhance the security of the ICT environment:

(i) Cyber Security Operations Centre (CSOC) will be implemented in the 2022/23 financial year.

CSOC is a centralize function within an organization employing people, processes and technology to continuously monitor and improve an organization’s security posture while preventing, detecting, analyzing and responding to cybersecurity incidents. CSOC will act like the hub or central command post, taking in telemetry from across the Department’s IT infrastructure, including its networks, devices, appliances, and information stores wherever those assets reside. The proliferation of an advanced threat places a premium on collecting content from diverse sources. Essentially, the CSOC will be the correlation point for event logged within the Department. This will be implemented by way of a hybrid model using existing tools aggregated on the one platform.

(ii) External Penetration Testing.

Discussions and planning had already commenced with some of the industry partners in terms of providing a comprehensive external penetration testing, with the aim of identifying any gaps in our security environment. This process is expected to be finalized by the middle of the year, and be completed annually going forward.

2. Where the Master of the High Court and the High Court share the same building, each operates independently as the Master’s Office falls within the ambit of the DoJ&CD and runs on the DoJ&CD Virtual Private Network (VPN), whereas the High Court falls under the ambit of the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) and runs on the OCJ VPN.

Reply:

a) Work on the drafting of the Framework began in June 2020. Work on the draft was delayed as increasing Covid-19 infections and stringent Covid-19 Regulations required that immediate action and interventions be embarked upon wherever possible to mitigate against their impact on court operations and court efficiency.

The Directions issued by the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services contained some of the interventions such as, e.g. the keeping of Priority Rolls; Court staffing arrangements etc, whilst the Court Optimisation Committee, an intervention led by the Deputy Minister, sought to address challenges and bottlenecks being experienced at the court level by bringing together justice stakeholders and members of the judiciary.

As the rate of Covid infections dropped and the Alert Levels changed accordingly with less stringent Regulations, work could resume on bringing about a more permanent and long-term solution to the long-standing issue of criminal case backlogs.

It should be highlighted that addressing the causes of criminal case backlogs requires the buy-in of all stakeholder departments. For this purpose, extensive consultations were conducted, including workshops. Both external stakeholders as well as internal stakeholders had to be consulted in the drafting and finalising of the Framework, before it could be submitted to the Minister. Consultations began in early July 2021 and continued until November 2021. The Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster was also consulted on various occasions through the Development Committee (Sub-Committee of the JCPS Director-Generals’ Cluster). Several versions were submitted for guidance until the final draft Framework was submitted to the Minister on 22 March 2022.

The Framework provides for the establishment of a National Steering Committee comprised of senior officials of all stakeholder departments and entities, viz. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the Department of Correctional Services, the Department of Health, the National Prosecuting Authority, Department for Social Development, Legal Aid South Africa, the South African Police Service, and so forth. The National Steering Committee would also need to include representatives of the Judicial Accountability Committee (Magistrates).

The initial responsibility of the National Steering Committee will be to finalise, through various consultations, Memoranda of Understanding between the stakeholder departments and entities outlining each respective department or entity’s responsibility and commitment to perform their individual line functions that they are required to do within their respective mandates, so as to contribute to the reduction of criminal case backlogs.

Each stakeholder department or entity will, in turn, be finalising Annual Performance Indicators within their areas of responsibility, each of which will feed into an overall JCPS Indicator with the desired outcome being reduced criminal case backlogs.

These tools seek to ensure on-going monitoring of performance and the progress being made in reducing the criminal case backlogs consistently and progressively.

Already existing regional and district structures will deal with challenges at local, district and regional level with matters that cannot be resolved at these levels being escalated to the National Steering Committee.

b) The draft Framework will be finalised after the inputs from the Lower Courts Judiciary have been obtained. It must be stressed that these consultations must still take place. Court performance and court efficiency fall within the purview of the judiciary. The Department plans to begin the implementation of the Framework with the convening of the National Steering Committee after consultations with the Lower Courts judiciary have taken place and their inputs have been incorporated.

The Framework aims to provide for a long-term mechanism to address criminal case backlogs. However, the Department has developed an Action Plan to be implemented immediately to address challenges which have a negative impact on the courts and which fall within the Department’s responsibility.

The Action Plan includes interventions such as, amongst others, -

1. Priority Courts identified in terms of highest backlogs and the development of priority rolls;
2. Continuous Rolls - Matters involving multiple accused to be placed on continuous roll for trials;
3. Backlog Courts established where feasible;
4. Client-Liaison Meetings with service providers e.g. CRT service providers
5. Additional Human Resources;
6. Psycho-social support for court officials to improve on the rate of absenteeism;
7. Repairs and Maintenance (IT) - Regional Heads and ISM meet with service provider every Wednesday to track progress;
8. Additional Equipment Procured (IT);
9. Facilities interventions such as procurement of portable battery packs and generators, facilitation of the carrying out of minor maintenance works and procurement of mobile units to be used as court rooms and testifying rooms; and
10. Security measures for the courts.

Reply:

In response to the questions above, the National Prosecuting Authority has informed me as follows:

1. Orlando CAS 150/08/19

It was declined to prosecute the matter, as the case docket contained very scant evidence. Mr Tshepo Mhlongo, provided a very cryptic statement where he mentioned that he is the lawful owner of a certain property and alleged that Sibusiso Duma and his two brothers are collecting rent. The accused denies this allegation. The decision to decline a prosecution was made on 11 December 2019. The Investigating Officer was informed that he may re-submit the case docket once further admissible evidence that objectively supports the allegation made by Mr Mhlongo is obtained. Up to date, no such evidence has been obtained.

2. Orlando CAS 220/11/2019

The matter is on the court roll as prosecution was instituted. This matter is partly heard and Mr T Mhlongo is again the complainant herein. The State of Disaster that existed, the non-availability of Legal Aid South Africa, the absence of accused on more than one occasion, the non-availability of the docket and the non-functioning of the court recording machine are cited as reasons for the number of remands. The matter was remanded to 22 April 2022 for continuation of the trial. The Presiding Magistrate came from another court to attend to the partly heard matter, but unfortunately the matter could again not proceed due to a faulty recording machine. The case was subsequently remanded to 21 June 2022 to court “A” for hearing further evidence. The State’s case is not closed yet as the Investigating Officer still needs to testify.

3. Orlando CAS 551/04/2018

This matter involves the brother of Mr T Mhlongo who is called Lincoln Mhlongo. This matter was finalised on the 29 August 2019 wherein the accused was found guilty of assault and sentenced to twelve (12) months imprisonment which was wholly suspended for five (5) years.

4. Orlando CAS 133/10/2015 (with Orlando CAS 513/04/2019)

These matters are being dealt with at the Office of the Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) under DPP ref 10/2/4/3-306/19 and as per the latest correspondence to the South African Police Service (SAPS) Provincial Head, Gauteng Detectives dated 30 March 2022, it is clear that there are still investigations outstanding and a return date of 14 April 2022 is stated for an update from SAPS side. SAPS is supposed to advise the DPP’s office on the appointment of an expert who will do a voice comparison.

5. Orlando CAS 40/10/2019

The complainant is also Mr T Mhlongo. This case is also on the court roll after prosecution was instituted. On 07 May 2021, warrants of arrest were authorised against the two (2) accused. As warrants of arrest were issued, it is unclear when the warrants will be executed as this function falls within the ambit of SAPS.

6. None of the cases mentioned above were withdrawn.

Reply:

The provisioning of the erf numbers by the Lesedi Local Municipality already took place during the criminal investigations on the matter, whereupon same were outlined on Schedule “A” of the charge sheet, as follows:

No.	Property description	Current title deed no.	Current owner details	Purchase date	Purchase price	Previous owner details	Previous title deed number
	Erf 1810 Heidelberg extension 9	T56357/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/02/2010	R150 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 3407 Heidelberg extension 16	T56350/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/03/2010	R81 000. 00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3404 Heidelberg extension 16	T56344/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/03/2010	R81 000. 00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 2033 Heidelberg extension 9	T56352/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/03/2010	R179 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 3353 Heidelberg extension 9	T56355/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/03/2010	R75 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 3108 Heidelberg extension 16	T56343/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/03/2010	R85 000. 00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3405 Heidelberg extension 16	T56346/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 860413 0709083	10/10/2010	R81 000. 00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 1817 Heidelberg extension 9	T57285/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/02/2010	R180 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 3403 Heidelberg extension 16	T57286/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/03/2010	R81 000. 00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 2151 Heidelberg extension 9	T57284/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/02/2010	R220 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 1811 Heidelberg extension 9	T74471/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/02/2010	R172 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 1816 Heidelberg extension 9	T74472/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/02/2010	R162 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 1658 Heidelberg extension 9	T88175/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/02/2010	R248 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 1579 Heidelberg extension 9	T89743/2018	Mashinini Florence with ID no. 8604130709083	10/02/2010	R240 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 3145 Heidelberg extension 16	T4829/2019	Nombembe Wandile Elvis with ID no. 9107106385085 and Nombembe Samukelisiwe Thandeka Felicity with identity nr 9012181057080	07/05/2009	R100 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3146 Heidelberg extension 16	T40964/2018	Peete Justice Malefetsane with identity no. 6905225627086 and Peete Matshidiso with ID no. 7401190271083	22/12/2010	R100 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3371 Heidelberg extension 16	T1869/2019	Msiza Themba Hope with ID no. 8603075344088	09/12/2018	R280 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3292 Heidelberg extension 16	T66475/2018	Ratanda Young Generation with registration no. 071-320-NPO	07/04/2009	R375 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 484 Jameson Park	T80274/2018	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	05/10/2018	R197 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T68847/2000
	Erf 629 Jameson Park	T79939/2018	Buffels Kraai Kroning Trust with registration no. 2053/2018	05/10/2018	R172 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T57804/1999
	Erf 6860 Heidelberg extension 25	T5087/2019	Kroonjuwele Eiendom Trust with registration no. 848/2018	05/10/2018	R850 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T86377/2010
	Erf 3091 Heidelberg extension 16	T13731/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	13/12/2018	R270 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3089 Heidelberg extension 16	T13732/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	13/12/2018	R270 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 2307 Heidelberg extension 9	T2328/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	22/11/2018	R175 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 2308 Heidelberg extension 9	T2610/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	22/11/2018	R185 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 2306 Heidelberg extension 9	T2611/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	22/11/2018	R180 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 3416 Heidelberg extension 16	T6629/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	13/12/2018	R230 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 362 Jameson Park	T74445/2018	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	05/10/2018	R180 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T28780/1996
	Erf 362 Rensburg	T7553/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	05/10/2018	R156 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T70301/1989
	Erf 2305 Heidelberg extension 9	T7991/2019	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	22/11/2018	R175, 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 816 Jameson Park	T79945/2018	Oorvloed Eiendom Trust with registration no. 2116/2018	05/10/2018	R180 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T148224/1999
	Erf 3411 Heidelberg extension 16	T47435/2018	Radebe Buti Paulus with ID no. 6602155534081	03/02/2009	R85 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3381 Heidelberg extension 16	T47436/2018	Radebe Buti Paulus with ID no. 6602155534081	03/02/2009	R110 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3414 Heidelberg extension 16	T47889/2018	Radebe Buti Paulus with ID no. 6602155534081	03/02/2009	R85 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3412 Heidelberg extension 16	T47890/2018	Radebe Buti Paulus with ID no. 6602155534081	03/02/2009	R85 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3413 Heidelberg extension 16	T48041/2018	Radebe Buti Paulus with ID no. 6602155534081	03/02/2009	R85 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3377 Heidelberg extension 16	T47432/2018	Radebe Teboho Edward with ID no. 9004015377081	07/04/2009	R90 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3378 Heidelberg extension 16	T47433/2018	Radebe Teboho Edward with ID no. 9004015377081	07/04/2009	R100 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3376 Heidelberg extension 16	T47434/2018	Radebe Teboho Edward with ID no. 9004015377081	07/04/2009	R90 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3128 Heidelberg extension 16	T66474/2018	Radebe Teboho Edward with ID no. 9004015377081	07/04/2009	R100 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3129 Heidelberg extension 16	T66476/2018	Radebe Teboho Edward with ID no. 9004015377081	07/04/2009	R100 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3127 Heidelberg extension 16	T70825/2018	Radebe Teboho Edward with ID no. 9004015377081	06/04/2009	R100 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 385 Jameson Park	T2659/2019	Ambrosius Familie Trust registration no. 2072/2018(G)	05/10/2018	R186 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T64708/1999
	Erf 298 Jameson Park	T3342/2019	Ambrosius Familie Trust registration no.2072/2018(G)	05/10/2018	R186 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T9535/2000
	Erf 150 Jameson Park	T79947/2018	Ambrosius Familie Trust registration no. 2072/2018	05/10/2018	R187 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T117586/1999
	Erf 656 Jameson Park	T88643/2018	Ambrosius Familie Trust registration no. 2072/2018	05/10/2018	R186 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T87586/1996
	Erf 2357 Heidelberg extension 9	T3373/2019	Muizenberg Familie Trust registration no. 2063/2018	22/11/2018	R195 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 541 Jameson Park	T75945/2018	Muizenberg Familie Trust registration no. 2063/2018	05/10/2018	R183 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T77618/1997
	Erf 682 Jameson Park	T79943/2018	Muizenberg Familie Trust registration no. 2063/2018	05/10/2018	R191 500.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T72955/1988
	Erf 146 Jameson Park	T80272/2018	Bedenhorst Familie Trust registration no. 2073/2018(G)	05/10/2018	R186 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T64296/1999
	Erf 251 Jameson Park	T84465/2018	Bedenhorst Familie Trust registration no. 2073/2018(G)	05/10/2018	R200 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T14163/2000
	Erf 75 Jameson Park	T84470/2018	Bedenhorst Familie Trust registration no. 2073/2018(G)	05/10/2018	R195 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T4426/1996
	Erf 467 Jameson Park	T79951/2018	Bedenhorst Familie Trust registration no. 2073/2018	05/10/2018	R195 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T20040/1972
	Erf 545 Jameson Park	T79949/2018	Bedenhorst Familie Trust registration no. 2073/2018	05/10/2018	R197 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T62741/1999
	Erf 3081 Heidelberg extension 16	T88174/2018	Makgoale Jacqueline Matete Mokgohloe with ID no. 9808090135085	21/02/2009	R110 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3099 Heidelberg extension 16	T1868/2019	Bordewijk Familie Trust registration no. 2074/2018	05/10/2018	R180 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3125 Heidelberg extension 16	T1639/2018	Mabunda Popo Brian with ID no. 7804175340080 and Fumo Vincent with ID no. 0311265255084	19/02/2010	R80 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 4601 Heidelberg extension 23	T22665/2019	Mabunda Popo Brian with ID no. 7804175340080	17/01/2014	R296 960.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T25132/2002
	Erf 3120 Heidelberg extension 16	T32281/2017	Mabunda Popo Brian with ID no. 7804175340080	07/04/2009	R80 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3389 Heidelberg extension 16	T89657/2018	Mabunda Popo Brian with ID no. 7804175340080 and Fumo Vincent with ID no. 0311265255084	29/01/2010	R89 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3167 Heidelberg extension 16	T16915/2018	Mokoena Siphiwe Ephraim with ID no. 7607035653083 and Mokoena Ntombikayise with ID no. 7507040720085	27/03/2009	R100 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3292 Heidelberg extension 16	T66475/2018	Ratanda Young Generation	07/04/2009	R375 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3293 Heidelberg extension 16	T2329/2019	Mfene Popie Maria with ID no. 5607020714082	15/10/2018	R145 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3384 Heidelberg extension 16	T85819/2018	Mangoato Piet Phuti with ID no. 7009215993084	15/10/2018	R97 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3322 Heidelberg extension 16	T85818/2018	Mangoato Piet Phuti with ID no. 7009215993084	15/10/2018	R130 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3371 Heidelberg extension 16	T1869/2019	Msiza Themba Hope with ID no. 8603075344088	09/12/2018	R280 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3373 Heidelberg extension 16	T13730/2019	Legodi David Malesela with ID no. 7210285296081	13/11/2018	R170 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3375 Heidelberg extension 16	T15908/2019	Legodi David Malesela with ID no. 7210285296081	13/11/2018	R170 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3374 Heidelberg extension 16	T18815/2019	Legodi David Malesela with ID no. 7210285296081	13/11/2018	R170 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3382 Heidelberg extension 16	T6631/2019	Legodi David Malesela with ID no. 7210285296081	13/11/2018	R170 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 3402 Heidelberg extension 16	T56354/2018	Motsoeneng Teboho Moses with ID no. 8812055399083	15/01/2010	R85 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 8 Jameson Park	T79941/2018	Sadomba Andrew with ID no. 7012145206080	05/06/2018	R120 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T15395/2000
	Erf 3417 Heidelberg extension 16	T81767/2018	Sebiloane Teboho Joseph with ID no. 8402055916084	10/02/2009	R85 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T30258/1989
	Erf 245 Jameson Park	T2259/2019	Miya Sebolai Joseph with ID no. 7212075417083 and Miya Sebolelo Maria with ID no. 8103080543089	5/05/2018 04/10/2018	R120 000.00 R250 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality Pule Vincent Motaung with ID no. 790323 5645 080	T142397/2000 T74097/2018
	Erf 1630 Heidelberg extension 9	T6630/2019	Elzinkhorst Familie Trust with registration nr 2071/2018	05/10/2018	R200 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 1962 Heidelberg extension 9	T56353/2018	Mmusi Project Management CC with registration no. 200910105023	10/01/2010	R170 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 1814 Heidelberg extension 9	T56356/2018	Mmusi Project Management CC with registration no. 200910105023	10/01/2010	R170 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975
	Erf 1815 Heidelberg extension 9	T56345/2018	Tlaka Matubatse Victor	10/01/2010	R158 000.00	Lesedi Local Municipality	T24246/1975

END.

Reply:

For the sake of clarity, the accused was sentenced to five (5) years’ imprisonment in terms of the provisions of section 276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act No. 51 of 1977. Thus, after serving a sixth of the sentence (10 months), she may be placed under correctional supervision. The 5-year term was therefore not accurately reported by the media.

The Department of Education and INTELLIMALI commissioned two (2) forensic investigations (Ernst & Young being one of the two companies) and the findings from both companies cleared the officials of any involvement or human error. The final findings were that the deposit was due to a computer glitch or hacking. The police investigations also did not reveal any evidence of wrong-doing on the part of the officials, either from the Department or INTELLIMALI. 

In light of the above, no grounds of acting against any official could be found. Any further enquiries in this regard should be addressed to the Department of Higher Education or South African Police Service.

END.

Reply:

(a) A procedure manual has been developed as a tool to assist the officials working at the detention facilities to understand the requirements with regard to the implementation of section 48 (Clothing) of the Correctional Services Act. The procedure manual serves to make provision for consistent standards in terms of issuing, assigning and receiving of remand detainee uniforms and to ensure uniformity within the department.

On a yearly basis, Regions submit their needs for the next financial year, for the ordering of remand detainees’ uniform. It is acknowledged that the uniform for Remand Detainees is not sufficient to cater for all remand detainees due to lack of funding. Since 2019 the budget for Remand Detainees uniform was drastically reduced on an annual basis. In 2019/2020 an amount of R40 049 000.00 was allocated for Remand Detainees uniform. In 2020/2021, an amount of R15 800 000 was allocated and in 2021/2022 an amount of R17 900 000.00 was allocated. The budget is further reduced to R9,5 million for 2022/23 financial year. With the reduced budget the challenge of shortages for Remand Detainees Uniform is going to be even bigger in 2022/23 as the required quantities to be submitted to the National Treasury will also be reduced due to budget cuts.

The provision of uniform to remand detainees has been prioritised and included in the 2022/23 Annual Operational Plan (AOP) with a monthly target of 90%..

(b)(i)(ii) The Department has identified the need for training officials in supply Chain Management and the need was for the past two years among top priorities. During the financial year 2020/21 a total of twenty-three (23) officials received training in Supply Chain Management and a total of forty-one (41) officials were also trained in 2021/22. Training was concluded in all Regions and the Department has again in 2022/23 placed Supply Chain Management training as one of the top training priorities where the number of officials to be trained will be increased.

END.

Reply:

1. It should be noted that Department of Correctional Services allows offenders to lodge complaints or requests on daily basis, which include enquiring about the status of their profiles. This process has always been available to the mentioned offenders. The whereabouts of the profile reports of both offenders have always been known by the Department. Both profiles are in the final phases of the consideration process.

Both Offenders are serving sentences of life imprisonment. They have benefitted from Phaahla judgment handed down by the Constitutional Court on 03 May 2019, since they were sentenced after 01 October 2004 for offences committed before 01 October 2004. Therefore, they were also allocated maximum credits as per the Van Wyk Judgment. However, this does not mean they qualified for automatic placement on parole.

2(a) The offenders were considered by the Case Management Committee (CMC) and the Correctional Supervision and Parole Board (CSPB) for possible placement on parole.

(b) The profile reports were also considered by the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS) for possible placement on parole. The possible placement of offenders serving life sentences (lifers) is considered by the Minister in line with section 78 of the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998. Therefore, the Minister will consider each case on its merit and his decision will be made known to both offenders within a reasonable time after the Minister has made a decision.

END.

Reply:

DRAFT REPLY

The National Efficiency Enhancement Committee (NEEC) and the Provincial Efficiency Enhancement Committees (PEEC) are judicial governance stakeholder forums which are chaired by the Chief Justice and the Judges President of the Divisions of the High Court respectively. The request for information as contained in the question by the Honourable member has been referred to the Chief Justice for consideration.

Reply:

I have been informed by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development that, currently, the Department does not have charges specific to cannabis. However, the Department gathers information in relation to four (4) charges relating to cannabis which was previously referred to as “dagga”. This is included under the umbrella of “other narcotics”, and the Department cannot drill down to charges relating to cannabis or dagga.

The current charge description is as follows: “Unlawfully receiving any document, intoxicating liquor, dagga, drug, opiate, money or any other article whilst in custody; unlawful supplying, conveying, hiding or placing for an offender’s use any document, intoxicating liquor, dagga, drug or opiate; bringing or introducing into a correctional centre or place of custody any document/ intoxicating liquor/ dagga/ drug/ opiate; Inmate – Arranging with a correctional/ custody official/ another person for a document/ liquor/ dagga/ drug/ opiate/ money/ article.”

It should also be noted that the National Director of Public Prosecutions indicated that the National Prosecuting Authority does not record the above requested information manually, and the electronic case management system allows for reporting on both possession of drugs as dealing in drugs which could be extracted in accordance with the relevant sections of the Act. However, information specific to ‘cannabis’ is not available.

END

Reply:

a) Total number of remand detainees who have who have been in detention for more than two years as at 31st March 2022 was 3 698.

Regional breakdown is as follows:-

Region	Grand Total
Gauteng	1718
Western Cape	708
Limpopo, Mpumalanga & North-West	390
Kwa-Zulu Natal	387
Eastern Cape	291
Free State & Northern Cape	204
Grand Total	3698
Source: GITO

b) The reasons for the prolonged period of detention is the delayed response from the courts on the outcome of the applications of Section 49 G or a continue with detention response is received, however DCS does continue to make use of the provision of Section 49G of the Correctional Services Act by referring Remand Detainees (RDs) to court before completing a period of two years for consideration of their detention and thereafter annually if the RD remains in detention after the initial referral. The courts are required to consider applications from DCS where possible outcomes are as follows:-

1. Release of the RD
2. Release and placement on warning,
3. Placement under s62(f): Supervision by a correctional official
4. Reduction of the amount of bail
5. Placement in a secure care facilities
6. Decline to review bail (Unsuccessful application)

The department intends to intensify relationships with the Justice Cluster by participating in the National Efficiency Enhancement Committee (NEEC), Judicial Case Flow structures and the courts to address this challenge.

c) The strategies developed during the two consultative sessions held in November 2021 for all six regions relates to measures to reduce overcrowding. Heads of Centres were encouraged to establish and maintain stakeholder relations by attending District Efficiency Enhancement Committee (DEEC) meetings where issues relating to Case flows are addressed.

END

Reply:

1. The official is currently in the employ of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) after initially being on suspension.

(a) She is currently in the same position, since Public Service prescripts do not allow for any further conditions when uplifting a precautionary suspension.

(b) The NPA was obliged to uplift the suspension in terms of an arbitration award.

2. The criminal matter is partly heard in the Pretoria Regional Court. The charges are:

Count 1: Theft

Count 2: Fraud

Count 3: Contravention of section 40(A)(2)(a) of Act 32 of 1998 - Causing unauthorised access to an NPA computer

Count 4: Contravention of section 41(6)(b) of Act 32 of 1998 - Disclosed NPA documents contained on an NPA laptop to another.

The matter was back in court on 29 March 2022, and the State closed its case. The defence brought an application in terms of Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA) to have the accused discharged at the end of the State’s case. The State was prepared for such an application, which it opposed and submitted written heads of argument.

The matter was remanded to 10 May 2022 for judgement in respect of the application in terms of Section 174 of the CPA.

Reply:

1. (a) The recent flooding in KwaZulu-Natal has negatively affected the day-to-day

operations of the courts due to the damaged infrastructure. On 12 April 2022, there was a very low attendance by officials as public transport was not available, and there was a precautionary warning that people should not access certain roads. Many courts postponed matters on that day.

The Court Managers have reported that operations at most courts have resumed fully. A number of courts need to be repaired following the floods. Some park homes will need to be replaced due to severe damages, whilst new ones are required in some courts. The only courts forced to close early due to health and safety concerns are those courts that are still without water.

(b) The only Court which was affected by the recent floods in the Eastern Cape is Port St. Johns. There was no infrastructure damage (including flooding and leakages). The only damage incurred affected telephone lines in the office. As a result, the office is not telephonically accessible, but a call has been logged for the telephone lines to be attended to. The Superior Courts (High Courts and Labour Court) in the Eastern Cape Province were also not affected.

2. (a) A total of 35 courts were affected by the floods. The courts that have been damaged include the following:

Item No.	District	No. of Courts Affected	Names of the Courts Affected
	EThekwini	8	i) Verulam Magistrates Court; ii) Verulam Family Court; iii) Pinetown Magistrates Court; iv) Chatsworth Magistrates Court; v) Ntuzuma Magistrates Court; vi) Emlazi Magistrates Court; vii) Wentworth Magistrates Court; and viii) Newlands East Magistrates Court
	Harry Gwala	4	i) UMzimkhulu Magistrates Court; ii) Hlanganani Magistrates Court; iii) Ixopo Magistrates Court; and iv) Himeville Magistrates Court.
	iLembe	4	i) KwaDukuza Magistrates Court; ii) Ndwedwe Magistrates Court; iii) Maphumulo Magistrates Court; and iv) Nsuze Periodical Court.
	King Cetshwayo	2	i) Esikhawini Magistrates Court; and ii) Mtunzini Magistrates Court.
	Ugu	7	i) Port Shepstone Magistrates Court; ii) Ramsgate Branch Court; iii) Izingolweni Magistrates Court; iv) Phungashe Magistrates Court; v) Emzumbe Branch Court; vi) Scottsburgh Magistrates Court; and vii) Umzinto Magistrates Court.
	UMgungundlovu	4	i) Pietermaritzburg Annex Building; ii) Pietermaritzburg Magistrates Court; iii) Howick Magistrates Court; and iv) Masters Office Pietermaritzburg.
	uMkhanyakude	2	i) Hlabisa Magistrates Court; and ii) Manguzi Branch Court.
	uMzinyathi	2	i) Msinga Magistrates Court; and ii) Greytown Magistrates Court.
	uThukela	2	i) Ekuvukheni Magistrates Court; and ii) Ezakheni Magistrates Court.

b) The following are the extent of the damages caused to the courts:

1. Roofs causing roof leakages and damaged ceilings;
2. Park homes;
3. Floors and carpets;
4. Windows;
5. Peeling paint;
6. Electricity supply;
7. Water supply;
8. Generators;
9. Cleaning of drainage systems; and
10. Access roads.

c) Repairs to the damaged courts are on-going. There are on-going meetings between the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD), Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) as well as stakeholders. DPWI is assisting government departments with the required assessments on the damages caused, and service providers have been appointed to attend to some critical areas. It is anticipated that all repairs to roofs will be finalised by 31 May 2022. Depending on the outcome of the completed assessments, some roofs might need to be replaced.

d) The KZN Regional Office has put contingency plans in place to ensure that the work of the courts can continue. All the courts will function during repairs as Court Managers and Heads of Judiciary manage the optimal utilisation of the available courtrooms. Periodical courts operating in damaged mobile courts will be relocated to the main seats. Where water is not available, the DoJ&CD has procured drinking water. Water tanks are procured, and the municipality is assisting with water delivery. Some courts close early due to lack of water. Capacity is sourced from other regions to assist where possible.

Reply:

a.) The Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU) has to date obtained preservation orders to the value of R157 744 720.20, and forfeiture orders to the value of R120 255 279.80. Some of the forfeited funds have already been paid back to the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), the State or victims.

b.) The total number of arrests and/or court enrolments that have been made to date is 132. These relate to 87 natural persons and 45 juristic persons (entities).

c.) The total number of sentences that have been imposed to date is 19. These relate to five (5) natural persons and thirteen (13) juristic persons (entities).

        i.) Five (5) natural persons were charged and convicted of theft, fraud, forgery and uttering relating to claims from the UIF.

        ii.) Thirteen (13) juristic persons (entities) were charged and convicted of contraventions of Section 234(a) read with Section 22(1) of the Tax Administration Act 28/2011 and further read with Sections 1 and 23(1) of the Value Added Tax Act 89/1991.

Sentences imposed range from a term of imprisonment, fines as well as suspended sentences.

 

Reply:

It should be noted that besides the above explanation regarding security services, the department also engaged the then contracted service provider to conduct assessment on the functionality of security systems of Mbombela High Court while the contract was still active. It was discovered that two Network Video Recorders were faulty and becomes dysfunctional. The two NVR system were found to be irreparable due to unavailability of spare parts in the local market. To mitigate the risk, the procurement process to replace the faulty NVR and monitors has since been finalized in March 2022, in that the security system functionality has now improved, however, there are some of the cameras that needs to be maintained and repaired which will be attended to as soon the new service provider is appointed.

END

Reply:

(1) Yes, plans are in place for the appointment of a permanent National Commissioner.

(2)(a) A four months recruitment plan is in place and it is envisaged that a permanent National Commissioner will be appointed no later than 31 July 2022.

(2)(b) The process has begun as the position was advertised on 07 March 2022 with a closing date of 28 March 2022. It is envisaged that shortlisting and interviews will be conducted during April 2022 and May 2022.

END

Reply:

On 17 February 2022, the Director-General (DG) of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) approved the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)’s request to establish a multi-disciplinary Task Team to Develop/Review the draft Terms of Reference (ToR) for the Donor Review Committee prepared by the NPA.

The Task Team met on 8 March and 25 March 2022. The Task Team is currently in the process of compiling a detailed report to the National Director of Public Prosecutions and the DG of DoJ&CD in which certain recommendations will be made on purpose, and the rules and procedures that will govern its operations.

The target date for implementation of the protocol is 30 June 2022.

Reply:

The bed space capacity of Rooigrond Medium A Correctional Centre is 645, the current inmate population is 895 which is 38.76% over populated. Based on the inmate population, the current approved posts establishment is not sufficient.

The centre has an approved post establishment of 196, with 183 filled (93.37%) and 13 posts vacant (6.63%). The Department has a new organisational structure approved by the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services for consultation to address the challenges of staff shortage.

END.

Reply:

a) The following are the key actions towards curbing the contraband into DCS facilities:

• DCS officials are sensitised to comply with Security policies and procedures by ensuring that proper and regular searches of inmates, officials, visitors and services providers are conducted at Access Control points. For any non-compliance, consequence management which includes disciplinary cases and opening criminal cases with SAPS is undertaken.
• Bag-less society is implemented in all Correctional Facilities and the relevance of this is discussed during morning parade and at security forum committee meetings.
• Frequent patrolling of outer perimeter fencing on a daily basis including foot patrols during the day and night.
• Officials are sensitised on a daily basis on the consequences of colluding in corrupt activity with offenders and inmates.
• Smuggling and corrupt activities by officials within the Correctional Facilities is a standing point of the agenda at morning parade and at security forum meetings
• Searching of official vehicles, service providers and visitors using metal detectors search mirrors, scanners and body scanners at entry points.
• The use of EST officials to conduct random surprise search operations at all access points of the Correctional Facility.
• The assistance of SAPS, Metro Police (sniffer dogs), South African Revenue Services inspection services (illegal imports) and Crime Intelligence Unit are requested at different intervals
• The use of DCS K9 Unit (sniffer dogs & corridor dogs) during surprise searching operations.
• The use of walkthrough, hand held metal detectors, scanners, of parcel scanners and the use of x/ray scanners which are installed at certain Correctional Facilities
• Incidents of smuggling by officials with offenders are investigated and disciplinary action taken against perpetrators.
• Use of internal information gathering on smuggling or corrupt activities.
• The Emergency Security Team (EST) at Management Areas is tasked to continually do search and clean-up operations.
• M&E including provision of support to custodial officials by management.
• The issue of integrated planning with stakeholders which features prominently as DCS works closely with other players in the security space, such as, SAPS, DOD, CSIR, etc. does yield good results.

(b)(i) Eighteen (18) officials have been dismissed for smuggling goods and contrabands.

(b)(ii) Seventy-four (74) officials were prosecuted in the past two years, 40 cases for 2019/2020 financial year and 34 cases for 2020/2021 financial year.

END.

Reply:

a) The Department did not fail to intervene and/or resolve the matter in terms of administrative legislative prescripts. The Department is following processes provided for in law.

b) The matter is handled within legislative prescripts and must be allowed to follow due course. The matter is sub judice as fair administrative procedure depends on prevailing circumstances of each case.

END

Reply:

(1) and (2) Government has an obligation to ensure that state institutions are adequately resourced. To date, National Treasury has met this obligation in respect of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). As a result, the question of private donor funding does not arise. In this financial year, R1,2 billion has been allocated to the NPA. In the next financial year, the NPA is expected to advise the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and National Treasury if a shortfall arises. Having addressed the issue of adequacy of funding, I have been informed of requests by the NPA regarding the acceptance of donor funding, its modalities, measures to ensure accountability and to address perceptions of interference with the independence of the NPA and actual interference with the independence of the NPA. These engagements have been ongoing with the Director-General of the Department as the Accounting Officer and the NPA. In this regard, a governance framework for the acceptance of donor funding is being considered.

In general, all private donor funding is processed through the Reconstruction Development Programme which falls under the administration of the National Treasury. In terms of this programme, domestic and foreign grants are received and dispensed according to strict guidelines, controls and oversight.

Should we have a scenario wherein the budget of NPA can only be supplemented by donor funding, the process mentioned above will apply. Safeguarding the independence of the NPA remains of utmost importance. A proper governance framework will be put in place to ensure that the NPA will be sufficiently insulated.

END

Reply:

a) The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) did not fail to ensure that necessary steps are taken in respect of the maintenance and refurbishment of the building to prevent the closure of Rustenburg Magistrate’s Court.

The Department has a delegation of R100 000.00 per incident as part of the day-to-day maintenance guidelines to ensure that the challenges experienced at the court are addressed. Below are the day-to-day maintenance issues addressed by the Department through the North West Regional Office:

• Leaking pipes;
• Repairs to ablution facilities;
• Repairs to ceilings;
• Security and office lights; and
• Air conditioners.

However, the Rustenburg Magistrate Court was served with a prohibition notice by Bojanala Platinum District Municipality for reasons listed below:

• Failure to provide the facility users (public and staff members) with an environment that is not harmful to their health and well-being.
• Exposing facility users to asbestos fibre material that were found to be dripping from the ceiling within the facility passage and court area.
• Exposing facility users to unsafe structural conditions of falling ceiling boards with asbestos lining, and failure to provide adequate ablution facilities for public and staff members.
• Ignoring and allowing continued use of non-functional ablution facilities and use of same toilet facilities by both genders.

Therefore, the efforts made by the North West Regional Office delegation were not sufficient to address all the challenges highlighted above.

b) Rustenburg Magistrate Court is old and dilapidated, and there will always be facility issues and structural challenges due to aging of the building. After the closure of the court, an action plan monitored on weekly basis was developed to address the issues raised. Since the court reopened, service providers to attend to unhygienic toilets and contractors to fix the ceilings were appointed, and the facility is cleaned.

The Bojanala Platinum District Municipality confirmed that the Department has rectified the issues that were raised, lifted the notice and the court is currently operational.

Permanent solution of the maintenance challenges to the court:

The long-term solution for the court is to repair and renovate the building to eliminate unhygienic conditions of the premises that pose a health risk and nuisance to public health and safety.

• The Rustenburg project started in March 2007 as a Repair and Renovations (planned maintenance) project registered and funded by Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI). The project went out on tender in 2012. The tender lapsed without the appointment of a service provider by DPWI. The DPWI did not fund the project in the 2013/14 financial year due to budget cuts.
• The DPWI requested DoJ&CD to fund the project under capital budget in May 2013, and the DoJ&CD agreed to the proposal in July 2013, on condition that additional accommodation vacated by SARS at the adjacent building be added to the project, upgrading of the old court and all security measures and ICT requirements be included.
• The project scope included:
• Conversion of existing offices to accommodate officials within the court, including adjacent Public Protector and Family Advocate at Old SARS building;
• Additional Family Courts at the Old SARS building;
• Walk way adjoining the main court building to the Old SARS building;
• Guardhouse;
• Access for people living with disability;
• Covered and uncovered Parking around both buildings;
• Air-conditioning system;
• Ablution facilities;
• Plumbing system;
• Repairs to walls, windows, doors, roof and floor skirting;
• Installation of a lift at the main building; and
• CCTV, alarm, PABX, Control Room and Server Room.
• A Pre-Design Information Request (PDIR) was issued to the DPWI’s Town Planning Services (TPS) in September 2014 for purposes of clearing the site. The site clearance was issued in March 2015.
• A Sketch Plan Committee meeting which was scheduled for 4 October 2016 turned into a technical meeting because the DPWI Professional Services Quantity Surveyor was not happy with the high project estimate/high building cost.
• The project was re-advertised on 20 September 2019 and closed on 23 October 2019, the briefing meeting was held on 4 October 2019. The project validity period expired before appointment was concluded.
• The project was re-advertised on 01 April 2021 and closed on 05 May 2021. The bid has been going back and forth between DPWI Regional Office and National Bid Adjudication Committee (NBAC). To date, no contractor is recommended or appointed. The bid evaluation process is underway at DPWI.

In light of the above, this is what the Department has been trying to do over the years but due to the procurement processes of DPWI, the DoJ&CD find itself in a dire situation.

The DPWI is currently going through the evaluation process for the third time, and DoJ&CD hopes that the contractor will be appointed in the 2022/23 financial year for the refurbishment of the court to be completed.

END

Reply:

The South African Law Reform Commission released its Report on Adult Prostitution in 2017. Cabinet, at the time, decided not to make a policy choice at that stage and felt that the issue of the possible decriminalisation of sex work should be further debated. There are various policy and legislative options. In order to take the debate on the possible decriminalization of adult sex work forward, the Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mr John Jeffery, has started a series of consultative meetings with various stakeholders and interest groups. The Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development has met with representatives of the pro-decriminalization sex work sector and has had similar meetings with other stakeholders who have a variety of views on the matter.

a) No resolutions have been taken as the engagements with stakeholders are ongoing, but the intention is to proceed with the finalization of a Draft Bill by the end of this year.

b) There are no resolutions as the engagements are ongoing, but the engagements with stakeholders seek to elicit a wide range of views on the matter.

c) As mentioned above, the current engagements are being led by the Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development. Once a Draft Bill has been prepared, the Minister will approach Cabinet to seek approval to publish the Bill for public comment.

Reply:

a) The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD)’s Gauteng Regional Office requested the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) to conduct a structural assessment on the Palm Ridge Court facility on 08 November 2021.

The request was based on numerous complaints that the users of the building had been raising to the attention of the DoJ&CD’s Gauteng Regional Office where administration staff, judiciary and the public at large felt they were not safe to either occupy or utilize the Palm Ridge Magistrate Court facility due to its severe structural defects.

The assigned structural engineer visited the site to conduct an inspection on 15 November 2021. The nature of the inspection involved assessment of the Palm Ridge Magistrate Court facility to pronounce on its structural integrity and provide recommendations. The recommendations on the Investigation Report, Condition Assessment: Palm Ridge Magistrate Court were that a complete status quo report be conducted by a professional team and where the need for further investigation arises, a specialist be requested.

The DoJ&CD wrote to DPWI and requested that a comprehensive assessment on the structural integrity of the building be conducted, and a new repairs and renovations project on the facility be registered.

ZAS Architects & Planners and Fhatani Consulting Engineers together with representatives from DPWI and DoJ&CD undertook a review of issues identified within the Investigation Report: Conditional Assessment: Palm Ridge Magistrates Court, Johannesburg as prepared by DPWI on Thursday, 3 February 2022. A detailed report, dated 8 February 2022, covers two (2) sections, a response to remedial items identified by the structural engineering services division and prioritization of remedial items identified.

ZAS Architects & Planners and Fhatani Consulting Engineers provided their professional opinion that there were no major remedial items identified that warrant the building unsafe, and the facility can be used for its intended purpose. Notwithstanding, the remedial work as identified should be carried out expeditiously.

b) The structural engineer report has declared the building safe for occupation. However, the report further outlined the remedial works that needed to be executed as part of the maintenance of the court. DPWI has attended to the following identified challenges on an emergency basis:

1. Leaking roof;
2. Damaged ceilings;
3. Non-functional lift;
4. Damaged flooring;
5. Urinal systems; and
6. High-rise lighting globes.

For the remedial work required to fix the cracks, DPWI is in the process of appointing a contractor. In anticipation of the appointment of the contractor to fix the wall cracks, DoJ&CD is of the view that the remedial work cannot be executed while the users are in the building.

The DoJ&CD has been looking for an alternative accommodation for officials occupying the one wing which is severely affected by wall cracks. Two (2) locations have been identified, one (1) is a community hall within a 5km radius of the court earmarked as alternative accommodation, upon municipality engagement and approval. The second location is a vacant land parcel opposite the court, this is privately owned and can be utilized as parking. The owner of the site has agreed to let out the land to DoJ&CD officials to use as parking daily. The courts parking area will be used to place park-homes as offices and mobile courts while repairs are being attended to at the court.

END

Reply:

1. In order to address the question with regard to the withdrawal rate it is necessary to indicate the details of the thirteen (13) finalised cases. Five (5) cases resulted in convictions, two (2) cases resulted in acquittals, and in the remaining six (6) cases prosecution was in fact declined.

The six (6) cases wherein prosecution was declined are as follows:

•  

1.1 Lichtenburg CAS 259/8/2016

Background of Case (Summary)

Financial Intelligence Centre (“FIC”) identified several deposits into the bank account of the Chief Financial Officer of Ditsobotla Local Municipality from the following entities:

(a) Khoisan Roads Cc, Ipes-Utility Management Services (PTY) LTD, and Bay Breeze Trading 241 Cc.

(b) Two (2) of the abovementioned entities are service providers of Ditsobotla Local Municipality.

Outcome:

The main suspect has passed away, and prosecution was declined on 22 July 2021.

•  

1.2 Potchefstroom CAS 81/05/2011

Background of Case (Summary)

Docket was opened by the Department of Education North West in Potchefstroom. The complainant alleges that two tenders were awarded to four companies during 2007. During investigations by the Department of Education it was discovered that two of these four companies were allegedly front companies.

Outcome:

The Deputy Public Protector (DPP) declined to prosecute due to insufficient

evidence to prosecute.

1.3 Hartbeespoortdam CAS 174/6/2016; and

1.4 Hartbeeesporrtdam CAS175/06/2016

Background of Case (Summary)

The docket was opened by the Department of Water and Sanitation North West at Hartbeespoort dam. The complainant alleged that the suspects contravened sec 57 (e) of the PFMA, by appointing a company to upgrade the road at Hartbeespoort dam and Lindleyspoort dam whereas the terms of the contract does not make provisions for such services. It was also found the same service provider allegedly had received other tenders without following tender procedures.

Outcome:

The DPP declined to prosecute due to insufficient evidence.

•  

1.5 Mogwase CAS 204/03/2013

Background of Case (Summary)

The Department appointed a contractor to disburse an amount of R1.5m to create projects to alleviate poverty for 100 indigent’s community members but the contractor allegedly disbursed for only 22 indigents. The said contractor allegedly failed to return to the site to continue with the project as agreed in the service level agreement and stole the remaining amount.

Outcome:

The DPP declined to prosecute because the suspect is deceased.

•  

1.6 Mmabatho CAS 270/05/2011

Background of Case (Summary)

The Department of Education advertised a tender seeking a motivational speaker who will render service to different districts within the province for a period of six (6) months. The MEC, Superintendent-General and officials connived with the appointed service provider to defraud the Department by inflating prices and claiming for services not rendered.

The case was before the Mahikeng High Court and was struck off the roll, on 25 August 2014 because the prosecutor needed to finalise the charge sheet and get permission from the DPP North West to re-enrol the matter.

Outcome:

Application for re-enrolment was submitted to the DPP who requested the DPCI to follow-up on certain aspects before a final decision could be made. On 21 September 2021, the DPP refused authorisation in terms of section 342A of Act 51 of 1977 for re-enrolment of the matter, and the matter is now deemed finalised.2. 

2. In regard to the remaining seven (7) finalised cases, prosecution was instituted and resulted in five (5) convictions and two (2) acquittals. This translates to a conviction rate of 71%. The details of the two (2) cases wherein the accused were acquitted are as follows:

2.1 Wolmaranstad CAS 92/12/2010

Background of Case (Summary)

The municipality advertised a tender for refuse trucks whereby the complainant was one of the service providers that bid for the tender. The complainant alleges that he was approached by the employees of the municipality whereby they promised to influence the bid committee to award the said tender to him for benefit.

Outcome:

Matter was before court on 24 April 2019. The accused were acquitted. The complainant was a single witness, as the second witness, his son, passed away prior to the proceedings. At the stage when the matter was partly heard, it happened on repeated occasions that an interpreter was not available for the complainant, and the Court refused further postponement of the matter in terms of section 342A of Act 51 of 1977, resulting in the acquittal of the accused.

•  

2.2 Mahikeng CAS 165/01/2018

Background of Case (Summary)

The Department of Health advertised a vacancy for the Head of the Department (HoD) post. The appointed HoD misrepresented himself by submitting false information during his application. Information was received that the appointment was irregular as he did not meet the requirements as per the advert of the post. Preliminary investigations were conducted, and it was proved that there was a prima facie case that needs further investigation. 

Outcome:

The case was prosecuted in the High Court, and the accused was acquitted on 09 November 2021. The court found their versions to be reasonably possibly true.

3. It is submitted that, given the abovementioned context, the finalisation of these thirteen (13) cases does not represent serious under-performance.

END

 

 

 

Reply:

(a) (i) The current total number of inmates requiring medical care in South African correctional facilities cannot be predicted for a particular time as they all remain potential patients. Nonetheless, all inmates have access to health care services based on their individual health needs as mandated by the current Departmental Policy Procedures on Health Care.

(a) (ii) The most prevalent disease amongst inmates is the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV).

(b) The following standard measures are implanted to prevent inmates from getting sick:

• Screening of inmates on admission, during incarceration and on release for communicable diseases in order to facilitate early diagnosis and the initiation of treatment;
• Provision of treatment for communicable and non-communicable diseases in compliance with the Standard Treatment Guidelines and Essential Medicines Lists (STGs and EML;
• Provision of Primary Health Care services to inmates on a daily basis to address their health needs. Those that require secondary and tertiary levels of care are referred to the relevant external and sensitization sessions on various health conditions as well as maintenance of hygiene standards such as promotion of hand and respiratory hygiene for inmates with regard to COVID-19 through different media as well as implementation of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures;
• Compliance to the Department of Correctional Services specific Standard Operating Procedures for Preparedness, Detection and Response to COVID-19 in order to contain and mitigate COVID-19 infections in the correctional facilities;
• Administering of COVID-19 vaccines to the inmates who have agreed to be vaccinated in order to achieve herd immunity in the correctional facilities thus mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; and
• Provision of meals to inmates addressing their nutritional needs.

END

Reply:

a) For the period ending 31 January 2022, the analysis for the unpaid invoices of more than 30 days was as follows:

(aa) >30 days	(bb) >60 days	(i)(cc) > 90 days	(i)(dd)>120 days and above
No.of invoices	Total Value	No.of invoices	Total Value	No.of Invoices	Total Value	No.of Invoices	Total Value
3 205	R15 193 370.14	1078	R3 474 541.90	745	R3 014 842.40	2 507	R4 770 030.52

( c) It is envisaged that by the end of March 2022 the above-mentioned outstanding invoices would be paid.

END

Reply:

a)  The details of the persons with whom the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has entered into agreements in terms of section 38 of the NPA Act are as follows:

1. Adv. Z Matebese, SC has been appointed to prosecute in the matter of State versus R Mkhwebane, which is a perjury case against the Public Protector opened as per Hillbrow CAS 536/08/2019. The perjury charges are based on the adverse factual findings by the Constitutional Court relating to the honesty and integrity of the Public Protector as per Public Protector v South African Reserve Bank (CCT 107/2018) 2019 (6) SA 253 (CC). At the heart of the allegations against the accused, is the false statements she made regarding the purpose of the meeting she had with Presidency on 7 June 2017, and the discussions she had with the Presidency regarding the remedial action in her final report in respect of an investigation into loan funds made available by the South African Reserve Bank to an entity called Bankorp Ltd, which was later taken over by Absa Bank Ltd. The matter is of a high-profile nature and involved an important Chapter 9 institution.

2. Adv. Nazir Cassim, SC, Adv. Sandra Freese and Av Thabile Ngubeni have been appointed in respect of a High Court Case in Bloemfontein re State versus N Mokhesi and 15 Others (Case Number 45/2021). The accused, during pre-trial proceedings, gave the State notice of their intention to file certain motion applications on various issues, including but not limited to inter alia that the evidence before the Zondo Commission be excluded in the criminal trial, as well as an application pertaining to the applicability of sections 27 and 34 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act 12 of 2004, and allegations in respect of the infringement of various rights of the accused. The accused referred to allegations of impropriety on the part of the State and National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), including Senior State Advocate De Nysschen and the investigation team. The aforementioned counsel had dealt with similar applications for the State. They were appointed to provide services for the duration of the criminal proceedings under the aforesaid case number and any other related matters and appeal processes that may arise out of the criminal proceedings against the accused.

3. Adv. Izak Pansegrouw has been appointed in respect of a High Court Case in Johannesburg regarding the State v Sylla Moussa. The case emanates from the former DSO where advocates James De Villiers and Pansegrouw were seized with the matter. Both have since resigned. The accused is a Guinean national who, during June 2006, was charged with sixteen (16) counts of fraud, alternatively, three (3) counts of theft and three (3) counts of money laundering in terms of the provisions of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (POCA), Act 121 of 1998.

The prosecution of Mr Sylla Moussa is the second longest outstanding matter on the High Court roll in Johannesburg. The matter has been dragging for more than twelve (12) years due to various and incessant interlocutory applications brought by the accused. The Judge President of Gauteng, Honourable Justice Mlambo has already on numerous occasions expressed his concern and displeasure with the apparent problems finalising the matter. He has already allocated a specific Judge to case manage the matter.

This is a very complex fraud matter and voluminous in nature. The preamble of the indictment reflects the following: The accused was in control of two (2) accounts held by corporate entities with ABSA bank. The said accounts were labeled “credit accounts” and bore no-risk status, which meant that the accused could immediately make withdrawals against cheque deposits made into the account. Electronic transfers can only be made from such an account if sufficient funds exist in that account, even if only by way of cheque deposits. The accused allegedly conducted “cross fire fraud” which is described in the preamble to the indictment as follows:

a) No value cheques or cheques of insufficient value (“facilitation cheques”) would be deposited into the beneficiary bank account at ABSA and drawn against the drawer’s account at ABSA.

b) The lack of funds in the drawer’s account to support the amount depicted as per face value of the facilitation cheques, resulted in an artificial credit being created in the beneficiary bank account.

c) The drawing and deposit of the facilitation cheques would be recorded as debit and credit entries respectively. The balances and credits recorded on the respective bank statements of the beneficiary and drawer bank account would therefore not be representative of the genuine or underlying funds created by such transactions, but would be artificial and designed to mislead Absa into accepting that the accused or the corporate entities were conducting bona fide transactions or were involved in genuine and bona fide arm’s length business transactions while they were not.

4. Adv. Wim Trengove, SC, Adv. Andrew Breitenbach, SC,Adv Hephzibah Rajah and Adv. Ncumisa Mayosi were appointed in respect of STATE VERSUS JACOB G ZUMA AND THALES SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD (CASE NUMBER CCD 30/2018) in the KZN High Court. The accused (Mr. JG Zuma) had on the first day of the criminal trial on 17 May 2021, given the State formal notice of his intention to file a special plea in terms of section 106(1)(h) of the CPA and section 35(3) of the Constitution, Act 108 of 1996, wherein he would seek a recusal of the lead prosecutor, Adv. Billy Downer, SC. In the light of the accused attack under oath against Adv. Downer personally, the latter had to file an answer on behalf of the State under oath. Counsel were required to settle such an answer and to argue the matter before the criminal court, as Adv. Downer would be disqualified from doing so himself. A substantial part of these allegations in the accused affidavit were strikingly similar to the allegations which Zuma made in his permanent stay application previously before court. The full court had either found the allegations to be without foundation or struck out the scandalous and vexatious allegations, including those against Adv. Downer personally, in the permanent stay ruling handed down on 11 October 2019. The counsel previously engaged, namely: Adv. Wim Trengove, SC, Adv. Andrew Breitenbach, SC, Adv. Hephzibah Rajah and Adv. Ncumisa Mayosi, had all worked on the preparation, drafting and arguing of the permanent stay application against Mr Zuma. They accordingly had an in-depth knowledge of the history of this matter and the relevant arguments he advanced in his special plea.

5. Adv. C.J Mouton SC, Adv. G Wolmarans and Adv. Chuma Mcoseli were appointed in respect of THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS GRAHAMSTOWN VERSUS TIMOTHY OMOTOSO & OTHERS in the Eastern Cape High Court.

The accused in the aforementioned matter stands before Court on the following charges:

a) COUNT 1

Managing an enterprise conducted though a pattern of racketeering activity (contravention of section 2 (1) (f) of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998 as amended)

b) COUNT 2

Participating in the conduct of an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity (contravening section 2(1)(e) of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998 as amended)

c) COUNT 3, 5, 9, 14, 16, 20, 23, 26, 30, 33, 35, 38, 41, 45, 46, 48, 49, 51, 54, 56, 57, 60 and 62

Trafficking in persons for sexual purposes (contravening section 71 (1) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 as amended).

Alternatively, Involvement in Trafficking in persons for sexual purposes (contravening section 71(2) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 as amended).

4) COUNT 4, 7, 8, 11, 15, 18, 22, 25, 32, 37, 40, 43, 44, 52, 53 and 59

Rape (contravening section 3 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 as amended)

5) COUNT 6, 10, 13, 17, 21, 24, 27, 28, 29, 31, 34, 36, 47, 50, 55, 58, 61 and 63

Sexual assault (contravening section 5(1) of Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 as amended)

On 28 April 2021, the Defence filed an application in the Eastern Cape High Court for an order to declare a “mistrial” in the matter. When the Defence brought the said application, it became apparent that the allegations levelled against the prosecution team were quite serious and it became impossible for the State’s advocates seized with the criminal prosecution to continue dealing with the application in Court. In the circumstances, an application was made to the Honourable Minister of Justice and Correctional Services to approve the appointment of Adv. C.J Mouton SC, Adv. G Wolmarans and Adv. Chuma Mcoseli in terms of section 38(1) of the NPA Act 32 of 1998, since a determination had already been made that the matter should be opposed. The aforesaid section 38 Counsels have thus been appointed on behalf of the State to appear and argue the “mistrial” application.

6. THE STATE VERSUS CLIFFORD BISHOP AND OTHERS

The accused in the aforesaid matter are being prosecuted on a charge of arson, two (2) counts of murder and two (2) counts of attempted murder. Adv. Glenn Gregory Turner is prosecuting the matter. Adv. Turner has been on contract as a Senior State Advocate stationed at the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Grahamstown. He was a member of the NPA for approximately 40 years. When his contract with the NPA expired on 30 June 2021, Adv. Turner requested his supervisor to complete the aforesaid matter, which at that stage was partly heard, in order to avoid inconvenience and costs.

7. THE STATE VERSUS XOLANI ZUNGU AND THREE (3) OTHERS

Adv. Greef was a Senior State Advocate attached to the Organised Crime Component, Durban. The aforesaid officer retired from the NPA with effect from 1 April 2021. She however declared to her supervisor willingness to return to complete the aforesaid matter without remuneration. The trial has been proceeding since April 2019, and the matter could not be finalised by the time Adv. Greef retired due to Covid-19 crisis.

The DPP held a view that it is in the interest of justice and expedient for Adv. Greef to continue prosecuting the matter, as she has been involved in the matter since its inception, and was au fair with all the challenges involved in the matter. The appointment of another prosecutor to continue with the matter would have potentially delayed the matter further, and involved unwarranted costs to the NPA.

1. The table below provides details of specific cases the aforementioned persons have been engaged to perform duties and functions for the NPA:

Name of Supplier	Business Unit	Description of Service	Ministerial Approval date	Cost
Adv. Nazeer Ahmed Cassim, SC	ID	Estina Dairy Farm	19 May 2020	R3 000/h
Adv. Isak Zirk Pansegrouw	DPP Gauteng South	State v Sylla Moussa	21 May 2020	R1 800/h
Adv. Wendy Greeff	DPP KZN	State v Xolani Zungu and 3 others	31 Mar 2021	R0
Adv. Zinzile Zandisile Matebese, SC	NPS	State v Busisiwe Mkhwebane	13 Apr 2021	R2 350/h
Adv. Glenn Gregory Turner	DPP Grahamstown	State v Clifford Bishop and 2 others	06 Sep 2021	R0
Adv. Andrew M Breitenbach, SC	NPS	State v J Zuma and Thales South Africa	24 May 2021	R3 600/h
Adv. Ncumisa Mayosi	NPS	State v J Zuma and Thales South Africa	24 May 2021	R1 900/h
Adv. Hephzibah Rajah	NPS	State v J Zuma and Thales South Africa	24 May 2021	R2000/h
Adv. Wim Trengove	NPS	State v J Zuma and Thales South Africa	24 May 2021	R4 800/h
Adv. Christiaan Johannes Mouton, SC	DDPP Port Elizabeth	State v Timothy Omotoso and others	31 May 2021	R3 200/h
Adv. Chuma Emily Mcoseli	DDPP Port Elizabeth	State v Timothy Omotoso and others	31 May 2021	R600/h
Adv. G Wolmarans	DDPP Port Elizabeth	State v Timothy Omotoso and others	31 May 2021	R2 200/h
Adv. Nazeer Ahmed Cassim, SC	DPP Bloemfontein	State v N Mokhesi and 15 others (Asbestos)	17 December 2021
Adv. Sandra Freese	DPP Bloemfontein	State v N Mokhesi and 15 others (Asbestos)	17 December 2021
Adv. Thabile Ngubeni	DPP Bloemfontein	State v N Mokhesi and 15 others (Asbestos)	17 December 2021

Reply:

(1)(a) From August 2013 up to 7 February 2020, the Department upgraded 106 courts into sexual offences courts in line with the MATTSO[1] Sexual Offences Courts (SOC) Model. Pursuant to the promulgation of section 55A of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act, 2007 (Act No 32 of 2007) (the Act), these courts are now referred to as the MATTSO courts.

On 7 February 2020, section 55A of the Act was promulgated into law to introduce the statutory sexual offences courts that must be established and resourced in line with the Regulations relating to Sexual Offences Courts. The Department is in the process of converting the MATTSO courts into the section 55A sexual offences courts. However, this does mean that the MATTSO courts ceased to function, as section 55A (5) of the Act empowers the MATTSO courts and the rest of the courts for the regional divisions to deal with sexual offences matters, even though they are not established as the sexual offences courts yet.

On 30 March 2022, the Minister received a letter of concurrence from the Acting Chief Justice to designate courts where the section 55A sexual offences courts must be established. With this progress at hand, it is therefore anticipated that the first batch of these courts will be released in the next financial year (2022/23).

(b) As indicated in paragraph (1)(a) above, at present only the MATTSO courts are prioritising the adjudication sexual offences matters until the establishment of the section 55A sexual offences courts. The Department is unable to provide the exact number of magistrates dedicated to the MATTSO courts, as the allocation of such presiding magistrates falls under the purview of the administrative functions of the head of each regional division (referred to as the Regional Court President). In seeking to formalise the execution of this judicial function per regional division, section 55A (7) of the Act requires the head of each regional division to issue directives with the purpose of ensuring that sexual offences matters receive priority at each sexual offences court. It is therefore expected that the Regional Court Presidents will issue these directives upon the establishment of the section 55A sexual offences courts planned for the 2022/23 financial year.

(2) During the period 1 April 2021 to 28 February 2022, the 106 MATTSO courts registered the following cases according to the following metrics:

Reply to Question (2)(a)	Reply to Question (2)(b)(ii)
Province	No. of MATTSO Courts	Total No. of new cases registered	Total No. Pending cases
Eastern Cape	6	151	327
Free State	9	403	593
Gauteng	21	695	810
KwaZulu-Natal	12	425	700
Limpopo	10	142	333
Mpumalanga	7	246	507
Northern Cape	12	150	274
North West	14	161	506
Western Cape	15	349	936
TOTAL	106	2 722	4 986

(2)(b)(i) During the period 1 April 2021 to 28 February 2022, the NPA reported cases of sexual offences finalised with conviction as follows:

	Total No of cases finalised with a verdict	Total No of Cases finalised with a Conviction	Percentage of Conviction
All provinces	4 040	3 008	74.5%
Courts attached to the 55 TCCs	1 190	910	76.5%

3. The Department is currently not collecting statistics according to the types of sentence imposed on convicted sex offenders, and this includes sentences imposed in terms of the minimum sentencing legislation referred to as the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1997 (Act 105 of 1997). However, the correction of this matter is already receiving attention. In January 2022, the Department established a Task Team constituted by statisticians, gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF) specialists and the system developers drawn from DoJ&CD, NPA, Legal Aid South Africa, the Integrated Justice System (IJS) and the judiciary to address gaps in the current data metrics of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS): Criminal and to align this data repository to the new changes introduced by the recent 3 GBV Amendment Acts of 2021. The upgrading of the ICMS: Criminal will unfold in a phase-in approach which gives priority to the inclusion of the additional data metrics on sentencing, as part of Phase 1. The latter Phase is expected to be finalised in 2022/23 financial year.

While the Department’s ICMS upgrade is in progress, the NPA is collecting statistics on the imprisonment sentences imposed on convicted sex offenders, but in a limited scale. During the period 1 April 2021 to 28 February 2022, the NPA reported that the 55 Thuthuzela Care Centres (TCCs) recorded the following breakdown of sentences imposed exclusively on convicted rape offenders:

Offence	Type of Sentence	Number
RAPE	Life imprisonment	173
	20-25 years imprisonment	89
	10-19 years imprisonment	338

Please note that these statistics do not give the complete performance of all courts in the country, as it is limited only to those courts that are linked to the 55 TCCs.

1. Ministerial Advisory Task Team on the Adjudication of Sexual Offences Matters ↑

Reply:

In improving contract management at DCS, contract management at Department of Correctional Services, contract owners or End Users are reminded in writing twelve (12) months ahead and within six months another follow up is made in advance to ensure that contract periods or durations do not end before a new service provider is appointed.

In addition, this contract register also assist to indicate if the service provided is still required and what are the implications going forward.

The department also issued a directive that no extension of contract will be entered into as part of improving contract management and reducing irregular processes.

END

Reply:

1. A security incident was reported, the investigation has been completed and submitted to the delegated authority. The recommendations of the report were approved and are currently in implementation. Furthermore, a criminal case has been reported to the Police (SAPS case number 155/1/2022)
2. Yes, a report was submitted. The centre has been stabilized and the 9four perpetrators identified in the incident have been subjected to disciplinary processes as prescribed. In addition, the offenders have been reclassified as high risk and transferred to an appropriate facility. The Emergency Support Team (EST) has been deployed to augment security in the Management Area. In addition, the Management Area is implementing an action plan to eliminate contrabands from entering the centre.

END

OBJECTIVE	STRATEGY	ACTIVITIES
To maintain a secure and safe environment that is conducive to the rehabilitation of inmates and the attendance of remand detainees in court processes.	Working with Intelligence Agencies	Collaborate with Intelligence agencies i.e., Secret Security Agency (SSA), South African Police Services (SAPS), Crime Intelligence, South African National Defence Force Intelligence; Information sharing and actions to be taken on High Risk offenders, officials, members of the community and illegal activities taking place inside and outside correctional facilities.
	Vetting and Screening of all Officials	All Officials to undergo vetting / screening
	Profiling of Gang members	Photos are taken of all the tattoos on the offenders’ body. (Upper and Lower body); Record all additions and changes to profiled tattoos with regular intervals/ as soon as it becomes known; Utilisation of community profiling information; Previous history of offences; Maintenance of Electronics Record Systems for easy reference; Track and trace including monitoring of re-offending patterns.
	Management of Security Information	Identify gang members and high risk inmates upon admission. All warrants (J7) and relevant documents are screened upon admission; All cases of intimidation/threats must be registered with the Head of Correctional Centre (HCC); HCC must liaise with Area Commissioner and external law enforcement agencies such as the SAPS and SSA in cases of intimidation and threats; Identified high risk inmates (syndicates/organised crime and high risk awaiting trials) should be transferred to Correctional Centres away from their power base.
	Establishment of Security Committees	Committees have been established in order to effectively manage security activities in centres such as searching, segregation of offenders, discipline, etc. Hold monthly meetings to analyse incidents, security breaches and compliance to security protocol.
To facilitate the combatting approach to prevent ,reduce and eradicate disruptive groups (e.g. gangs) on the Management of Correctional Centres;	Interventions to discourage Gangsterism	Offenders that divulge security information leading to positive results are rewarded in line with Special Remission policy; Disciplinary actions are taken against gang members and Staff for involvement in gang activities; Criminal activities reported to law enforcement agencies; Develop an Information gathering and processing capacity in order to implement a “Virtual Analytics environment “ linking collectors, exploiters , analysts, and stakeholders electronically , to improve its responsive to and the management of gangs.
	Development and Implementation of an Information Management
To enable inter-sectorial co-operation (i.e. government and civil society) to promote Correctional Centre and Community safety	Establish Inter-Sectorial forums to promote Correctional Centre and community safety	Regular meetings between Head of Centres and Law Enforcement Agencies DCS Management and officials participate in the following structures: Provincial Joint Operational And Intelligence Structure (PROVJOINTS), National Joint Operational And Intelligence Structure (NATJOINTS), National Intelligence Coordinating Committee (NICOC), Anti-Gang Unit (AGU), Community Forums, Special Operations, etc. Educate learners at Schools and Community members about the danger of engaging in Gang activities Educate and train officials on how to infiltrate gang operations
To address the potential negative effects of incarceration;	Interventions to discourage Gangsterism:	• Inmates that divulge security information leading to positive results are rewarded in line with Special Remission policy; • Disciplinary actions are taken against gang members and Staff for involvement in gang activities; • Criminal activities reported to law enforcement agencies;
	Development and Implementation of an Information Management System	Develop Information gathering and processing capacity in order to implement a “Virtual Analytics Environment “ linking collectors, exploiters , analysts, and stakeholders electronically , to improve responsiveness to the management of gangs .
To address the potential negative effects of incarceration;	Effective orientation of inmates on admission and during incarceration;	An orientation/ Information manual is availed to all offenders upon admission and during Case Management Committee processes (CMC); Orientate all Remand Detainees on admission; All inmates are informed of Unit rules upon admission and continuously thereafter; All inmates are sensitised to the threats of Gangsterism on a continuous basis; Implementation of Integrated Inmates Management System (IIMS).
To develop and build knowledge about Gangs and effective response in Gang Management to inform, review and monitor / improve strategies	Ongoing Research to improve knowledge on Gangs and other disruptive inmates groups and creating safer correctional centers	Department is currently in negotiation with Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) to sign an MoU to assist with research on various topics of which gangsterism is included.
	Mitigation of gang activities	The process of training officials on basic intelligence and information gathering is underway; Ensure separation of inmates involved in gang activities from the rest of inmate population, vulnerable inmates, first time offenders and offenders with further charges.

END

Reply:

The mandate to investigate complaints against sheriffs as well as to institute disciplinary proceedings lies with the South African Board for Sheriffs.

In terms of Section 44 (1) of the Sheriffs Act, 1986 (Act No. 90 of 1986), any complaint, accusation or allegation against a sheriff may be lodged with the Board in the prescribed manner.

The prescribed manner is in terms of the Regulations relating to Sheriffs, 1990, and includes the submission of formal complaint to the South African Board for Sheriffs in an affidavit-format and/or per the form as prescribed in the Regulations.

In terms of section 44 of the Sheriffs Act, 1986, the Board can charge a sheriff for improper conduct and institute a disciplinary proceeding.

In terms of Chapter IV of the Sheriffs Act, 1986 (Act No. 90 of 1986), the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services can suspend the sheriff from office under certain circumstances and usually only does so on the recommendation of the Board for Sheriffs as the regulatory authority.

It is therefore recommended that the Honourable Member addresses her concerns to the Chairperson of the South African Board for Sheriffs for investigation.

 

 

Reply:

The National Director of Public Prosecutions has received the following information from the Director of Public Prosecutions, KwaZulu-Natal in whose jurisdiction the matter is being prosecuted:

1. The evidence in the docket presents a strong case against the accused with at least two witnesses who made statements in terms of section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
2. There is further evidence corroborating their evidence independently.
3. The matter is set down for trial due to start on 18 August 2022. At present, the State is ready to proceed and witnesses will be called to present evidence in pursuit of a successful prosecution.
4. The granting of bail does not amount to the weakness of the state’s case despite the ruling by the Magistrate, which the State is intending to appeal.
5. The State opposed bail on 21 May 2019 after the accused were arrested and bail was refused. On 03 February 2022 the accused appeared at Ixopo Magistrates’ Court where they applied for bail on new facts. The State opposed bail and the accused were nonetheless granted bail on 15 February 2022. The accused were each granted bail of R5000. The court found that exceptional circumstances existed which in the interest of justice permitted the granting of bail, based essentially on the delay in the commencement of the trial and issues related to the facts of the case. The court decided on its own which conditions to impose and the amount of bail without engaging the parties thereto. The State has indicated its intention to appeal and the record of the bail proceedings is being transcribed. The accused are required as bail conditions to attend the criminal proceedings at all times, report to identified police stations on Mondays and Fridays and reside in identified places, not to enter the jurisdiction of Umzimkhulu during the subsistence of the criminal proceedings against them, not to communicate with state witnesses and to hand over their passports.

 

Reply:

a) The Department’s Maintenance Integrated Case Management System (Maintenance ICMS) data collection system does not collect information on the number of cases kept in abeyance specifically for cases where parents against whom support is claimed cannot be found. The Maintenance ICMS captures data relating to court processes and therefore does not specifically collect data on maintenance investigation processes which are administrative processes conducted outside of the court related processes before or during formal enquiry as part of maintenance file preparation. As Maintenance Investigators carry out investigations on a variety of issues which are critical as part of preparation of maintenance cases, these were not captured because of lack of human resources capacity. However, other efforts are underway to establish monitoring systems for the administrative processes relating to case preparation functions carried out by court support officials (Maintenance Clerks, Investigators and Officers). These include the linking of the TransUnion System to the Maintenance ICMS and the development of the Person Verification System (PVS) for Family Matters. The first PVS to be developed by the Integrated Justice System in conjunction with the Office of the Chief Family Advocate (OCFA) will be the Maintenance PVS.

b) The Department is currently using the services of a third party provider, a credit bureau institution (TransUnion), to help to investigate maintenance respondents in first time applications and in cases where the respondents have defaulted in maintenance payments. This system is used to track and trace the respondents’ whereabouts; their financial information; and the assets to ensure that the Magistrate is provided with sufficient information to hold formal enquiries in respect of the various types of maintenance applications applicable. This system enables the Department to bring to court maintenance respondents and defaulters who may not want to be found to ultimately pay maintenance for their children as obliged in terms of the law. Third party provider systems are not the only means used to conduct investigations to track and trace the whereabouts of the respondents or Defaulters. Maintenance Investigators use a host of other sources to gather both personal and financial details of parties involved in maintenance applications. These include information from Municipalities Vehicle Registration Offices, Department of Labour, Department of Housing; South African Revenue Services (SARS) etc.

END

Reply:

a) The Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT) defines “high-profile corruption cases” as those corruption cases that have been selected by the Case Management Committee to be part of the ACTT Priority List. The aforementioned case management committee consist of members from various institutions including the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigations (DPCI), Special Investigating Unit (SIU), Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC), National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), National Treasury and Department Public Service and Administration (DPSA).

The case intake criteria have been reviewed by the ACTT Executive Committee (EXCO), and consists of a number of variables such as the monetary value, profile of the accused such as Municipal Managers, Accounting Officers and alike, government priorities based on sectors identified to be vulnerable and the crime type, which are scored according to set criteria in order to determine if any particular matter should be adopted onto the list.

The statement made as part of this parliamentary question, that “a decision not to prosecute is not open to review”, is not factually correct as a number of options are open to any complainant or person with material interest in the matter. In terms of section 6(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977, such persons may apply for a “nolle prosequi” certificate and decide to institute a private prosecution. Apart from this review procedure in court, any party dissatisfied with a decision of any member of the prosecution authority relating to a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute, may make representations to the relevant Director of Public Prosecutions and/or the National Director of Public Prosecutions.

Furthermore, it is not commonly known that the decisions not to prosecute are explained and discussed amongst the members within the ACTT Case Management Committee where the reason(s) for the decision is/are analysed, and methods considered to see if any future preventative steps can lead to another result.

The following provide a breakdown of the methods of finalisation of priority cases over the past ten (10) years:

1. Verdict Cases:

a) Convictions were obtained in sixty-one (61) trial cases; and

b) There were eight (8) acquittals.

2. Forty-five (45) matters were declined to prosecute.

3. Matters currently under investigation/enrolled:

a) Seventy-two (72) cases are in court, of which nineteen (19) are partly heard. This means that a decision to prosecute was taken in 75% of the aforementioned cases.

b) True statistics for convictions in this class of crime?

Sixty-one (61) convictions related to cases in which:

1. A total of ninety-one (91) accused were convicted from the ninety-nine (99) accused prosecuted and sixty-one (61) of the sixty-nine (69) cases resulted in a conviction. This translates to:

a) 92% conviction rate on persons convicted

b) 88% conviction rate on number of cases prosecuted.

The conviction rates are only measured against the cases and/or the accused prosecuted, as various matters may not be prosecuted for reasons outside the control of the investigating authorities and the prosecution authority.

The aim is not to see how many convictions may be achieved, but to ensure that justice is done, and also seen to be done, in all matters. It is therefore important to understand that after thorough investigations, there may not be sufficient evidence to institute prosecution or for other reasons, such as the unavailability of witnesses or accused.

END

Reply:

It is not correct that the Prosecution Policy and Policy Directives were last reviewed in 2014. While the Prosecution Policy is considered for review from time to time, the nature of the policy is such that it is and would be expected to remain fairly constant.

a) The Prosecution Policy is aimed at promoting the considered exercise of authority by prosecutors and contributing to the fair and even-handed administration of the criminal laws. The last amendment made to the policy was adopted in June 2013, where a paragraph was inserted dealing with the prosecution of corruption of foreign public officials. The rest of the policy remained the same. The last review of the entire policy was in 2020 and the view was held that no amendments were necessary. There is currently a process underway to consider the addition of a new part to deal with mechanisms for non-trial resolution of matters.

b) The Policy Directives are subject to an ongoing review process and relevant portions are amended from time to time in accordance with judicial decisions, changes in legislation and practical considerations. While the complete directives are considered from time to time, most recently in 2020, individual parts have been amended, with the most recent being on 1 July 2021. The review of the directives is an ongoing process. There are a number of parts currently under review.

END

Reply:

(a) The total number of incidents of sexual harassment is 42.(a) 

(i) (aa)	2018/19	2019/20	2020/21
	5	9	11
(b) (i)	Concluded	Concluded	Concluded
	2	6	3
(b)(ii)	Withdrawn	Withdrawn	Withdrawn
	None	1	1
(b)(iii)	Pending	Pending	Pending
	3	2	7
(c)	Sanction	Sanction	Sanction
	1- Dismissal	1-One month suspension without salary. 2- Two month suspension without salary. 4- Not guilty	1- Final written warning. 1- Verbal warning 1- Not guilty

 

(a)(i)(bb) since 01 April 2021

 

(a)(i)(bb)	Since 01 April 2021
	17
(b)(i)	Concluded
	5
(b)(ii)	Withdrawn
	1
(b)(iii)	Pending
	11
(c)	Sanction
	2- Dismissal 1- One month suspension without salary 1- Not guilty 1- No outcome (contract of complainant lapsed prior to investigation being finalised

 

END

Reply:

As reported in the 2020/21 Departmental Annual Report on the Child Justice Act, 2008 our courts recorded a 55% increase in the number of rape charges against children who appeared in preliminary inquiries, compared to the previous reporting period. The percentage calculation is based on a percentage contribution of rape to all the charges recorded during the 2020/21 reporting period compared with the percentage contribution of rape to all the charges recorded during the 2019/20 reporting period.

(a) What steps will be taken by the department to investigate the reasons for the exponential increase in the rape charges?

In addressing the alarming rise in sex crimes perpetrated by children, the Department has commenced with a two pronged approach at provincial and national levels:

(a)(i) The Department has already identified 6 provinces, which recorded the highest numbers of rape charges against children appearing in preliminary enquiries, as the focal areas where primary interventions must be undertaken, and these are: Mpumalanga (50%), North West (45%), Limpopo (36%), Eastern Cape (30%), Free State (30%) and KwaZulu-Natal (29%). Each of these provinces has a fully-functional multisectoral Provincial Child Justice Forum- tasked to monitor the provincial implementation of the Child Justice Act. Each Forum will conduct an investigation to identify the core drivers of the high numbers of child sex offenders in its province so as to develop tailor-made interventions for prevention, response and care by the end of May 2022. These plans must be correlated with the National Strategic Plan on Gender-based Violence and Femicide (NSP GBVF) (2020- 2030), which seeks to end GBVF and sex crimes in the country, whether perpetrated by adults or children.

(b)(ii) The Department has also considered the recent research study on Children Seeking Justice: Safeguarding the rights of child offenders in the South African Criminal Court[1], which reveals the increasing number of children who commit sexual offences against other children. The study found that many child offenders fall into the highest vulnerability category because of previous sexual abuse victimization, apart from neglect and abuse. On 22 February 2022 the Directors- General Intersectoral Committee on Child Justice requested the National Technical Intersectoral Committee on Child Justice to consider the recent studies on this issue as the basis on which the national action plan for intervention can be developed. This is to ensure that government actions target the identified root causes of the problem. The Departments of Social Development and Basic Education will be the key implementers of this Plan since they are the key drivers of the early crime prevention programmes for children and parents. The two Departments are represented at all levels of child justice and the NSP collaborations. This Plan will be the enhancement of the NSP GBVF to avoid the unnecessary duplication of government interventions.

(b) What co-operation will be pursued with other departments to find solutions to this dire state of affairs?

(b)(i) The Department intends to use the existing collaborations of the NSP GBVF to find and execute solutions, as aspired by the NSP. The NSP is a multisectoral strategic framework to realise a South Africa free from gender-based violence and femicide. Its collaborations draw representations from a wide spectrum of government and civil society organisations at national, provincial and local levels. It targets all perpetrators of GBVF, irrespective of age. Among its collaborations is the GBVF Inter-Ministerial Committee, chaired by the Minister of Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities, and tasked by Cabinet to give political oversight in the implementation of the NSP.

Understanding the array of social ills that are the core drivers of child offending in South Africa, the NSP GBVF recognises children who experience violence within families and institutions as the main target group for intervention. Poverty, malnutrition, racism, bullying, drug addictions, corporal punishment at home, dysfunctional families, poor/lack of parenting are some of the dominant and fundamental breeding foundations for GBVF child offending. Pillar 2 of the NSP GBVF provides key activities for prevention and restoration of social fabric which include:

• the adoption and roll out of school-based gender-based violence prevention programmes;
• GBV prevention integrated into the roll out of Early Childhood Development programme; and
• parenting and early childhood development programmes to build non-violent and gender transformative approaches to parenting.

These NSP indicators are spot-on towards ending child offending in sex crimes and GBVF-related crimes. The Department therefore does not intend to re-invent the wheel as the government and civil society formations of the child justice sector are already the key stakeholders in the implementation of the GBVF NSP.

The NSP stakeholders, including the DoJ&CD, report performance to the Presidency via the Department of Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities on monthly basis. The reports are signed by the respective accounting officers or heads of government institutions. The Directors-General Intersectoral Committee on Chid Justice will receive similar reports for monitoring purposes.

Songca, R. 2019. Children seeking justice: safeguarding the rights of child offenders in South African Criminal court. De Jure Law Journal. p. 316-334. Available at http://dx.doi/org/10.17159/2225-7160/2019/v52a17 ↑

Reply:

The mandate to investigate complaints against sheriffs as well as to institute disciplinary proceedings lies with the South African Board for Sheriffs.

In terms of Section 44 (1) of the Sheriffs Act, 1986 (Act No. 90 of 1986), any complaint, accusation or allegation against a sheriff, may be lodged with the Board in the prescribed manner.

The prescribed manner is in terms of the Regulations relating to Sheriffs, 1990, and includes the submission of formal complaint to the SA Board for Sheriffs in an affidavit-format and/ or per the form as prescribed in the Regulations.

In terms of section 44 of the Sheriffs Act, 1986, the Board can charge a sheriff for improper conduct and institute a disciplinary proceeding.

In terms of Chapter IV of the Sheriffs Act, 1986 (Act No. 90 of 1986), the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, can suspend the sheriff from office under certain circumstances and usually only does so on the recommendation of the Board for Sheriffs as the regulatory authority.

It is therefore recommended that the Honourable Member address her concerns to the Chairperson of the South African Board for Sheriffs for investigation.

Reply:

The tables below provide details of the total amount spent by the Minister, Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, and the officials of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development on catering, entertainment and accommodation since 29 May 2019:

(i) Minister and Personnel
Description	2019/2020	2020/2021	2021/2022	Total
a) Catering	R7 423.00	-	-	R7 423.00
b) Entertainment	R263.00	R4 235.60	-	R4 498.60
c) Accommodation	R1 536 203.67	R537 007.44	R820 987.34	R2 894 198.45
	R1 543 889.67	R541 243.04	R820 987.34	R2 906 120.05

(ii) Deputy Minister and Personnel
Description	2019/2020	2020/2021	2021/2022	Total
a) Catering	R1 424.85	-	R480.00	R1 904.85
b) Entertainment	R3 145.00	-	R2 088.10	R5 233.10
c) Accommodation	R249 451.10	R53 141.74	R108 312.00	R410 904.84
	R254 020.95	R53 141.74	R110 880.10	R418 042.79

(iii) Departmental
Description	2019/2020	2020/2021	2021/2022	Total
a) Catering	R5 883 618.80	R778 208.35	R1 519 545.11	R8 181 372.26
b) Entertainment	-	-	-	-
c) Accommodation	R119 119 041.10	R75 124 425.40	R87 709 342.92	R281 952 809.42
	R125 002 659.90	R75 902 633.75	R89 228 888.03	R290 134 181.68

Reply:

a) The Committee on the Rationalisation of Areas and Judicial Establishments of the Division of the High Court of South Africa held the following meetings:

(i) Virtual meeting held on 13 July 2021. Introductory meeting with Deputy Director-General Court Services.

(ii) Virtual meeting held 29 September 2021: Discussion of the draft Road map with the DDG Court Services

(iii) Physical meeting 5 November 2021 at Protea Hotel Fire and Ice, Pretoria: Department’s detailed submission to the Committee outlining the following aspects:

• The challenges pose by pre-1994 areas of jurisdiction of the high courts; in particular, the Eastern Cape and Gauteng divisions
• Proposed changes to the current areas of jurisdiction of the high courts; and
• Proposed additional local seats with a view to increase access to justice.

(iv) It is expected that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) will present their submission regarding the above, at the date to be confirmed.

b) The Committee was expected to submit its Interim Report on or before 15 October 2021 and its final report by 31 December 2021. Subsequent to the presentation by DoJ&CD the Committee then had a sense of the work to be completed and then it was agreed that the Terms of Reference be amended to provide for new dates for submission. In terms of the Committee’s roadmap the OCJ and NPA were supposed to make similar submission to the Committee. There was hesitation from both the OCJ and NPA which derailed the commitments made on the roadmap. The Terms of Reference (ToRs) were thus amended to provide for new dates regarding the submission of reports by the Committee. The dates in the new ToRs were revised to 15 April 2022 for the submission of its Interim Report, and 30 July 2022 for the submission of its Final Report.

c) Expenses incurred to date

Item	Amount
Venue for meeting (Protea Fire and Ice, Pretoria)	R16 524.00
Accommodation	R4 478.77 (Only done for one members for 2 nights. Others members did not require accommodation)
Flights	R9 233.49 (for 2 members)
Shuttle	R2 732.24
Ten (10) Laptops	R232 387.10
Ten (10) Wi-Fi Routers	R53 880.00
Printers	R56 575.00
Payments to Members of the Committee	R767 103.95
Total	R1 142 914.55

Reply:

1. In view of media reports on his address at the Constitutional Rights Conference in Cape Town in February 2022, during which he stated that the mandate of Legal Aid South Africa (LASA) will be expanded to assist victims of evictions, what steps have been taken by his department to extend the statutory scope of LASA;

1. Legal Framework

In accordance with the Legal Aid SA’s mandate and the objects as provided in the Legal Aid South Africa Act, 39 of 2014:

1.1 Regulation 17 determines as follows in respect of the granting of legal aid in terms of the Restitution of Land Rights Act:

“17. (1) Legal Aid South Africa may grant legal aid for cases under the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994 (Act No. 22 of 1994) if the Land Claims Commissioner—

(a) makes funds available to Legal Aid South Africa to fund the matter;

or

(b) is the opposing party to the litigation or possible litigation.

(2) Legal aid may not be granted for the claim lodgement and investigation under the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994.”

1.2. Regulation 18 provides for legal aid for persons affected by the Land Reform Act, the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, and the Prevention of Illegal Occupation and Eviction from Land Act and reads as follows:

“18. (1) Legal aid may be granted to persons affected by the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act, 1996 (Act No. 3 of 1996), the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, 1997 (Act No. 62 of 1997) and the Prevention of Illegal Occupation and Eviction from Land Act, 1998 (Act No. 19 of 1998): Provided that the granting of legal aid in terms of this regulation is subject to the making available of funds by the relevant government department.”

2. Steps taken-

2.1 In December 2019, the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Land Reform resolved to:

• Establish the Land Court to deal with all land related matters and that Legal Aid SA should be mandated and funded to provided legal representation to persons who are not able to afford their own legal representation; and
• Recommended the transfer of the Land Rights Management Facility (LRMF) from the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD) to Legal Aid SA.

•  

2.2 The Land Court Bill was introduced into Parliament on 01 May 2021, and confirmed the intended transfer of the legal representation function to Legal Aid SA at a Ministerial press briefing of 01 March 2021.

2.3 A Committee consisting of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD), Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development as well as Legal Aid SA was set up in February 2020 to implement the transfer of the Land Rights Management Facility to Legal Aid SA including compliance with the requirements of the PFMA for the transfer of the function.

2.4 A Task Team constituted by Legal Aid SA, Land Rights Facility Management of the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development as well as the NS Attorneys started the co-management of the Land Rights Management Facility from July 2021 to ensure a smooth transfer of the functions to Legal Aid SA on 01 January 2022. During this process, an assessment of the land matters handled by LRMF was conducted and this informed the organizational capacity/structure and funding which will be required by Legal Aid SA to deliver the additional mandate.

2.5 There are three (3) specific areas where Legal Aid SA is required to take over the function from the LRMF to provide legal services to litigants: Land Restitution, Labour Tenants and ESTA Evictions. Therefore, Legal Aid SA has a mandate to assist farm occupiers, labour tenants and the restitution claimants.

2.5.1 Third, Legal Aid SA will work in collaboration with other Departments (such as the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development, Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs and Department of Human Settlements) to assist the victims of evictions, labour tenants or land claimants.

2.5.2 Second, Legal Aid SA will challenge the constitutionality of any sections in the Extension of Section of Tenure Act 62 of 1997, the Land Reform (Labour Tenants) Act 3 of 1996 and Restitution of Land Rights Act 22 of 1994 that are not in line with the constitution.

2.5.3 Firstly, Legal Aid SA will instruct private lawyers to oppose evictions and to challenge any constructive evictions;

2.6  Legal Aid SA took over the management of the legal representation component of the Land Rights Management Facility from 01 January 2022.

2.7 The Intergovernmental Task team chaired by the DoJ&CD facilitated the transfer of the LRMF and transitional arrangements in accordance with the Department of Public Service and Administration Transfer of Functions and National Treasury Regulations. The Minister of Agriculture Rural Development and Land Reform submitted a motivation to the Minister of Public Service. Administration, with the support of the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services motivating for the transfer of the LRMF Function with the necessary Budget. The Minister of Public Service Administration in February 2022 approved the transfer to the function and submitted same to the Minister of Finance for the implementation of the Budget Transfer. National Treasury is currently in the process of implementing the transfer of the Budget to the baseline budget of Legal Aid SA for 2022/23.

2. Whether there has been any investigation by his department on the additional capacity that may be required by LASA to fulfil the additional services; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Investigation on additional capacity and staffing:

a) During the co-management process as indicated in paragraph 2.4 above, the investigation as to the additional capacity was assessed based on the current case load and the outcome of the investigations informed the structure below.

b) The staffing structure currently consists of the Legal Executive: Land Rights Management, 4 Senior Legal Practitioners and Administrative Staff – 1 Personal Assistant, 1 Administrative Officer (Account Capture), 1 Taxation/Verification Officer, 1 Finance Officer and 2 temporary Administrative Officers to assist with capturing R172M in commitments.

c) The Legal Executive: Land Rights Management is responsible for overseeing and monitoring the performance of the Land Rights Management Unit.

d) It is vital to mention at this stage that Legal Aid SA will implement this project in two phases. The first phase as mentioned above, is interim, and the second phase is permanent.

e) Going forward the legal services delivery model for land rights matters will be implemented as follows, and therefore additional capacity will be required

f) Legal Aid SA plans to employ its own staff in each province to undertake land rights matters, as opposed to the judicare system currently used. This will assist in reducing the contingent liability substantially as well as the ongoing costs of outsourcing these matters to practitioners in private practice. It will also assist in ensuring that quality legal services are provided to farm occupiers, labour tenants and land claimants. The legal practitioners from Legal Aid SA will be trained and equipped with the necessary skills and resources. The Legal Aid SA quality assurance programme will be applied in land rights matters.

g) The Provinces, as currently serviced by Legal Aid SA, will be divided into regions. The number of regions to be established and legal practitioners to be allocated to each region is determined by considering the number of active cases inherited by Legal Aid SA from the LRMF, as well as an anticipated increase in the numbers of land claims matters to be referred to the Land Claims Court as indicated by the Chief Land Claims Commissioner.

h) The following table summarises the proposed permanent structure and the staff of the Legal Aid SA Land Rights Management Unit.

Item No.	Province	No. of Regions	Staffing Per Region
	Kwa-Zulu Natal	4	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Junior Practitioner One (1) Paralegal
	Mpumalanga	4	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Junior Practitioner One (1) Paralegal
	Western Cape	4	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Junior Practitioner One (1) Paralegal
	Gauteng	3	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Paralegal
	Eastern Cape	3	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Paralegal
	Free State	3	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Paralegal
	Limpopo	3	One (1) Senior Attorney One (1) Junior Attorney One (1) Paralegal
	North West	3	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Paralegal
	Northern Cape	2	One (1) Supervisory Legal Practitioner One (1) Senior Legal Practitioner One (1) Paralegal

END