ATC190712: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services on Budget Vote 22: Office of the Chief Justice and Judicial Administration, dated 12 July 2019

Justice and Correctional Services

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services on Budget Vote 22: Office of the Chief Justice and Judicial Administration, dated 12 July 2019
 

The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, having considered Budget Vote 22: Office of the Chief Justice and Judicial Administration, reports as follows:

 

1. The Office of the Chief Justice and Judicial Administration (OCJ) was established primarily to support the Chief Justice in executing his/her administrative and judicial powers and duties as Head of the Judiciary and Head of the Constitutional Court, as determined by the Minister of Public Service and Administration in 2010. The OCJ has the following functions:

• Providing and coordinating legal and administrative support to the Chief Justice.
• Providing communication and relationship management services and inter-governmental and international coordination.
• Developing courts administration policy, norms and standards.
• Supporting the development of judicial policy, norms and standards.
• Supporting the judicial function of the Superior Courts.
• Supporting the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and the South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI) in the execution of their mandates.
• Administering the Judges’ Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act.

 

1. The transfer of administrative functions and identified staff attached to the Superior Courts from the Justice Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to the OCJ commenced on 1 October 2014, while the OCJ received its own Budget Vote from 1 April 2015.

 

1. The Minister of Justice and Correctional Services is the OCJ’s Executive Authority (EA), while the Secretary General (SG) is its administrative head. The Secretary-General engages and consults with the Chief Justice and other Heads of Courts in respect of the administrative functioning of the Superior Courts, while the Chief Justice controls the judicial functions of the Superior and Lower courts. The Department continues to support the administration of the Lower/Magistrate’s courts.

 

1. The Office of the Chief Justice presented its Annual Performance Plan 2019/20, as well as its Budget for the 2019 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) on 5 July 2019. The presentation can be obtained from the Committee Secretariat.

 

1. Overview of the Vote for the 2019 MTEF

 

1. The OCJ is allocated an annual budget of R2.3 billion, compared with R2.1 billion for 2018/19 and R2.0 billion in 2017/18 (adjusted appropriation). The budget is expected to increase to R2.46 billion in 2020/21 and R2.6 billion in 2021/22.

 

Table 1: Budget allocation for the Office of the Chief Justice per programme

Programme	Adjusted Appropriation 2018/19	MTEF
		2019/20	2020/21	2021/22
	R ’million	R ’million	R ’million	R ’million
Administration	201 380	214 611	227 852	237 517
Superior Court Services	845 252	900 110	965 784	1 029 837
Judicial Education and Support	73 115	82 971	88 234	91 776
Subtotal	1 119 747	1 197 692	1 282 870	1 359 130
Direct Charge: Judges’ Salaries	1 022 091	1 098 546	1 180 937	1 257 698
Total	2 141 838	2 296 238	2 462 807	2 616 828

 

Table 2: Budget allocation for the Office of the Chief Justice per economic classification

Economic Classification	Adjusted Appropriation 2018/19	MTEF
		2019/20	2020/21	2021/22
	R million	R million	R million	R million
Compensation of employees (including Judges’ remuneration)	1 644 037	1755 428	1 865 703	1 987 106
Goods and services	314 442	340 656	358 923	379 952
Transfers and subsidies	67 646	95 609	127 905	136 178
Payments for capital assets	115 713	104 545	110 276	113 592
Payments for financial assets	-	-	-	-
Total	2 141 838	2 296 238	2 462 807	2 616 828

 

 

1. Spending priorities 2019 MTEF

 

1. The High Court in Mpumalanga will become fully operational in 2019/20. Funding for the court is expected to increase from R28.1 million in 2019/20 to R33.4 million in 2021/22, in the Superior Court Services programme. Similarly, allocations for the operations of the Polokwane High Court, which opened in 2016/17, are expected to increase by 13.6%, from R27.2 million in 2019/20 to R30.9 million in 2021/22.

 

1. The number of personnel is expected to increase from 2 601 in 2018/19 to 2 611 in 2021/22 with the operationalisation of the Mpumalanga High Court. Spending on compensation of employees, therefore, will increase from R1.6 billion in 2018/19 to R2 billion in 2021/22.

 

1. Over the medium term, the South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI) plans to provide 246 judicial education courses on case-flow management and constitutional imperatives. Other planned courses include courses on record keeping and general issues in pleadings, debt collections and debt reviews related to the National Credit Act (2005), criminal court skills, child justice skills, new legislation on domestic violence and spousal and child maintenance, immigration and other topics. Expenditure in the South African Judicial Education Institute subprogramme is expected to increase from R51.4 million in 2018/19 to R53.8 million in 2021/22.

 

1. The OCJ plans to modernise and digitise its systems and processes to respond to the growing need for court services and to stay abreast of technological developments The implementation of an electronic filing system for the Superior Courts by 2020/21 is intended to increase efficiency. The project forms part of the Integrated Justice System (IJS) programme, led by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, in the JCPS Cluster. An amount of R14.3 million is allocated over the medium term for the system in the Administration programme.

 

1. The judicial norms and standards were developed and gazetted in February 2014. The OCJ supports the Chief Justice in monitoring and reporting on compliance with the norms and standards, while the Judiciary reports on court performance. These activities are carried out in the Superior Court Services programme. Due to the labour-intensive nature of the work in this programme, the majority of this expenditure is on compensation of employees.

 

1. The OCJ plans to further improve the quality of its performance information by implementing an automated system to monitor court performance, which, in addition to the electronic filing system for Superior Courts, is expected to simplify the monitoring and evaluation of norms and standards.

 

 

1. Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ): Annual Performance Plan 2019/20

 

1. The Secretary-General presented the OCJ’s 2019/20 Annual Performance Plan.

 

1. The OCJ supports the Judiciary in its contribution to Chapter 14 of the National Development Plan (NDP) ‘Promoting Accountability and Fighting Corruption by Strengthening Judicial Governance and the Rule of Law’ by:

• Accelerating reforms to implement a judiciary-led court administration.
• Ensuring an efficient court system.
• Reducing court administration inefficiencies.
• Ensuring access to justice.
• Ensuring judicial accountability.
• Providing training to the judiciary through SAJEI.

 

1. The OCJ has aligned its plans with the NDP and Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) 2014 – 2019 as follows:

• Administration is linked to Chapter 13 of the NDP, ‘Ensure good governance in the administration of the Department’; and to Outcome 12, ‘An efficient and effective development-orientated public service’.
• The programmes Superior Court Services and Judicial Education and Support are linked to Chapter 14 of the NDP, ‘Promoting accountability and fighting corruption through strengthening judicial governance and the rule of law. This is linked to Outcome 2, ‘All people in South Africa are and feel safe’.

 

1. The OCJ has the following strategic goals: The efficient and effective administration of the OCJ; improved administrative and technical support to the Judiciary; and ensure administrative support to the Superior Courts. These are broken down into the following strategic objectives:

• Capacitate the Office of the Chief Justice.
• Ensure good governance in the administration of the Department.
• Ensure the effective and efficient administration of the Superior Courts.
• Enhance the judicial skills of serving and aspiring judicial offices to perform optimally.

 

1. The OCJ has identified the following key strategic risks and mitigation strategies for 2019/20:

 

Table 2: Strategic risks and interventions in mitigation

Strategic Objective	Risk	Mitigation/ Interventions
Administration
Capacitate the Office of the Chief Justice	Inadequate budget.	Reprioritise funds and posts (based on organizational functionality assessment/realignment project). Request an adjustment of compensation of employees ceilings from National Treasury.
Ensure good governance in the administration of the department	Possible exposure to fraud and corruption.	Continuous awareness on fraud and anti-corruption policies. Strengthen internal controls relating to fraudulent court orders. Strengthen the monitoring and implementation of internal controls. Monitor implementation of fraud prevention plan.
	Lack of control over security and facilities	Monitor the implementation of the updated MOU contract Engage with the Justice Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to ensure that the budget is spent on OCJ priorities. Continuous monitoring of the facilities and infrastructure and address challenges encountered.
Superior Court Services
Ensure the effective and efficient administration of the Superior Courts	Inadequate quasi-judicial services rendered	Prioritise the appointment of Registrars. Continuous training of Registrars.
	Inadequate implementation of the Master Systems Plan (MSP)	Request funding from IJS and National Treasury for implementation of the court modernization projects as outlined in the MSP. Additional Appointment and training of ICT personnel. Monitor implementation of the updated MOU for the transfer of functions between the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the OCJ.

 

 

1. Office of the Chief Justice: Programmes

 

1. Programme 1: Administration

 

1. The purpose of this programme is to provide strategic leadership, management and support services to the Department. The programme consists of the following sub-programmes: 

• The Management subprogramme provides administrative, planning, monitoring, evaluation, performance reporting and risk management functions necessary to ensure effective functioning of the Department. 
• The Corporate Services subprogramme provides an integrated Human Resources Management (HRM), Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and Security Management Support Services to the Department. 
• The Finance Administration subprogramme provides overall financial, asset and supply chain management services to the Judiciary and the Department.
• The Internal Audit subprogramme provides overall internal audit and forensic audit services to the Department.
• The Office Accommodation subprogramme provides for the acquisition of office accommodation for the Department.

 

1. Performance indicators and targets for 2019/20 include the following:

 

Table 3: Administration: Performance indicators and annual targets 2018/19 – 2021/22

Objective/Performance Indicator	Medium Term Targets
	2018/19	2019/20	2020/21	2021/22
Strategic objective 1: Capacitate the Office of the Chief Justice
Percentage of funded vacant posts on PERSAL per year	10%	10%	10%	10%
Strategic objective 2: Ensure good governance in the administration of the Department
Audit outcomes on financial statements	Unqualified audit opinion (No more than 5 material misstatements)	Unqualified audit opinion (Clean audit)	Unqualified audit opinion (Clean audit)	Unqualified audit opinion (Clean audit)
Annual Performance Plan (APP) tabled within prescribed timelines	APP tabled within prescribed timelines	APP tabled within prescribed timelines	APP tabled within prescribed timelines	APP tabled within prescribed timelines
Combined assurance plan developed and implemented	Implement plan	Implement plan in 24 Superior Courts	Implement plan in 24 Superior Courts	Implement plan in 24 Superior Courts
Number of strategic and operational risk registers developed and updated	8	8	8	8
Fraud Prevention Strategy implemented	Fraud Risk Prevention Strategy developed, approved and implemented	Fraud Risk Prevention Strategy implemented in 24 Superior Courts	Fraud Risk Prevention Strategy implemented in 24 Superior Courts	Fraud Risk Prevention Strategy implemented in 24 Superior Courts
ICT Master Plan implemented	Prioritised projects (e-filing) piloted at 2 High Courts	Prioritised projects (e-filing) rolled out in 5 Superior Courts	Prioritised projects (e-filing) rolled out in 12 Superior Courts	Prioritised projects (e-filing) rolled out in 24 Superior Courts
Percentage of internal audit projects completed in line with the approved Annual Audit Plan	100%	100%	100%	100%
Number of compliant financial performance reports submitted	12	12	12	12
Number of asset registers produced	2	2	2	2

 

1. The Administration programme is allocated a total budget of R214.6 million in 2019/20. The spending focus is on the prioritised projects of the ICT Master Systems Plan (e-filing project) that will be rolled out to all Superior Courts by 2021/22. 

 

1. Programme 2: Superior Court Services

 

1. This programme provides judicial support and court administration services to the Superior Courts. The programme consists of the following sub-programmes: 

• The Administration of Superior Courts subprogramme provides administrative and technical support to the Superior Courts, monitors the overall performance of the Superior Courts, and enhances judicial stakeholder relations.  
• The Constitutional Court subprogramme funds the activities and operations of the Constitutional Court.
• The Supreme Court of Appeal subprogramme funds the activities and operations of the Supreme Court of Appeal.
• The High Courts subprogramme funds the activities and operations of the various high court divisions.
• The Specialized Courts subprogramme funds the activities and operations of the labour, land, electoral and competition courts.

 

1. All performance indicators and targets for the programme that address court performance have been removed, leaving only those that relate to quasi-judicial performance. The performance indicators and targets for 2019/20 are, therefore, as follows:

 

Table 4: Superior Court Services - Performance indicators and annual targets 2018/19-2021/22

Objective/Performance Indicator	Medium Term Targets
	2018/19	2019/20	2020/21	2021/22
Strategic Objective 3: Ensure the effective and efficient administration of the Superior Courts
Percentage achievement of quasi-judicial targets	90%	90%	100%	100%
No. of monitoring reports on Court Order integrity produced	4	4	4	4
Percentage of default judgments finalised by Registrars	90%	100%	100%	100%
Percentage of taxation of legal costs finalised	90%	100%	100%	100%
Number of training workshops on case management conducted for Registrars, clerks, etc.	2	2	2	2
Percentage of warrants of release delivered within one day of release granted	98%	98%	98%	98%

 

1. The Superior Courts Services programme is allocated R900 million for 2019/20 and will increase to R1 billion in 2021/22 as a result of the allocation of reprioritised funds from the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development for the operationalisation of the Mpumalanga High Court to improve access to justice.

 

1. Programme 3: Judicial Education and Support

 

1. The programme, Judicial Education and Support, provides education programmes to Judicial Officers, including policy development and research services for the optimal administration of justice.

 

1. The programme has the following sub-programmes: 

• The South African Judicial Education Institute subprogramme funds the activities of the SAJEI to provide training for Judicial Officers.
• The Judicial Policy, Research and Support subprogramme funds the provision of advisory opinions on policy development and regulatory services to the Judiciary and the Department.
• The Judicial Service Commission subprogramme provides secretariat and administrative support services to the Judicial Service Commission to perform its constitutional and legislative mandates effectively.

 

1. Performance indicators and targets for 2019/20 are as follows:

 

Table 5: Judicial Education and Support - Performance indicators and annual targets 2018/19 – 2021/22

Objective/Performance Indicator	Medium Term Targets
	2018/19	2019/20	2019/20	2021/22
Strategic Objective 4: Enhance judicial skills of serving and aspiring judicial officers to perform optimally
No. of judicial education courses conducted	78	80	82	84
No. of research monographs for Judicial Education produced per year	2	2	2	2
Percentage of legal advisory opinions on policy development and research services provided within 15 days of receipt	100%	100%	100%	100%
No. of reports on judicial appointments and judicial complaints produced	3	3	3	3

 

1. The Judicial Education and Support programme is allocated R82.9 million in 2019/20. The spending focus for this programme is on conducting training for judicial officers.

 

 

1. Committee’s observations

 

1. General

The Committee raised a number of matters that the OCJ is unable to respond to as it would not be appropriate for it to speak on behalf of the Judiciary and the Judicial Services Commission. Although some these issues are captured in this report, the Committee intends to approach the Speaker to request a meeting with the Chief Justice and Heads of Court to discuss these and other issues of mutual interest.

 

1. Information regarding court performance for more effective oversight of the court administration

The Committee expressed its unhappiness about its inability to properly gauge how well the courts are working, as much of the information related to court performance is located within the Judiciary. Information and statistics on court performance, which used to be available to Parliament in the exercise of its oversight function of the Executive, is no longer accessible. The Committee fully understands the reasons for this. The Committee also acknowledges that the Judiciary has decided to ‘account directly to the nation, as is the case with jurisdictions like Kenya, Singapore and many other comparable and progressive constitutional democracies’. The South African Judiciary Annual Report 2017/18, which the Chief Justice presented to the Nation last year provides extremely valuable insight to developments within the Judiciary and contains some statistics relating to the Superior Courts.

 

Nonetheless, there are gaps – while the Judiciary has begun to collect data regarding the performance of the magistrates’ courts – for some years now there has been no information available. As these courts hear the majority of the cases heard, the lack of information regarding their functioning is concerning.

 

The Committee cannot but think that the court administration and performance functions are so closely related that it is impossible for it to consider the one without regard to the other. So, for example, if the air conditioning breaks down and prevents matters from being heard as the day warms unbearably or if difficulties obtaining the necessary journals and law books delays a judgement, access to justice is undermined by a failure in the court administration. In order to exercise oversight towards ensuring that the correct intervention occurs at an administrative level, it is helpful for the Committee to have an understanding of the systemic challenges that undermine delivery of justice services in our courts, as well as a basic grasp of how the court case management system works in practice. In this regard, the insight of the Judiciary is invaluable.

 

 

The Committee is aware that the solution lies partly in the finalisation of the long overdue court administration model. The Committee is also keen to hear more of the systemic challenges that the Judiciary face in the delivery of justice and will engage with the Speaker to request a meeting with the Chief Justice and Heads of Court.

 

1. Capacitation of the Land Claims Court. The Committee welcomes the Minister’s announcement that legislation will be introduced that will ensure that Judges are appointed permanently to the Land Claims Court and its proper capacitation.

 

1. Progress towards a single judiciary and transfer of functions to the OCJ

The Committee supports a single judiciary as envisaged by section 166 of the Constitution. The Committee understands that a Lower Courts Bill is at a very advanced stage and intends to continuously monitor progress going forward.

 

1. Tools of trade. The Committee understands that Judicial Officers are experiencing difficulties accessing tools of trade, especially law reports and other library materials, and that the transfer of functions from the Justice Department to the OCJ that will allow the Judiciary to access these materials for itself has not yet occurred. The Committee requests that the OCJ provide it with a written report on the challenges that are being experienced in this regard by 30 August 2019.

 

1. Court infrastructure and maintenance. The Committee notes that the new Minister of Public Works and Infrastructure has stated that our courts are in a terrible state. She has asked for court managers to report on backlogs in maintenance matters, such as lifts and air conditioning that don’t work. The Committee is interested in the outcome of this and requests that it is kept informed of developments in this regard. The Committee is also interested on whether the Judiciary has been approached to provide its input.

 

1. Impact of an increasingly litigious society on the courts. The Committee notes that as our society becomes increasingly litigious, the workload of our courts has grown. In order to keep abreast of the demand, there is need for more capacity and systems must be made more efficient by way of modernisation and digitisation. The ICT Master Systems Plan promises to improve efficiency in the court administrative processes and the e-filing project is prioritised for rollout to all Superior Courts over the medium term. The Committee is very interested in the scope and progress of the project and will arrange a dedicated briefing as soon as its programme permits.

 

1. Security. The Committee is concerned about reports of inadequate security at courts and requests that the OCJ provide it with a full report in this regard.

 

 

1. Recommendations

 

1. The Committee, having considered the Budget Vote 22: Office of the Chief Justice and Judicial Administration, supports it and recommends that it be approved.

 

 

Report to be considered