Minister on selection of members for National Council for Correctional Services

Correctional Services

27 January 2010
Chairperson: Mr V Smith (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

In a joint meeting with the Select Committee on Security and Constitutional Development, the Minister of Correctional Services discussed the appointment of individuals to serve on the National Council for Correctional Services. The Minister tabled a short-list of eight names which she hoped the Committee would endorse. After briefly outlining the eight short-listed individuals for consideration, the Minister advised the committee members to study the curriculum vitae of each before deciding on whether to proceed with the appointments or not. The Minister gave an undertaking to have the appointment process finalised by 1 March 2010. The Committees were generally happy with the Minister’s undertaking to speedily finalise the appointments.

Questions from Committee members included a request for the total number of nominations from which the short-list was drawn and whether it was possible to look at the names and details of those who did not make the short-list. There was concern that only one person was nominated to represent the medical profession. Asked what the maximum number of appointments the Minister could make in consultation with them, the Minister explained that a minimum of four individuals could be appointed, but the Act was silent on the maximum number. However she warned against nominating a large number of members to serve on the council as this might stall the work of the NCCS especially when a quorum could not be reached. The Minister was thanked for her commitment to speedily finalising the appointments. Some members felt there was no need to delay and they should endorse the Minister’s short-list. It was however agreed that the Portfolio Committee be given time to study the CVs and then advise the Minister of their views on the candidates. The Minister stressed that their decision should be made in time to allow her to have the appointments ready before 1 March. The Committee will reconvene on 9 February 2010 where a resolution would be taken on whether or not they endorse the Minister’s nominations.

Meeting report

The Minister of Correctional Services, Ms Nosiviwe Maphisa-Ngqakula, spoke about the nominations of public representatives to serve on the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS). Section 83 of the Correctional Services Act empowers the Minister of Correctional Services, in consultation with the relevant parliamentary committees, to appoint four or more members of the public to serve on the NCCS. The Minister presented the profiles of eight candidates which had been short-listed by the department. The curriculum vitaes of the eight candidates were to be issued to the Committee for consideration. The committee members were encouraged to deliberate on them before 9 February 2010.The Minister explained that the law allows the Minister to appoint individuals in consultation with stakeholders. There is a provision for the Chief Justice to make three nominations, and one nomination from the Magistrates Commission, one representative from the National Prosecuting Authority, one from the South African Police Service and another representative from the Department of Social Development. The Act further empowers the Minister to appoint two additional members to the NCCS without any consultation whatsoever. Acting in line with that provision, she had appointed two professors with extensive knowledge in correctional service matters.

As for the candidates meant to be appointed in consultation with the parliamentary committee, the Minister announced the list of eight individuals, briefly outlined their background and their credentials in the field of work they are involved in. The individuals consisted of academics, medical practitioner, lawyers and clinical psychologists. The Minister expressed a concern that there had been only one nomination from medical practitioners.

Discussion
Mr Z Madasa (ANC) asked if, since the Minister herself had said that she was not entirely happy with the fact that few medical practitioners had been nominated, it would not be a good idea for the process to be re-opened - considering that medical practitioners, for example doctors, were critical to the activities of the NCCS. He asked for clarity on remuneration of those appointed to the NCCS.

Mr B Fihla (ANC) said it was important to nominate people with relevant skills to deal with inmates. Some professions were more relevant than other and he gave the example of clinical psychologists. He was also uncomfortable with the reality of having only one doctor sitting on the NCCS.

The Minister explained that the Act makes it plain that there is no salary for the work which these individuals would be doing. However, there would be an allowance paid to cover out-of-pocket expenses. She emphasised that this was not a full time job.

Ms M Mdaka (ANC) asked the Minister whether there were any permanent employees working under the NCCS. She referred to support staff such as secretaries. She also asked what the term of office was for those appointed to serve on the NCCS.

The Minister replied that the issue of permanent employees to support the work done by the NCCS has been the subject of debate between her and Judge Desai. They had been reflecting on the idea of employing at least a junior attorney to coordinate the activities of the NCCS so that its work could be made manageable. At the moment Judge Desai did everything by himself, including secretarial work, and that was not an ideal situation. As to the question of term of office, the Minister said there was no stipulation mentioned in the Act but the department had decided to appoint on a five year basis.

Mr A Fritz (DA) commended the Minister for her undertaking to have the appointments made by 1 March. He asked how many people in total had been nominated. He also asked the Minister to briefly explain the process she and her department had followed in short-listing those whom she was presenting to Parliament.

Mr A Matila (ANC) felt the presentation made by the Minister and the brief introduction to the candidates indicated that the Minister had applied her mind properly and he had no doubt that the right nominations had been made. He asked members not to delay the process any further and to endorse the nominations.

Ms M Phaliso agreed with Mr Matila, saying she too was convinced that there was a general consensus on the nominations from amongst the committee members and that perhaps it was time to finalise the process once and for all.

Mr D Bloom (COPE) thanked the Minister for her commitment to speedily finalising the appointments. He then asked the chairperson to allow the members time to study the CVs of individuals so they could be able to give an informed view about the suitability of the individuals. He warned against a move to rush the process of endorsing the Minister’s nominations, saying the Minister herself had said that it was not necessary to give an answer whether or not they agree with her nominations on the very same day.

Mr E Chaane (ANC) asked whether it was necessary for the Minister to be present when the Committee met on 9 February to give their views on the nominations.

The Minister replied that there was no need for her to be present when the Committee deliberated. However, the Committee had all the powers to ask her to come forward if there was anything she needed to explain.

Mr J Selfe (DA) said the approach which some of the members were suggesting was not necessary since the Minister did say that she did not expect an answer that very day. In his view, the members needed to apply their minds without rushing to any decision.

Mr I Gunda (ID) said he supported the idea of appointing an attorney to run the office of the NCCS on a permanent basis. He was strongly against the proposal to take a decision without having been afforded an opportunity to consider the CVs of the individuals short-listed.

The Chairperson said he understood the need for giving committee members time to consider the CVs but he was not in agreement with those who were suggesting that the Minister give details on all the nominations. If that would be allowed, there was no chance that the Portfolio Committee’s decision would be ready before 9 February.

The Minister said that the eight short-listed individuals came from a pool of 35 nominations. She would be happy to furnish members with all the details of the 35 candidates but it must be borne in mind that that might delay the process which was set to be completed by 1 March 2010.

Mr Matila told the Portfolio Committee to be mindful of the fact that the NCOP Committee would away on official duties in their respective provinces and this absence must be taken into account when setting the appropriate date for reconvening on the matter.

Mr S Abrams (ANC) asked what the maximum number for appointees was as stipulated in the Act.
 
The Minister replied that the law did not place a limit as to what the maximum number should be. In other words the Portfolio Committee might elect any number they deem necessary but she warned against nominating too many individuals as this might stifle the activities of the NCCS, especially if not all NCCS members were equally committed to the work for which they were nominated.

The Chairperson thanked the Minister for her presentation. The Portfolio Committee secretary would make available the CVs of the short-listed candidates to each committee member before the close of day.

The meeting was adjourned.


Documents

No related documents

Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: