Child Justice Act National Policy Framework & Accreditation of Diversion Services: Departments of Justice and Social Development briefings

Meeting report

Child Justice Act National Policy Framework: Department of Justice and Constitutional Development briefing
Ms Pat Moodley, Acting Chief Director, Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DOJ & CD) noted that in terms of the Child Justice Act (the Act), the Director Generals (DGs) who comprised the Intersectoral Steering Committee for Child Justice (ISCCJ) were obliged to develop a National Policy Framework (NPF). That NPF had to ensure a uniform, coordinated and cooperative approach. There had to be proper intersectoral coordination. The NPF had to guide the implementation and administration of the Child Justice Act. There also had to be cooperation with non-governmental and civil societies. A plan had to be developed in order to enhance service delivery within available resources. The aim was also to try and ensure that all children received equal services.

The Child Justice Policy Framework outlined the context and vision of the Act. It also contained an introduction to the policy framework. The NPF was located within the broad objectives of the Act. She explained that, for example, it protected the rights of children as contained in the Constitution, and ensured that children were not exposed to the adverse effects of the formal criminal justice system.

Identified priorities had to take precedence when the Child Justice Act was being applied. Each government department had to fulfil its own mandate, as well as partnering with civil society. The hand-over of responsibility, from one department to another, in respect of children in conflict with the law had to be regulated and well managed. Human resources and capacity had to improve. Diversion services were often provided by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and there had to be cooperation with the government. She noted that Diversion Service Providers and programmes had to be strengthened. It was the Department’s priority to build 18 child and youth care centres across the provinces.

Children had to be assessed timeously. The various government departments had to ensure that regular assessments were conducted. Ms Moodley reminded Members that the Preliminary Inquiry procedure was new.

Another challenge was that raising awareness had to be a priority, especially for those affected children. It had to be made widely known that there was a separate child justice system.

Ms Moodley added that the development of the Information Technology (IT) system had to be prioritised to enable the flow of information. The national operational ISCCJ would be used to collect data. It was important for a child to go through the system, with all due consideration being given to the fact that all dealings must be appropriately geared towards proper treatment of the child. The best interests of the child had to be taken account. It was important for government officials at every level to understand their responsibilities. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development had a national operational centre which had incorporated a number of important indicators.

Finally she noted that the NPF set out registers in accordance with the provisions of the Act

Discussion
Mr J Jeffery (ANC) commended the structure of the NPF. He said that there should be an element that ensured the functioning of the two child justice centres. The NPF had to specify that the child had to have legal representation in line with the provisions of the Act. It had to be made clear to the South African Police Service (SAPS) officials that children who had been arrested had to appear before a magistrate as soon as possible.

Mr Jeffery noted that there was nothing in the NPF that informed Department of Correctional Services (DCS) that children sent to the correctional centres had to be evaluated to see if they should be held there. He indicated that the most important task would be that of monitoring. It would be useful if the Committee received quarterly reports on how matters were proceeding. Children under ten years of age had to receive special monitoring. The National Prosecuting Authority had the incorrect impression that all cases should be diverted, but this was wrong, as serious cases had to be prosecuted as they would otherwise always have been.

Ms N Michael (DA) said that during a recent visit to the Pretoria Magistrate’s Court she was very pleased to find that officials had been briefed on the Act. It was also pleasing to note that this Magistrate’s Court had a fully functioning Child Justice court. The Committee had not considered that there were many child headed households in South Africa. The trend was that children from these households could get someone from their area to pose as their relative in court, for a nominal fee. She pointed out that many human traffickers tended to loiter around courts, and once they found out that children were in trouble with the law they preyed on them.

Mr M Gungubele (ANC) was curious to know how dynamic the interaction amongst officials at the various levels was. The NPF had taken care of a number of required elements for the successful implementation of the Act.

Policy Framework for the Accreditation of Diversion Services: Department of Social Development briefing
Ms Connie Nxumalo, Chief Director: Family and Social Crime Prevention, Department of Social Development, noted that the Act also required that a system of accreditation of diversion services must be developed. The purpose of the NPF was to serve and protect the needs of children in conflict with the law. Service providers and diversion programmes had to comply with minimum norms and standards. The NPF aimed at ensuring that there was capacity building and sustained service delivery to facilitate the continuous improvement of diversion programmes. The objective of the policy was to try and ensure that all service providers, Department of Social Development (DSD) employees and relevant stakeholders were aware of and supported the DSD’s approach to quality. The DSD also had to ensure that there was a proper accreditation and quality assurance system, which was well coordinated.

She noted that certain criteria had been set out for accrediting organisations. These criteria for accreditation were a display of authority and competence, sound financial systems and adequate capacity. An accreditation criteria system had also been set up for assessing programmes. A suitable programme had to have pre and post assessment mechanisms. It should also be shown to reduce criminal behaviour and clearly articulate projections and outcomes. It also had to have a system of monitoring. The programmes also had to be exposed to regular supervision by senior staff members.

The DSD had come up with mechanisms to apply the NPF. There would be capacity to monitor the implementation of the NPF. An Accreditation Committee would be set up to accredit qualified service providers, analyse the system of accreditation, and take part in the realisation of policies and strategy. The accreditation system had three phases of an application process, a verification process and the actual accreditation process. The DSD would lend implementation support.

Discussion
Mr Jeffery asked who did the accreditation.

Ms Nxumalo replied that provinces were currently putting measures in place. Their deadline was 15 June 2010. The decision on accreditation fell on the accreditation Committee.

Mr Jeffery noted that there were members of SAPS in the meeting, and he asked if the National Instructions in terms of the Act had been tabled before Parliament.

Mr M Van Rooyen, Senior Legal Administrative Officer, South African Police Services, replied that the National Instructions were tabled before Parliament on 26 March 2010.

The Chairperson thanked the two Departments and informed them that the Committee was satisfied with the NPF.

Other Committee business
Ms Michael complained to the Chairperson that the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development had not informed members of the Committee about a new campaign to tackle human trafficking, referred to as “Red Card”, for the duration of the World Cup. She felt very strongly that the Committee should have been invited to the launch, or at least have been informed about it.

Mr Gungubele said that he shared Ms Michael’s unhappiness about the lack of information. However, he cautioned against approaching this matter at a technical or political level, as he was not sure if the Minister was obliged to inform the Committee about the campaign.

Mr Jeffery agreed with Mr Gungubele, and added that he still felt upset that the Committee had not been invited at the launch of the Child Justice Act. Technically, the Minister did not have to inform Members. However, he did feel that at the very least, out of courtesy his office could send the Committee a copy of the Department’s programme.

Magistrate’s Suspension: Committee Report
The Committee adopted its report on the suspension of Magistrate Jacobs.

The meeting was adjourned.