Independent Complaints Directorate on its lease agreements

Meeting report

The Chairperson, in her opening remarks, said that the Committee had visited Limpopo and found serious confusion regarding the keeping of Domestic Violence Registers at police stations. This concerned the Committee greatly in the light of the increase in violence against women in South Africa. The under reporting of domestic violence would be a serious problem. On the other hand, in Mpumalanga, the keeping of the Domestic Violence Registers in police stations was going well, because there were staff members dedicated and designated for that particular function.

The Chairperson noted that a week before, in a meeting with the Department, reference was made to sick leave being abused by staff members at particular police stations, amongst others, Maitland Police Station in Cape Town. The Provincial Police Commissioner of the Western Cape then responded to this information by saying that the Portfolio Committee had the wrong information. The Chairperson said that the Portfolio Committee relied on the Department for its information, which meant that, if the information was incorrect, it would be the Department itself which provided it and not the Portfolio Committee. If the claims were true, it clearly pointed to a problem.

The Chairperson asked why the Cato Manor case had to be brought to the attention of Parliament and the public by the media and not by the ICD. [There have been allegations that a death squad was operating in the Cato Manor Crime unit and on 15 February 2012 it had been reported in the media that the Hawks announced that the unit had been shut down and would relocate to the Durban Central Police Station]. If it was the duty of the ICD to investigate deaths at the hands of the police, why did it not pick up on the problems at Cato Manor?

Mr Francois Beukman, Executive Director of the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) noted the remarks the Chairperson made about the Domestic Violence Register and its implementation at police stations in the Mpumalanga and Limpopo Provinces. Regarding the Cato Manor issue, the ICD was busy with its own investigation. Two staff members at the station had been suspended, pending the investigation. The ICD took the case very seriously and was doing everything in its power to uncover the facts in order to determine whether the allegations of a death squad were true. It was employing private pathologists to do the investigations. At this stage the investigations had not been completed.

Leased properties occupied by the ICD
Mr Francois Beukman, Executive Director, and Mr Mathews Sesoko, Acting Chief Director: Corporate Services, presented.

The ICD currently occupied 16 leased buildings: one National Office, nine provincial offices and six satellite offices. The presentation focussed on the details of the agreements for these properties and outlined the lease process, a summary of ICD leased accommodation, the total monthly and annual expenditure, locational suitability of ICD leased accommodation, property and leased information on current ICD leases, ICD head office (City Forum Building) and its current status, progress on remedial interventions and the way forward. A diagram explained the process flow amongst the ICD National Office, ICD provincial offices and the Department of Public Works. Currently the total annual amount payable for leased properties was R19¼ million, amounting to 15% of the budget. By 2014/15 it would be R26m.

Information detailed the term of the current leases, the commencement and termination dates, date of the signing of the lease and date of occupation, as well as other information of interest pertaining to the particular lease.

The ICD National Office, occupying the City Forum Building in Pretoria, was under a lease agreement lasting nine years and 11 months, terminating on 31 January 2019. The ICD took occupation on 15 September 2010.This lease was currently under enquiry by the Public Protector and the Special Investigating Unit to determine its validity.

The lease of the Eastern Cape provincial office in East London had expired in December 2010. It was currently on a month-to-month lease agreement until such time as DPW made a longer term agreement. The Eastern Cape satellite office in Mthatha was also on a month-to-month lease.

The Free State satellite office in Bethlehem was on a month-to-month lease while the DPW was in the process of procuring alternative accommodation in QwaQwa.

The KZN provincial office in Durban was on a month-to-month lease since the lease had expired in October 2010. The DPW’s initial cost analysis was in excess of what the ICD could afford. The satellite office at Empangeni was on a month-to-month lease and was more expensive at R61/m² than the head office in Durban at R41.35/m².

The Mpumalanga provincial office in Nelspruit was leased on a month-to-month basis since the leased expired in September 2011.

The provincial office of the North West had a two-year lease in place, but the DPW had not supplied the date on which it had been signed. The North West satellite office was on a month-to-month lease agreement since October 2011 when the lease expired.

The Western Cape provincial office was in Bellville and a process was underway to establish an office in George. There was no lease agreement yet.

The ICD instituted a number of internal remedial interventions to manage the accommodation function more effectively, amongst others, a reconstituted and strengthened Accommodation Committee to oversee property and lease management functions. The ICD was engaged in ongoing engagements with National Treasury and DPW regarding property and lease management. The challenge for the ICD was the renewal and extension of leases, short term leases of two years and securing alternative office accommodation.

Discussion
Buildings, Leases
Ms D Kohler-Barnard (DA) asked why the ICD did not own any buildings and what percentage of the annual departmental budget was spent on leases. Several buildings were on month-to month lease agreements. The Portfolio Committee recently dealt with SAPS, which had been locked out of its office premises because DPW did not pay the rent. It seemed that the conduct of the Department of Public Works (DPW) interfered with ICD’s ability to do its work properly. It had to give too much attention to its accommodation, instead of focusing on its core business. What guarantee did the Portfolio Committee have that when the ICD became the Independent Police Investigations Directorate (IPID), it would not still be as insecure about its accommodation as it was now? Many of the leases were month to month so the ICD did not know from month to month whether the DPW was going to renew the lease. It was an appalling situation and she wanted to know if the ICD was at least talking to DPW to either buy properties or secure longer term leases.

Mr Sesoko replied that 15% of the departmental budget went to the payment of leases. This 15% included the City Forum building.

Mr P Groenewald (FF+) said that if he understood the process correctly, the ICD itself could not buy a building. It was national policy that only the DPW could buy /lease buildings. The ICD could only submit a needs assessment to the DPW. The problem in the process was with the DPW. The presentation mentioned that the ICD had met with the DPW and ICD reported there was a better relationship and communication, but it did not solve the problem. The lease of the satellite office of the North West expired in 2011.The request by the ICD was put in Nov 2010. Why did it take the DPW so long, a year, to renew the lease? What reasons did they give?

Rev K Meshoe (ACDP) quoted the presentation as saying it was difficult to find suitable buildings. Yet there was no indication that buildings were being built to suit ICD requirements? Regarding the suitability of locations, was anything being done about making these buildings accessible to people with disabilities?

The Chairperson said that all the buildings seemed to be privately owned. Did ICD find out from DPW if there were any state owned ‘white elephant’ buildings available to occupy? She thought that there were quite a number of them.

Mr Mathews Sesoko, Acting Chief Director: Corporate Services, replied that DPW had a process to follow when doing an assessment. It had to look at government-owned buildings first. Only after that it could procure, lease or build a building.

His understanding was that the ICD initially requested DPW to build, but was told that it was too small a department to justify building a building to suit its needs. The DPW had decided to overhaul its procurement processes as a result of the bad publicity over the last few years. Small staff units in satellite offices would still not get their own buildings. The ICD continued to engage with DPW. The reality was that the responsibility rested upon DPW to procure appropriate buildings for the ICD

Ms A Van Wyk (ANC) asked about staff parking at the buildings. In some cases parking accounted for more than 10% of the monthly rental. Was it policy to provide parking at ICD’s expense? This was not standard practice at state institutions as even parliamentary staff were responsible for their own parking. At the Office of the State Law Advisor, only senior staff members had free parking.

The Chairperson said that at some of the provincial offices there were no cost allocations for parking bays. What happened about parking in these instances? She asked what the ICD policy was on parking.

Ms BongiweTukela, ICD Senior Manager: Legal Services, replied that there was a policy that ICD officials paid a portion of the parking. National and provincial executives did not pay.

Ms Van Wyk asked what informed ICD’s decision on where to locate a satellite office in the Western Cape. She believed there were problems in rural communities such as the Karoo areas of Beaufort West and Oudtshoorn.

Mr Sesoko replied that the ICD looked at statistics to see where most cases were reported. It looked at the accessibility of the town. Was it a central point where people converged to do other business as well? For example there was a satellite office in Bethlehem, but since more cases were subsequently reported in Qwa Qwa, the satellite office was moved to Qwa Qwa. The ICD planned one office each for Gauteng, Tshwane, Mpumalanga, and George in the Western Cape in the coming financial year.

Ms Van Wyk asked why the Mpumalanga and Tshwane offices were not reflected in the report.

Mr Sesoko said that the ICD had already made provision for staff for the Mpumalanga office in the new Financial Year. Although the office itself was not part of the presentation, it formed part of the user management plan for 2014.

Ms Van Wyk asked regarding the Structura Building in Pretoria, whether the money ICD spent on computer cabling had been recovered. The ICD had already been told to vacate the Old Mercedes Benz building in Pretoria and did not, and was facing legal action amounting to between R2m and R9m.What was the situation about the Old Mercedes Benz building?

Ms M Molebatsi (ANC) asked how far the ICD was in recovering the funds used for refurbishing and installing cables in the Structura Building which was later occupied by the Department of Human Settlements (DHS).

Mr V Ndlovu (IFP) said that the presentation indicated that the monthly rental for the KZN provincial office was much more expensive than any other provincial office, currently at R142 178, 21 per annum escalating to almost R2m per annum in 2015. The ICD planned to continue leasing buildings. In 2015 it would spend R25m on leases per annum. Was the ICD taking into account its expenses? Was it paying too much and not getting value for money?

Mr Ndlovu said that the same department, DPW, appointed different people to make deals in the same province with the same company. But the deals differed greatly. There was no standardization in terms of rate per square metre.

Ms Molebatsi asked who determined the rate, how was it determined and was it standardized? Why did the escalation per year vary from province to province, with some at 9%, some at 8% and some at 10%?

Mr Sesoko replied that the ICD was not involved in the signing of the contract. It had no say in the norms or escalations. It was determined between DPW and the landlord.

Mr George asked what problems the ICD had had with DPW invoices.

Mr Sesoko replied that there would be a meeting between the ICD and DPW during the last week of February, before the end of the financial year, where the two parties would reconcile their invoices and the ICD would pay over what it owed DPW. It was an ongoing process between the two parties.

Ms P Mocumi (ANC) referred to what the presentation stated about the National Office of the ICD. It stated that “The commencement date as specified in the lease agreement was 1 March 2009 and the occupation took place on 15 September 2010. Why did it take so long? Was rent being paid in the interim or was rent only paid after the occupation?

Mr M George (COPE) said that the lease for the National Office was signed 14 April 2009 and the ICD only took occupation on 15 September 2010, more than a year later. Who bore the cost of the period the department did not occupy the building?

Mr Sesoko replied that this was connected to the controversial head office lease. DPW indicated that the lease was originally entered into for the Department of Human Settlements. The ICD moved in more than a year later.

The Chairperson asked if the ICD paid for the year.

Mr Sesoko replied that the ICD did not pay, but was billed for R25m.

Ms Mocumi referred to the presentation where it stated that the lease agreement for the North West provincial office was not signed but the commencement date was 1 August 2011. Why did it happen? What did the ICD do to find out when the document was signed?

Mr Sesoko said that the ICD did not receive the information from DPW about the date on which the lease for the North West office was signed.

Ms Mocumi asked what commencement meant. Did it mean commencement of negotiation for the lease agreement or commencement of the occupation? Sometimes occupation occurred before the commencement of the lease and vice versa.

Mr George said that the month-to-month rental plan was a recipe for problems.

Ms D Sibiya (ANC) said that month-to-month leases created problems that undermined the government. The ICD had to sit down with DPW and resolve the problem to lessen the challenges.

Mr Sesoko replied that there were seven leases on a month-to month basis. According to DPW, there was a scarcity of buildings. The fact that the ICD often only made its assessment request at the termination of the lease period could have contributed to this situation. It was difficult to give time frames, because the ICD depended on DPW. The procurement processes were driven by DPW. The ICD could not engage with landlords. It could only go and view the building. Only DPW engaged with the landlord at this stage but there was movement in DPW towards a situation where the ICD would be part of negotiating leases. It was a problem, because it also touched on the question raised by Mr Ndlovu, where, for example, the Empangeni office was more expensive than the Durban office. The reason for this was where buildings were scarce; it was more expensive than where buildings were readily available. The ICD did not have influence. It had to negotiate a new situation.

Mr Sesoko said that the ICD recently had a problem at the KZN regional office where the staff had been locked out of the parking bays because DPW have not paid the rent. This had been going on for two weeks and was still continuing. The ICD had engaged with DPW. There was no guarantee that ICD would not be booted out of its offices. It engaged with DPW on a continual basis and hoped that it did not happen.

The Chairperson referred to the presentation under the heading Eastern Cape Provincial office: background - 25 January 2012 where it stated: “The ICD indicates that the rent estimated in DPW Preliminary Costs Analysis is in excess of the ICD’s budget”. She asked ICD management to explain the statement and the result of the statement.

The Chairperson referred to the presentation under the heading KwaZulu-Natal and said that the ICD was paying more per m² at R61/m² for satellite office space in Empangeni than for provincial office space at R41.35/m² in Durban. Did the ICD look at these issues and find that the rent was too high in some cases?

The Chairperson asked what “Departmental Financial Delegations” meant under the heading “Progress on Remedial Interventions” in the presentation.

Ms Van Wyk asked at what point the ICD engaged with DPW about expired leases. She asked the ICD to indicate the time of engagement as well as where the process was at this stage with each lease. Regarding the Western Cape ICD head office, according to her knowledge, the ICD occupied that building before the current two-year lease agreement came into existence. She asked for details of the history of that lease.

Mr Sesoko replied that most engagements would happen before the lease would expire. In the case of two provinces, the engagement happened one month after the lease had expired. The ICD wanted to engage as early as possible. The ICD wanted to strengthen the internal monitoring processes as well as the role of the Accommodation Committee to ensure that requests to DPW were made in time.

Ms Van Wyk noted the ICD had said that most engagements happened before the lease expired, but it was not entirely true. She cited the example of the Eastern Cape where the lease ended December 2010 and the ICD requested the renewal of the lease on 17 December 2010. There had to be a standard procedure that said there had to be engagement on the renewal of lease, for example, six months before the lease expired. The onus rested on the ICD to engage the service provider, in this case DPW, to render the service it was entitled to.

Ms Kohler-Barnard asked if the ICD had copies of all of the leases. The ICD then had to remind DPW that the leases were expiring.

The Chairperson agreed that the ICD had to interact with DPW to inform it that the leases had come to an end, the reason being that it had cost and budget implications for the ICD. There had to be negotiations, and this could not happen on the last day of the lease. This method of operation had resulted in the ICD being given the City Forum building by DPW, which it could not afford.

Mr Sesoko acknowledged a lack of monitoring of the expired leases. The ICD had put internal processes in place to rectify this. There was not enough engagement from the administration function in the provinces to monitor lease expiration. The monitoring of the lapsing of leases now became part of the performance agreements of provincial heads to ensure it enjoyed attention at the highest level. It was true that this process had budgetary implications. When the ICD received cost analysis in excess of what it could afford, it would communicate this to DPW. From now onwards, it would not just accept the cost analysis from DPW.

The Chairperson said that according to a letter she received from Roux Shabangu, Van Niekerk, the owner of the City Forum building, paid R59m for it. Could the ICD not buy the building instead of spending the money on leases? The ICD had to assert itself and say to DPW that it wanted to buy a building.

Ms Van Wyk asked why the ICD said it could not afford the rent for the building it occupied in the Western Cape, only after the deal was made and not before.

Mr Ndlovu asked what the implications were when the entity had moved into the building and then decided that it could not afford it.

The Chairperson asked again what the legal implications were of occupying a building and not paying rent.

Mr Sesoko replied that the questions raised were valid. The ICD stopped/suspended payment of the rent, because of the legal opinion it received that said that if it continued paying on an invalid lease, it was not complying with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA). The ICD was waiting on the outcome of the Public Protector investigation.

Mr Sesoko made a correction. There was an error in the summary. When one looked at the detailed information in the presentation under the heading Western Cape Provincial Office: Property and Lease Information. The lease period was five years as indicated on p39 and not two years as indicated on p38. The termination date of the lease was also 31 March 2012 as indicated on p39 and not 31 March 2013 as indicated on p38.

Ms Van Wyk said that the lease lapsed in a month’s time.

Mr Sesoko indicated that a request for renewal of the lease had been made to DPW.

Ms van Wyk said that the rent was too much, but the ICD said that the budget was available for it.

Mr Sesoko replied that the ICD indicated to DPW that it had to re-negotiate a rate within the budget of the ICD’s budget.

The Chairperson asked for an explanation of the process followed with the lease of the Western Cape Provincial office on which the ICD requested renewal on 20 May 2009 for 5 years, which was going to expire in March 2012.

Mr Sesoko replied that on 20 May 2009, the ICD requested the renewal of the contract for five years from DPW. The DPW did not respond promptly.

On 16 September 2011 the ICD reaffirmed its request for renewal to DPW. Then the developments of the ICD morphing into IPID came into play. The ICD /IPID would need additional office space, 753.6m². In October 2011, DPW came with a cost analysis and calculated the cost for 862.69m². For DPW to get the building would be too much and the ICD could not afford it. The DPW had to go back and re-negotiate in line with what the ICD could afford.

Ms van Wyk asked why the ICD asked DPW to re-negotiate an office that would be too small for the first phase of implementing IPID.

Mr Sesoko replied that Members had to be aware that the ICD gave its requirements, and DPW procured the building. The building was often bigger than requested, but partitioned for the needs of the ICD. This was the situation in this case. The ICD requested renewal because there was space available to provide for more m². The DPW did its own assessment, and it would indicate whether more space was available or not.

The Chairperson referred to the statement by the ICD that rental payment for the City Forum building had been suspended. What were the implications of this, in light of the ICD occupying the building?

Rev Meshoe asked who did the maintenance on the City Forum building if the ICD was withholding rental payment. Who was responsible to fix the latent defects in the building?

Mr Sesoko replied that the building was still maintained by the landlord. The building had latent defects causing flooding in the basement amongst other things. The DPW indicated that it wanted to take over maintenance of the building. The ICD received correspondence from DPW and the landlord regarding the fixing of the latent defects. It was a continual engagement and took long.

The Chairperson asked who maintained the buildings under month-to-month agreements.

Mr Sesoko replied that the agreement was the same as under the original lease. Maintenance would be done by the same party, whether the landlord or DPW at the same rates. There were challenges in this area, because at head office the maintenance was not done to the satisfaction of the ICD. The DPW planned to take over the maintenance from the landlord and deduct compensation for it from the rental amount, but it had not happened yet.

Mr Ndlovu concluded that the landlord breached his maintenance contract with DPW, but the ICD bore the consequences.

Mr Groenewald asked who was at fault when a lease expired and the official responsible did not alert the parties involved that this was the case. Was the official held responsible in any way? If he were the boss, he would fire the official for not doing his job. What was the reason given by DPW?

Mr Sesoko replied that the ICD could do no more than engage with DPW in order to have the leases renewed. It had engaged DPW a year earlier and had received no feedback. It was a systemic problem with DPW. ICD sent in its needs assessments in time, and only got its cost analysis a year later. He expressed hope that the new revamped interaction with DPW would bring a change in behaviour from DPW’s side.

Mr Groenewald asked if there were any consequences for officials in cases where the ICD was at fault.

Mr Sesoko replied that internal control systems had been put in place within the ICD to prevent this from occurring in future.

Ms van Wyk asked for copies of the new internal control systems.

Ms Kohler-Barnard asked if the people who failed to follow up on the leases got reprimanded, sanctioned, promoted, told not to do it again, had a disciplinary hearing, or did it not matter?

Mr Sesoko said that no action had been taken against any individual. It was not written in their KPAs in their performance agreements, thus they could not be held responsible.

The Chairperson asked why ICD did not follow up on its first request in the case of the Western Cape provincial office, within less than a year, knowing the delays DPW were working with.

Mr Sesoko acknowledged that the ICD had to be more proactive, but said that ICD was working on making sure that these incidents did not recur. The situation would improve with the new internal control system.

Ms Van Wyk asked what was happening about the Old Mercedes Benz building and the recovery of the funds spent at the Structura building.

Ms Bongiwe Tukela, Director: Legal Services, said, regarding the civil claim on the Old Mercedes Benz building, the ICD lawyers had applied for a default judgment. The plaintiff obtained a default judgment against the ICD. The ICD filed papers thereafter. The plaintiff had never followed the matter up. The ICD asked the state attorney what the current position was, but there had been no response as yet.

Ms van Wyk asked when the papers were filed and when the follow-up was made.

Ms Tukela said she did not have the file with her, but she would get the information and supply the answer. The default judgment was obtained because the ICD instructed the state attorney to file papers, which the state attorney failed to do. The state attorney submitted an affidavit stating that its clerk did not file the papers to court. This was why the plaintiff obtained a default judgment. The judgment was R2 000 491.

Mr Sesoko said that the amount spent on the Structura building for cabling had not been recovered. The DHS said that the issue rested with DPW. The DPW awaited the finalization of the investigation by the Public Protector into the City Forum lease to see whether it was valid.

Ms Van Wyk said that the Portfolio Committee could not be satisfied with either case. The ICD instructed the state attorney to file papers, which was not done. The ICD lost R2 000 491. Who was held responsible? The Public Protector investigation had nothing to do with getting the money back. The ICD had to assert itself and make sure that it got the money back.

The Chairperson asked Ms Tukela to explain the background to the case.

Ms Tukela said the ICD lease for the occupation of the OMB building expired. The ICD submitted the request to DPW to find new accommodation. DPW did not find new accommodation and the ICD stayed in the building. The landlord then filed the order for the ICD to pay for the occupation. In the meantime, DPW had already entered into a contract for another state department at a higher rate than the rate paid by the ICD. The landlord then proceeded to claim the occupational rent as well as the difference between the two rates. The ICD had to file papers that it was not in default, but DPW was in default, which was why the ICD defended the matter. The landlord claimed that the then executive director agreed to pay the monies claimed, but he had no proof to that effect, and the ICD denied that it was true. The ICD instructed the state attorneys to file papers to defend the ICD, which the state attorneys failed to do, resulting in a default judgment to the plaintiff. When the ICD became aware there was a default judgment against it, it instructed the state attorneys to say that the ICD was not at fault, therefore could not be expected to pay. The state attorney then filed an affidavit acknowledging that it failed to file the papers. The default judgment was reversed and the ICD’s plea to the plaintiff was filed. The plaintiff did not pursue the matter, but it could still happen. It was reflected as a contingent liability of the ICD.

Mr Ndlovu asked what the states of affairs were currently.

Ms Tukela said that the ICD was no longer occupying the OMB building. The plaintiff was supposed to pursue the matter, but no papers had been filed to this effect.

Ms van Wyk said that it may or may not happen, but the department had to make provision for it in its budget. She asked if the ICD paid what it owed to the landlord.

Ms Tukela replied that it paid the rental at the initial rate, but the landlord increased the rate for the period after the lease lapsed and wanted the ICD to pay the increased rate, which it did not do.

The Chairperson asked what percentage of the departmental budget was spent on salaries.

Mr Beukman replied that 48% of the ICD budget for the current year was spent on salaries.

Ms van Wyk said that the question on salaries was valid because the department was people driven, salary driven, operations driven. Spending large amounts on rent could negatively influence the core business of the department. The department brought down the spending on photocopying. She asked for a report in writing on how the current lease agreement impacted on the operation of the ICD.

Mr Beukman replied that he did not want to pre-empt the budget discussion, but the money for the new staff when ICD became the IPID, was ring-fenced, secured. The lease agreement would not affect the finances for the year immediately following this one, but might affect years after that.

The Chairperson said that an in-depth discussion was needed on the finances of the ICD as it transitioned into the IPID, amid all the other factors that impacted it financially. She did not understand how the lease agreement did not have an effect on its operations.

Mr Beukman thanked the Portfolio Committee for its interactions. The ICD had improved through its interactions with the Committee in the past and would continue to do so. The ICD had incorporated some of the recommendations and suggestions of the Portfolio Committee into its internal processes in order to run the ICD more effectively.

The Chairperson said that the issue of leases was a thorny one. Leases could be used to extract huge amounts of money from the state coffers. It was something that had to be managed by senior managers themselves so that when it came to accountability, the senior managers would be able to account for something they were involved in directly. The ICD would still deal with the City Forum case for a long time. It would remain a serious and thorny issue and she was unsure of its long term financial and legal implications.
The Portfolio Committee believed money had to be spent on core business instead of leases. The ICD had to assert itself and say:”This is what we need and this is what we can afford”. If this did not happen, it undermined the Public Finance Management Act.

The Portfolio Committee would be monitoring the situation closely. In the near future it would have to approve the ICD budget. It viewed the situation seriously and the situation needed a solution. What was the ICD going to do? Did it or did it not have money for the lease? The ICD and SAPS appeared to prefer leased buildings instead of buying buildings, building new buildings or using existing state buildings. She was not sure if this was the way to deal with this issue. Building or buying a building looked like the better option. Roux Shabangu said that Van Niekerk paid R59m for the City Forum building. Looking at the figures, buying the building would have been a better option. The ICD had to make clear what it wanted, instead of accepting what DPW came up with.

The Chairperson said she wanted a copy of the new internal control system. After engagement last year, the ICD did wake up. There was still a lot that needed to be looked into and corrected. The ICD had to be in control of the situation and the Committee needed to see this. It had to implement the control measures.

The City Forum issue was a serious matter. She expected ICD management to deal with it. Management was negligent in accepting the deal as it was. It did not look close enough at the details of the deal.

Regarding month-to-month leases, the Committee expected the ICD management to opt for a longer term lease or termination of leases, and it had to be able to explain why it made those particular choices.

Cato Manor
Mr Ndlovu said that it was the third time that the Chairperson had raised the issue of Cato Manor in a Portfolio Committee meeting. It seemed that the ICD got its information from the media. He wanted to understand it from the ICD point of view. It seemed as if the offices and satellite offices of the ICD did not supply the head office with information. Was it true or not? If the ICD only relied on the media and other sources for information, instead of being fed information by their offices, it would always be in a reactive position (as opposed to pro-active). The suspension of the staff members was a secondary act. Did ICD head office get information from its regional and satellite offices as it had to be according to the Constitution?

Rev Meshoe asked, regarding the Cato Manor issue, if the ICD had to rely on the media to learn about police misconduct, because the public did not trust the ICD enough to report police misconduct to it. The public preferred to go to the media.

Mr Beukman replied that, regarding Cato Manor, it was important to note that the report published mostly dealt with Class 1 cases where people died as a result of police action. Most of the cases were investigated by ICD or they were with ICD. In most cases, witnesses who could corroborate what happened at a specific scene were important in order to take the case forward. This was in addition to other reports like pathological reports. After the report was published in the media, witnesses approached the task team with new information. These witnesses and their information had to be evaluated for their authenticity. Most of these cases were ICD dockets or files in the process of investigation or they were not finalised yet. It related to this information. As result of the report published in the Sunday Times, the ICD appointed a task team and witnesses contacted the task team. It was a very sensitive, difficult process. In order to ensure a successful prosecution, those witnesses had to go to court. The ICD had to get sworn affidavits from them. Some were not prepared to appear in court. Certain operational procedures had to be followed by the investigators to ensure the finalised cases could stand up in court.

The ICD’s current final review looked at each case individually. It checked if the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) were followed by ICD KZN. If the SOPs were not followed, the task team reconstructed the matter, build up the dockets, and the ICD would come up with certain recommendations. If the SOPs were followed, and there was no evidence of wrongdoing by SAPS KZN, the case would not be taken forward.

The process was also an external review of what happened, especially concerning the 51 Cato Manor cases which was handled by the ICD, to make sure if SOPS were followed. The process would also point out which cases could be prosecuted, supported by the evidence brought forward by the new witnesses. This process was underway.

It was not uncommon anywhere in the world for an oversight body to act on information that became available in the public domain, or was made available by a police unit, as was the case with the ICD and the Cato Manor case, but this would not be the routine way of accessing information for the ICD. In the normal course of things, the ICD would respond to complaints.

The ICD hoped to finalise all matters in this regard by mid May 2012.

Ms Van Wyk said that the Cato Manor case pointed to a bigger problem within the ICD. There was no proper oversight over the ICD investigations, even on the Directorate: Investigation at the national level. If there were repeated deaths reported in connection with a certain police unit, it had to be focussed on. This issue needed to be addressed by the Portfolio Committee at another date. There was a problem with command and control in the ICD.

Rev Meshoe asked if the public knew about the ICD and what it was there for and if it rather believed in the media to do something about police brutality.

The Chairperson asked what the role was of the ICD in cases where people were killed by the police and the SAPS investigated and closed the cases. Did the ICD investigate those cases again or just accept that the cases were closed, knowing that some SAPS members covered up for their colleagues?

Mr Beukman replied that this problem resided in Chapter 10 of the SAPS Act. The new IPID Act would deal with it.

Mr George asked if the ICD started the investigation as a result of the media report, or if the ICD was already busy with the investigation.

Mr Beukman replied that in the Cato Manor case, the task team was appointed after the publication of the media reports on the case. The ICD did pick up cases from the media, but it also received referred cases from its offices. It was a mixed bag.

The Chairperson thanked the presenters of the ICD and the members for taking part in the discussion.

Committee Report on oversight visit to Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA) project in Port Elizabeth
The Chairperson formally tabled the draft report for perusal by the members. Members could make inputs and amendments to the report during the course of the week so it could be adopted the following week.

Committee Report on Presidential State Owned Enterprises Review Commission
The Chairperson formally tabled the draft report saying it was expected of Portfolio Committees to make submissions to the Commission on agencies and stakeholder organisations each had to oversee. The Committee had requested the research unit to put together a report on the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA). PSIRA was not state owned enterprise, but the report was broadened to include such. Members were expected to read the report by the research unit and see if it was in line with the Presidential State Owned Enterprises Review Commission report. Members had a week to add other SOEs, agencies and stakeholder organisations to the list to be overseen by the Portfolio Committee on Police. Members could also make other amendments to the draft report which would be adopted the following week.

The meeting was adjourned.