The day’s meeting was called to seek the opinion of various stakeholders on the Department of Police 2012/13 Annual Report and commenced with a presentation from The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) who had done assessments to measure the efficiency of management practices within SAPS. Using 31 management standards each area of assessment was given a score from 1-4. The four areas that DPME looked at were: strategic management, governance and accountability, HR management and financial management. Their results show that SAPS performed poorly in governance and accountability (22%), and HR management (30%). This was well below the national average. Governance and accountability were necessary in ensuring that mismanagement and corruption were minimised and that improvements were made to the service delivery sector. HR management had a profound effect on the overall performance of the organisation and the compliance numbers of SAPS were far too low. SAPS performed well in financial management and strategic management categories, but still needed to strive to attain level 4 ratings. SAPS needed to focus on improving service delivery mechanisms, internal audit arrangements, risk management, human resource development planning and management of disciplinary cases. All these subcategories performed at level 1 compliance standards.
Members expressed deep concern about the many core business areas that had only level 1 scores. Members asked what challenges prevented SAPS from reaching level 4. However, the Committee was not shocked as DPME brought up many issues which were historically weaknesses of SAPS.
The Institute for Security Studies (ISS) stated that SAPS Annual Report was comprehensive and many areas quite detailed. They were happy with the summaries that SAPS included at the end of each section, which ISS interpreted as SAPS recognising some of their shortcomings. The ISS found some problems with the crime statistics as SAPS had based its calculations from a dated census. The ISS noted the importance of thorough inspections of stations, units and offices were done annually on both an announced and unannounced basis, any problems arising from these inspections must be noted on a yearly basis. The ISS was concerned about the lack of information available on the inspectorate, and the subsequent inability to measure its performance. Without the ability to assess the inspectorate, any challenges would continue into the following year. Also cited was the lack of a clear cut way for the public to place a complaint about SAPS. There were currently four methods of communication listed by SAPS and with this it was difficult to determine whether the complaints were being sent to the relevant body and if any feedback was being given. Other concerns were lost and stolen firearms which could end up in the hands of criminals. Out of the 2 431 lost or stolen state firearms, over 95% were from SAPS and only 21% were recovered. There was a slight increase from 2011/12 to 2012/13 in police officer murders. The majority occurred to off-duty officers. The ISS reported confusion in the report over the definitions of “police action” versus “crime prevention”. The Annual Report spoke about lost or stolen case dockets and the ISS asked what steps were being taken against SAPS members found responsible. SAPS had to create a clear-cut mechanism for investigating corruption which was a major weakness in SAPS. Other key challenges SAPS needed to overcome included inadequate leadership, management, and accountability. These issues had been prevalent for almost a decade and SAPS needed to implement the recommendations from the National Development Plan.
Members requested clarification on lost and stolen case dockets, and on the murder statistics. The Committee were also concerned with police murder statistics. It was important to distinguish between an off duty officer who was murdered because he was an officer or was murdered for a different reason.
The Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) suggested that SAPS needed to completely revamp their management structure as its current structure was very top heavy. The management structure did not allow for sufficient manpower at a station level, and personnel distribution was a serious issue. There needed to be an increased focus on management and leadership at a station level which would aid each station in dealing with problems specific to its area.
POPCRU expressed great concern with the level of corruption in SAPS despite the number of formal policies designed to fight it. With the suspension of many officials due to corruption, POPCRU was concerned with the direct effect it would have on the overall governance of the department. Anti-corruption mechanisms within SAPS needed to be strengthened and reinforced. Many stations did not have the necessary facilities to fulfil their mandate and protect the citizens of their area. The lack of equipment and resources given to stations was negatively affecting service delivery. The increased rate of suicides amongst police officers was of grave concern to POPCRU; the number for 2012/13 was 115. Despite the therapy services made available to officers, many were reluctant to participate. POPCRU suggested that SAPS conduct a mandatory survey with employees to discover what they believed would be the best method for dealing with stress and depression.
The South African Police Union (SAPU) found the Annual Report to be informative, detailed and useful. SAPU said SAPS management needed to play an exemplary role and instil confidence in their subordinates, but current management was not achieving this. SAPS employees needed to feel that their interests were being taken into account. SAPU found some errors in the Annual Report such as despite there only being six Deputy National Commissioners, seven were listed - SAPU asked what the correct structure was. It noted that of the 5 861 disciplinary cases within SAPS, 1 641 were found not guilty and 507 were withdrawn. This meant that a third of all cases were not resolved and this suggested incompetence in handling these cases. The 16% vacancy rate in Crime Intelligence was also a concern as this was key for crime detection and prevention. SAPU brought to light that the position of Division Commander of Technology Management Services was filled without having an open application process and the position went unadvertised.
Members asked for clarification on the unadvertised position, for suggestions on ways to reduce police suicides. Members noted that POPCRU spoke of the lack of discipline within SAPS, but they were also employees of SAPS and were responsible for the conduct and discipline of their POPCRU members. The Committee asked for the support of SAPU and POPCRU if Parliament were to review the SAPS Act and make psychology debriefings compulsory for SAPS members involved in shootings or serious crimes.
The Chairperson began by apologizing for the meeting not being held at Parliament, there were not enough venues to accommodate the number of meetings for the day. The day’s presentation would be from interest groups and stakeholders and would focus on the management and finances of Programme 1: Administration.
The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) submission
The delegation from the DPME introduced themselves and noted that they do not assess external service delivery but instead measure the efficiency of management practices. During 2012 all National Departments participated in assessment. This process allowed the Departments to participate in self assessment and better understand where they need to improve. The evaluation is done using the Management Performance Assessment Tool (MPAT), which is a set of standards based on regulations and legislation.
The DPME noted that they wished to create a culture of learning to go along with their reports. The assessment was against 31 management standards in 17 management areas. Each area of assessment was scored out of four, Level 1 meant non-compliance with legal/regulatory requirements, Level 2 was partial compliance, Level 3 was full compliance, and Level 4 was full compliance and doing things smartly. In order to reach the next level, all criteria had to be met in evaluation. Even if one small thing was missing, the assessment would classify at the lower level. In many cases for SAPS, they missed out on reaching a higher level due to missing one qualification.
The percentage results for SAPS across the four key performance areas (national average in brackets) were:
Governance and Accountability
Compliance was considered Level 3 and 4, and anything below was non-compliance. The most worrisome areas for SAPS based on the assessment were governance and accountability (22%), and HR management (30%). These statistics were well below the national average:
- Strategic management was the systematic coordination of aligning resources and actions with the mission, vision and strategy of the organisation. SAPS had met all legal requirements here but needed to strive to increase performance standards to level 4.
- Governance and Accountability were necessary to ensure adequate checks and balances were in place to minimise mismanagement and corruption and for improved service delivery efficiency. The Department of Police did not meet 78% of the legal requirements and urgent attention was required.
- Human resource management practices had a profound influence on the overall performance of the organisation. A large portion of government’s budget was spent on human resources so it was very important. SAPS performed very poorly, as 70% of the legal requirements were not met. This area needed immediate attention as it had a profound effect on the proper functioning of the organisation.
- The financial management category was used to determine the extent to which managers ensured effective and efficient use of public funds. The Department of Police performed fairly well in this area, but the Performance Monitoring and Evaluation delegation noted that SAPS needed to work on improving their performance standards as they still had 29% at level 1.
A further breakdown was done showing how each category was scored and the subcategories used. Strategic management was broken down and had performed well, the average score was 3.5, which was greater than the national average of 3.0 and the subcategories included strategic planning and monitoring and evaluation. In the financial management category, SAPS scores fell along the national average. However the subcategory of supply chain management fell below the national average. SAPS performed above the national average in expenditure management.
The delegation addressed the two lowest scoring categories: HR management and governance and accountability. For governance and accountability, of the seven performance areas evaluated SAPS scored below the national average and the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security sector (JCPS) average in five areas: service delivery improvement, management structure, ethics, internal audit and risk management. They met or exceeded the national and JCPS average in accountability and delegations. For HR management, SAPS performed below the national and JCPS average in two of the four performance areas: planning and strategy, and employee relations. They performed above the averages in practices and administration, and management of performance. Despite performing close to the average it was noted that the average was a problem in itself. SAPS needed to improve drastically in all areas of HR management and governance and accountability.
The overall observed strengths of SAPS were noted as being strategic plans and annual performance plans, which both sat at level 4. The biggest observed weaknesses at level 1 standards were: service delivery improvement mechanisms, functionality of management structures, assessment of policies and systems to ensure professional ethics, assessment of internal audit arrangements, assessment of risk management arrangements, human resource development planning and management of disciplinary cases.
DPME noted that their goal was to encourage departments to learn from each other and to learn from the past. Focused workshops were held with departments to address their individual issues. The MPAT paints a single holistic picture of the state of a department. The difference between a general audit and using MPAT was that MPAT focused on imploring managers to act more responsibly and efficiently. The assessment encouraged departments to strive to achieve level 4 compliance as with it came better service delivery. Getting top management to assess themselves against best practice would make them focus on better management practices leading to more top-down efficiency. By continuing annual MPAT assessments, Parliament would be able to see the changes that occur.
The Chairperson thanked DPME and said it was interesting to hear the results. It was DPME’s first time before the Committee.
Ms M Molebatsi (ANC) asked what happened if there was non-conformance in the standards applied the following year.
Mr M George (COPE) noted DPME said that departments must acknowledge they have a problem in order to correct it, but what if they did not acknowledge it? If accountability was weak did it not affect other areas?
Mr P Groenewald (FF+) said the SAPS figures DPME presented led him to conclude that the people were not getting their money’s worth. He referenced HR management only having reached standards in 30% of their scores as an example. Many of the observed weaknesses obtaining Level 1 scores were part of SAPS core business.
Ms D Sibiya (ANC) asked what challenges did SAPS face that prevented them from reaching Level 4.
The Chairperson stated that their findings were not overly surprising as the Committee had long held the belief that SAPS problem lay in their management structures. What were the main issues that caused HR to have such a low score?
DPME responded that MPAT was very new and not all departments had participated since the beginning so it was difficult to use the data for comparisons at that point. For 2012/13, all departments had participated and outside monitors had been brought in. They were working with Parliament to scope the full functions and services of departments. People were being trained to assess the results and use them to work with the departments. DPME did not have the capacity to issue punishments, but they did bring concerns and problem areas to light, and with SAPS their problems lay in governance.
Many departments were not aware of the requirements which caused lower scores, but when people were informed, results would improve. The size of the police force provides its own challenges. Despite this, they still expected them to address the problem areas brought forth. In HR there was confusion over defining roles and who does what. The assessment found holes in the structures of SAPS Human Resources and many people were in their positions in an acting capacity. If management had been better organised, they would have been able to meet submission deadlines and many of their level 2 scores would have been bumped up to level 3.
Mr George said that taxpayers were paying a lot of money for departments, but many were not functioning as they should and this needed to be rectified.
The Chairperson declared that the role of DPME must not be confused with that of Parliament. The DPME followed an adherence approach rather than a punishment approach.
Mr Groenewald requested that the Committee be given the level percentages for each government department for comparison purposes.
DPME noted that those statistics were available on their website and that there was a full report providing comparisons. They closed by stating that each department had to play their part to ensure that improvements were made.
The Chairperson further thanked them for their presentation and hoped that it was the first of many engagements with the Committee.
Institute for Security Studies (ISS) submission
Dr Johan Burger, ISS Senior Researcher, said the ISS was a leading organisation in research and training and their vision was to create a more peaceful and prosperous place for all Africans. The Governance, Crime and Justice Division (GCJ) of the ISS aimed to promote democratic governance and reduce corruption through enhanced levels of accountability, transparency and respect for human rights in African democracies, as well as to reduce crime and improve justice by providing African governments with information to created evidenced-based policies.
The ISS determined that the SAPS Annual Report was comprehensive and many areas were quite detailed. At the conclusion of each programme analysis there was a summary section that the ISS deemed quite useful. This summary contained “strategies to overcome areas of under-performance” which provided the ISS with some assurance that SAPS was recognising its shortcomings and weak areas. The ISS did express concern that the report contained the Civilian Secretariat for Police Annual Report within it, and very little detail was given as to what effect the Civilian Secretariat was having in its role of providing oversight.
Dr Burger stated that some of the crime statistics presented in the report were found to be miscalculated. The changes in the crime ratios between 2011/12 and 2012/13 were found to be incorrect because outdated population estimates were used. SAPS did not use the most up to date information to calculate their ratios, and instead relied on information obtained from a dated census. The ISS had, since discovering this, written to the Minister, the National Commissioner and the Civilian Secretariat requesting a discussion on this. The ISS proposed a more regular release of crime statistics as it would better inform the population on ongoing trends and threats in their areas. The SAPS practice of waiting a long while to release crime stats was inefficient and when they finally released the statistics they were already outdated and useless.
The ISS also found that the SAPS Annual Report contained no information on the performance of the SAPS Inspectorate which was of great importance. Many of the weaknesses or underperformance indicated in the Annual Report suggested failure to perform regular and thorough inspections at all police stations, units and other offices. It was important that the number of inspections undertaken annually, both announced and unannounced, were presented in the Annual Report along with any systemic problems discovered. The Portfolio Committee should be kept informed on the steps being taken to address these systemic problems to ensure effective oversight. Dr Burger expressed concern that since there was no information on the inspectorate, the issues they found would continue into the future. Finding the appropriate reporting method for the public when there was a complaint about SAPS was found to be difficult as SAPS listed four methods of communication: SAPS National Complaints Line, Presidential Hotline, 24-Hour Call Centre, Anti-Corruption Hotline. With these four mechanisms, it was unclear whether all police-centred complaints were eventually centralised for proper control, feedback and analysis. Dr Burger suggested that the Committee request more information on the nature of complaints and how they were dealt with.
The ISS identified the huge problem of lost or stolen firearms in Programme 2: Visible Policing. Of the 2 431 state firearms that were lost or stolen, almost 95% (2 300) were SAPS firearms. Of these 2 300, only 21% were recovered. On 18 September 2012 the Minister of Police had called for SAPS to strengthen their firearms controls; what had happened in this regard since then? These arms might be being used to arm criminals, and year after year nothing was done to stop this problem. It was noted that of the 1 255 firearms confiscated country-wide, 98% (1 235) were confiscated in the Free State. An explanation for this statistic should be provided. Further, there was no system in place to confirm the reliability of SAPS reaction times.
The number of police officials murdered rose from 81 to 84 over the year, and most of these deaths occurred while the official was off-duty. The ISS said it would be useful for the Portfolio Committee to be given information on specific steps taken to reduce murders, both on and off-duty. There was a reported decrease in the number of people killed by police. This had occurred in the context of an increasing number of arrests for murders and robberies. This supported the argument that less violent policing was in the interest of the police.
Page 76 of the Annual Report provided some confusion between “police actions” and “crime prevention operations”, clarification was needed. Roadblocks, cordon and search operations, premises searched and farm checks decreased in 2012/13, but no reasons were given.
Dr Burger noted that SAPS had a challenge with case docket management – too many case dockets were being lost or stolen. What steps were being taken to prevent this and what steps were taken against the SAPS members found responsible?
The section on Programme 4: Crime Intelligence (CI) provided information on network operations, but neglected to report on covert operations. There was no indication of the number of operations taken out or planned for 2013/14. The increase in more organised types of crimes such as aggravated robberies should be explained. Better crime intelligence would lead to a reduction in these types of crimes. Unlike the other sections of the report there were no “strategies to overcome areas of underperformance” for this section. The National Commissioner had stated that CI needed to be fixed as many problems existed within it, what steps were being taken?
A similar problem existed in governance fraud and corruption as did in SAPS complaints mechanisms. There was no clear cut mechanism or investigating structure in regards to fraud. There should be a single source or office dedicated to information pertaining to corruption. If corruption cases were analysed, it could address weaknesses in the system. Of the 892 members charged with fraud, only 22 were suspended. What criteria were used to determine whether someone should be suspended?
Dr Burger briefly touched on the IPID statistical report. IPID had a much broader mandate than SAPS as they were obligated to investigate the following matters:
- Any deaths in police custody
- Deaths as a result of police actions
- Any complaint relating to the discharge of an official firearm by any police officer
- Rape by a police officer, whether the officer was on or off duty
- Rape of any person while that person was in police custody
- Any complaint of torture or assault against a police officer
- Corruption matters within the police initiated by IPID or after the receipt of a complaint from a member of the public, or referred to the Directorate by the Minister, an MEC or the Secretary
- Any other matter referred to it as a result of a decision by the IPID Executive Director, or if so requested by the Minster, an MEC or the Secretary.
Further, IPID may investigate matters relating to systemic corruption involving the police. Mr Burger noted the language used in the mandate of IPID. In some cases IPID was obligated to investigate, while in others the word “may” was used. The ISS suggested that IPID should pay more attention to the concept of police brutality.
In conclusion Dr Burger stated that much work was being undertaken by SAPS members, but key challenges remained in inadequate leadership, management and accountability. These issues had been prevalent for almost a decade but had yet to be comprehensively addressed. SAPS needed to do things differently, thus the ISS recommended that the urgent implementation of the recommendations in the National Development Plan be initiated.
Mr D Stubbe (DA) asked for clarification on the national murder statistics, he had received different murder statistics, why were they different?
Mr V Ndlovu (IFP) asked if it had been brought to the attention of Branch Commanders that they were not doing their jobs correctly.
Mr G Lekgetho (ANC) asked what was happening with lost dockets.
The Chairperson noted that an issue was the need to differentiate between off-duty officers who were killed because they were an officer, and those who was killed in a crime unrelated to their position. It cannot be said that someone who was in a club, and by chance an officer, was killed because they were an officer. She asked for the ISS’s definition of police action versus crime prevention.
In terms of SAPS non-compliance with domestic violence legislation being a prevalent in the Western Cape, the Chairperson noted that in many other provinces non-compliance was not reported. This was why the Western Cape’s statistics were higher; they should be commended for at least reporting.
Dr Burger stated that some of the SAPS statistics were incorrect because they had used the information obtained from the 2001 census. When the new census results were released they did not reconfigure their results, leading to the miscalculations.
The ISS did not know whether Branch Commanders were aware of their failure to fulfil their duties. It was the task of SAPS to tell them this, and unless they agree with the ISS that it was a problem, little would be done to resolve it. Internal oversight structures should have been able to identify these issues and determine that it was a problem that needed to be solved.
Some of the unaccounted-for case dockets were lost due to SAPS offices being burnt down, but this still did not account for the overall total.
The Chairperson thanked the ISS for their presentation and noted the appreciation of the Committee for the input of ISS.
Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) submission
Ms Thandi Shimange, POPCRU First Vice President, noted that their presentation raised two primary concerns: 1) The department rarely implemented any suggestions made. 2) The approach used to distribute the presentation. She then introduced the POPCRU delegation and handed over to her colleague to make their presentation.
Ms Tryphina Phihlela, POPCRU Senior Researcher, reiterated POPCRU’s primary concern which was that SAPS neglected to implement any of POPCRU’s suggested changes. POPCRU believed that SAPS required a restructuring to alleviate the top-heavy management structure of the organisation. They believed that the 176 Cluster Commanders were unnecessary and there was plenty of room for reduction at the top and more capacitation at the bottom. There needed to be a bigger number of personnel where the actual work took place, this would lead to proper delivery of the required services.
The SAPS Head Office was regarded as a policy making body and the structure should reflect this. Manpower was needed at station level, but the management structure did not adequately allow for this and insufficient personnel distribution was a big problem. The focus on restructuring could be directed at reducing the provincial and national structures and dissolving the Clusters in order to improve co-ordination. Ms Phihlela stated that moving skilled and specialised personnel to stations increased leadership and improved management, decision making and skills levels at stations which aided in addressing each station’s unique challenges. Changing the recruitment emphasis from a quantity to a quality approach was essential in ensuring that recruits were developed in a disciplined manner with a focus on skills development.
POPCRU then addressed corruption within SAPS and stated that despite the numerous formal policies and procedures designed to deal with corruption, it was still rampant throughout the organisation. This was evidenceb by the continual number of cases that occurred each year. POPCRU was especially concerned with the suspensions of officials and the effect it had on governance in the department. SAPS required more effective mechanisms of dealing with corruption. POPCRU encouraged SAPS to reinforce the measures taken against the police officers who act against the mandate of the department. They went on to applaud the majority of officers who continued to be loyal in the execution of their duties.
Police facilities were of concern to POPCRU, and the lack of progress on the building and renovation of stations had a direct negative effect on service delivery. POPCRU wanted SAPS to develop a system of implementation to ensure that targets were met. The communities of South Africa continued to struggle to obtain the police services they were entitled to and had to rely on private transport and long journeys to access such public services. A minority of the population enjoy great and unlimited services while the majority were being neglected. SAPS needs to reverse this trend.
Ms Phihlela expressed concern with the physical resources of SAPS. A large quantity were being allocated to Head Office, while stations in dire need of equipment, were being given smaller amounts of resources. POPCRU stated that management in the boardrooms had all the safety equipment while those in the field were forced to fight crime with limited resources. In rural areas, police visibility, accessibility and response required a dramatic improvement. These objectives could only be achieved if the department equipped the stations with the necessary resources, both human and physical. The lack of resources was deflating service delivery and with this, SAPS was violating the Batho Pele principle, which served as a guiding tool.
The loss of life due to police killings was a major concern of POPCRU. The so-called small increase in police killings was huge in the eyes of POPCRU. The methods that were applied to address this issue in the form of the Police Safety Strategy, were not effective and other solutions were needed. The loss of life was a double blow to both society and the sector, as SAPS could not afford to lose any officers. More steps needed to be taken to protect SAPS officers and POCRU warned the Committee of getting caught in repetitive talks that did not yield tangible results. There needed to be plans, not theories.
Ms Phihlela moved onto police suicides. The statistics were disturbing and shocking as 115 police officers committed suicide in 2012/13. Despite the therapy services available to officers to deal with stress, many were reluctant to participate. POPCRU was happy when SAPS announced their planned summit on the subject of police suicides and the departmental need to sharpen their understanding of the subject. POPCRU recommended that SAPS conduct a mandatory survey with employees to discover what they believed would be the best method in dealing with stress and depression.
On crime statistics, POPCRU took little comfort in the 0.4% decrease in sexual offences and rape. Many of these crimes still went unreported and it remained a major issue for South Africa. The slight increase of 0.6% in murders was of great concern to POPCRU. The 18% decrease in ATM bombings and 20.3% decrease in Cash in Transit (CIT) robberies were due to SAPS cooperation and partnerships with industry bodies. South Africa was facing a challenge in the number of deaths on the roads, with many being due to drug and alcohol abuse. POPCRU felt that more public awareness campaigns would aid in ensuring that the public was more knowledgeable of the dangers of impaired driving.
POPCRU believed that SAPS employees were adversely affected by the trend of non-compliance and non-implementation of policies and collective agreements. The non-payment of overtime in many components of SAPS remained a thorny issue and lowered the morale of staff. This lowering of morale hampered SAPS and affected the fight against crime.
Ms Phihlela concluded by saying that POPCRU believed that many SAPS members did sterling work and were committed to ensuring that South Africa was a safe and secure place to live.
South African Police Union (SAPU) submission
Mr Tumelo Mogodiseng, SAPU Depute President, said SAPU found the Annual Report informative, detailed and useful to the public. These reports were essential in ensuring that public institutions were accountable to the public for the work they do. SAPU acknowledged the hard work that SAPS members were doing on a daily basis despite the difficult circumstances they faced.
SAPU felt changes in the functioning of management were needed. Management needed to play an exemplary role and instil confidence in the minds of subordinates. SAPS members needed to feel as though their interests were taken into account. SAPU felt that the findings of the Annual Report did not instil the confidence that top management deserved in the eyes of the subordinates. Many errors were made in the report, including the National Commissioner being labelled as Lieutenant General in page 12 of the report. This demonstrates that the report used a cut-and-paste method from the report of the previous year. In other sections of the report the National Commissioner was referred to only as General. This error needed to be corrected and was unacceptable.
Mr Mogodiseng continued noting errors found in the report. Pages 10 and 11 demonstrated the organisational structure of management and listed seven Deputy National Commissioners, while in reality there were only six. Lieutenant General J Molefe was listed as a Deputy National Commissioner but this was incorrect. This information suggested that SAPS had changed its organisational structure, but SAPS had presented a different structure to this Committee on 17 September 2013. Which structure was correct?
SAPU further noted some grammatical changes that needed to be changed in the report including the use of the word ‘bribery’. The word ‘bribery’ had been replaced by ‘corruption’ in most documents as far back as 1992 and the inclusion of bribery could pose definitional problems.
The statistics given in regards to the implementation of the National Crime Combating strategy, focussed on geographic and organised crime and were not comprehensive or well represented in the report. The report primarily provided percentages and shied away from giving exact numbers.
Mr Mogodiseng noted that the appointment of the Divisional Commissioner of TMS (page 174) was done without advertising the post or going through the proper stages of the selection process. SAPU urged management to advertise vacant posts and to allow all candidates to compete and apply equally. The appointment of this position without advertising created a perception of unequal treatment and favouritism.
He noted that out of 5 861 disciplinary cases within SAPS, 1 641 were found not guilty and 507 were withdrawn. This meant that a third of all cases did not prove a case. It was suggested that this was a result of management’s incompetence or that cases were only opened as a punitive measure. The Disciplinary Code was an issue as it had yet to be promulgated by the Minister for reasons that were unknown to SAPS. Therefore it was misleading to quote or refer to the document. The 16% vacancy rate within Crime Intelligence was of grave concern to SAPU as CI was the root of crime detection and prevention.
SAPU concluded that many of the problems with the report were not merely cosmetic. In fact SAPU felt they were so fundamental that they led to SAPU losing confidence in the report. The credibility and accuracy of the report was questionable.
Mr Ndlovu asked for clarity about the post that was filled without advertising. He asked SAPU how they would take the errors found in the report and present them to SAPS.
Mr Mogodiseng replied that SAPU would hold meetings to look at the report before they presented their concerns to SAPS. About the post that was filled without being advertised, SAPS had always done things differently and appointments such as this added to the problem of top heaviness within the organisation.
Ms Molebatsi asked what SAPU and POPCRU would suggest to reduce the number of police suicides?
Mr George noted that POPCRU had said that discipline within SAPS was a problem, but POPCRU was a part of SAPS so they were part of the problem. Unions were responsible for the conduct and discipline of their members. He asked where the unnecessary Cluster Commanders belonged and what their duties were now.
The Chairperson stated that in the past year 84 officers had been killed and 115 had committed suicide. Would POPCRU and SAPU support Parliament in reviewing the SAPS Act and making compulsory psychology debriefings for officers involved in shootings or serious crimes, a reality.
Mr Mogodiseng replied that SAPU would be completely behind this suggestion.
Ms Shimange stated that POPCRU felt as though the systems in place were not efficient. POPCRU held workshops on discipline from time to time, but they needed the support of SAPS to make them effective. But SAPS had not acted sufficiently. The Cluster Commanders were deemed unnecessary by POPCRU because of the duplication of duties with other positions.
The Chairperson encouraged POPCRU and SAPU to raise their concerns with SAPS and not wait for the Committee to make a move.
- SAPS presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Police
- South African Police Service (SAPS) Annual Report 2013
- IPID Annual Reports 2012/13
- Audit Outcomes Police Sector
- Auditor General South Africa 2012/13 PFMA Outcomes
- Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) submission
- Institute for Security Studies: SAPS & IPID Annual Reports 2012/13
- The Presidency: Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation: SAPS 2012 Final Scores
- South African Police Union (SAPU) submission
- 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.