Composition and Functioning of the Magistrates Commission; Independent Police Investigative Directorate on its 2014 Strategic Plan

Meeting report

Mr Danie Schoeman, Secretary of the Magistrates’ Commission, said he was a fully-fledged public servant under the auspices of the Department of Justice and Correctional Services and had been in his position since 1997.  He also conveyed best wishes from the Chairperson of the Commission, Judge Francis Legodi.

He gave a brief overview of the business of the Commission, saying that it is an independent statutory body, in terms of the Magistrates Act 90 of 1993.   It held its first meeting in December 1993, and is composed of 27 members.   It has to be chaired by a judge, which at the moment is Judge Legodi, who is serving his second term. The Act prescribes that the other members of the Commission must be the Minister or his appointed representative, two regional magistrates, two chief magistrates, two ordinary magistrates, a teacher of law, two practicing advocates, two practicing attorneys, four designated members from the National Assembly, four permanent delegates to the National Council of Provinces and five fit and proper persons appointed by the President, in consultation with Cabinet, of which two must not  practice law in the ordinary course of their business. To his knowledge, it is the biggest commission in terms of current legislation -- bigger even than the Judicial Service Commission.

Mr Schoeman said that the functions and objectives of the Commission are contained in section 4 of the Magistrates Act.  Its main objectives are “to ensure that the appointment, promotion, transfer, or discharge of, or disciplinary steps against judicial officers in the lower courts” takes place impartially and that applicable laws and administrative directions are applied uniformly and correctly.  The Commission deals with these matters only in relation to magistrates, and not judges of the superior courts.

The next objective is to ensure that no influencing or victimisation of judicial officers takes place in lower courts.   The South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI) has now taken over promoting the training of judicial officers in lower courts and making recommendations to the Minister in this regard, although the Commission still makes recommendations through the Institute. The Commission is also tasked with compiling a code of conduct for judicial officers in the lower courts.  This code has been complied and is used by the Commission in its work.

The Commission has to advise the Minister and make recommendations regarding administrative matters applicable to magistrates, including proposals regarding legislation purporting to regulate conditions and other matters relevant to magistrates. It is required to carry out investigations and make recommendations to the Minister regarding the requirements for appointment and the suspension of magistrates. The Commission must also advise, make recommendations or report to the Minister regarding any matter which, in the opinion of the Commission, pertains to the independence of the dispensing of justice or the efficacy of the administration of justice.

For the Commission to perform its function, it has established a number of sub-committees in terms of the Magistrates Act.   As the Commission meets only once every quarter, an executive committee was set up to deal with urgent matters and comprises the chairperson of the Commission, and the chairs of the other five sub-committees. These sub-committees are: the appointments committee, which deals with the recruitment of judicial officers; the ethics committee, which deals with misconduct in line with regulations 24 and 25; the grievances and services committee, dealing with complaints from magistrates concerning their conditions of service; the utilisation committee, which handles the recommendations relating to the creation or abolition of posts for judicial officers in the lower courts. The training committee has recently been disbanded following SAJEI taking over the training function.

Mr Schoeman said that the Commission is primarily an advisory body in terms of the Magistrates Act. Its main business is threefold: first, to attend to the recruitment of judicial officers in the lower courts.  Currently, the Commission is involved with filling 308 posts ranging throughout all five levels of magistrate.  The recruitment process involves advertising, short listing and interviewing of prospective candidates.  The Commission had received more than 2 500 applications in response to its last advertisement relating to the 308 posts.  However, the Commission does not appoint magistrates.  It only recommends suitable candidates to the Minister of Justice and it is its policy to submit three names for each post, leaving  the appointment to the discretion for the Minister.

The second major function is to deal with complaints against the magistracy. Many complaints are received, ranging from the demeanor of judicial officers to complaints about the judgments in cases, which the Commission refers to the correct appeals procedure. The ethics committee deals with disciplinary matters involving the removal of magistrates, provisional suspension and the withholding of remuneration. This committee meets monthly and is supported by an independent component of magistrates, because it is policy that judicial officers are investigated by judicial officers, and they aid by presenting evidence in misconduct hearings. The ethics committee also does not have a Member of Parliament sitting, because there could be a conflict of interest where the same member conducts the investigation and ratifies the outcome.  The recommendations of the Commission, which prompt disciplinary measures and which are supported by the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, will be tabled with the Select Committee. This is because magistrates are not civil servants and enjoy security of tenure.   Therefore Parliament has to pass an Act in order to remove a magistrate from office.

The final major function of the Committee is to deal with the remuneration of magistrates.  In terms of the Act, the remuneration of magistrates is declared by the President, after consultation with the Independent Remuneration Committee (IRC). The remuneration committee of the Commission submits recommendations to the Chief Justice, who forwards them to the IRC.   The IRC will make its own recommendations, which are thereafter submitted to the President. The President’s recommendations are then tabled with the Select Committee, which then makes further recommendations to the President. This is an annual process.

Mr Johannes Meijer, Magistrate of the Commission responsible for dealing with misconduct and ethical matters, gave details of the misconduct processes which involve the Select Committee.   

Firstly, section 13 (3) of the Magistrates Act deals with disciplinary matters, including the removal of magistrates from office and provisional suspension. If the Commission feels provisional suspension is necessary, pending investigation of a complaint, the Minister -- on advice of the Commission -- can provisionally suspend the particular magistrate in terms of section 13 (3) (a).  In terms of section 13 (3) (b), the Minister will have to table the reasons for suspension with Parliament within seven days and Parliament must as soon as possible pass a resolution ratifying the suspension or not.   

Regarding removal from office, once the investigation of the complaint is concluded, the presiding officer in the investigation makes a recommendation for removal to the Commission on the grounds of unfitness to hold office, continued ill-health or misconduct.  When the presiding officer's recommendation is approved by the Commission, it must make this recommendation to the Minister, who must remove the magistrate from office and then a report must be tabled in Parliament, which makes the final decision on the removal from office in terms of section 13 (4).

Turning to section 13 (4) A, which deals with remuneration of magistrates, Mr Meijer said that if the Commission recommends removal or suspension, and no recommendation is made in this regard, then the magistrates’ remuneration stands. However, if the Commission has decided to withhold remuneration, then it is effective immediately.  In this regard, a report must also be tabled in Parliament within seven days of the decision being taken by the Commission and Parliament must then decide to ratify this, with amendments, or not at all. Once a recommendation for removal or suspension has been tabled, then the Commission must submit progress reports to Parliament every three weeks in terms of section 13 (3) (f).

He concluded by saying that disciplinary hearings are at times burdensome and often magistrates counter with points in limine, and appeals against decisions.  However, the process must remain procedurally as well as substantially fair and this is ensured by having magistrates preside over these disciplinary enquiries.

Discussion
The Chairperson inquired about the two letters recommending disciplinary action, asking whether the letters were there as mere examples or if they were premature for discussion.

Mr Meijer said they would need to be put on to the agenda and discussed fully in future. However, the recommendations for suspension and removal have been implemented by the Minister and the magistrates have been informed accordingly.  All that now awaits is ratification and the consequent formal tabling of the reports.

Mr S Thobejane (ANC, Limpopo) wanted to know whether the Commission had identified any loopholes or issues in the Magistrates Act which affected the work of the Commission, and which it could recommend for amendment.

Mr Schoeman replied that there had been a few minor amendments to the Magistrates Act since 1993, such as sections 12 and 13.  However, there was a major review of the legislation and regulations covering the lower courts as a whole under way, and the Department of Justice and Correctional Development will consult with the relevant role players in embarking on this process.

Mr M Mohapi (ANC, Free State) wanted to know if there were any measures in place which would allow the Commission to be more proactive, rather than merely reacting to issues of misconduct.

Mr Meijer replied that the Commission, through the ethics committee, would charge a magistrate with misconduct only subsequent to an investigation.  However, it is also empowered to give counselling, refer to sensitisation, request for training, give guidelines and conduct judicial quality assurance assessments, as more proactive functions.

Briefing by Independent Police Investigative Directorate
Mr Robert McBride, Executive Director of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), gave a brief overview and background to the entity, which is in its third financial year and embodies a move away from a complaints-geared directorate, to a more investigative institution. The initial body, the Independent Complaints Directorate had approximately 535 approved posts at its inception, and the IPID has 349 staff members. The IPID has produced and costed a strategic expansion plan, and bilateral meetings with National Treasury are being planned for the realisation of this plan, in order to generate sufficient capacity.  He asked for the Select Committee's support for the IPID's engagement with stakeholders in this regard.

The IPID's strategic focus for the 2014 to 2019 strategic period is dealing with capacity shortages.  This process will include the alignment of functions with the principles and values of the Constitution and the Independent Police Investigatory Directorate Act 1 of 2011 (IPID Act), organisational re-engineering, integration of the Directorate’s systems, programmes and structures, and the addressing of concerns raised by the Portfolio Committee regarding a lack of capacity. Several strategic priorities for the 2014/15 financial year have been identified, including the transformation of satellite offices to full complement status, implementation of the expansion strategy, and the establishment of a Consultative Forum, Integrity Management Unit and National Specialised Investigation Team.   IPID also aimed to attain another unqualified audit.

The work of IPID was affected by a number of environmental factors, such as the inadequate geographic coverage of IPID, an increasing workload due to events such as violent protests, as well as confusion in the public mind about the mandate of the IPID, leading to referrals to other entities.

Mr McBride dealt with some challenges and risks facing the IPID, starting with the high staff turnover due to low remuneration when compared to similar institutions, such as the Public Protector. There was insufficient funding for the relatively new mandate which the IPID is carrying out. The change in mandate has also left the IPID with capacity shortages in certain locations, leading to a lack of uniformity in investigative procedures. The nature of the work of the IPID is such that it deals with systemic corruption and organised crime, so there is a need for physical security, but this is sorely under-funded. The IPID also faces issues relating to non-compliance with certain legislation, such as the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Ms Lindokuhle Ngcongo, Chief Financial Officer, IPID, outlined the estimates of national expenditure for budget vote 23.   She noted that the IPID has aligned itself to the National Development Plan outcomes 3 and 12, by ensuring that the public has an increased trust in the police. The overarching goal of the IPID is to contribute towards a police service that is trusted by the community and operates in line with the spirit of the Constitution.

The historical allocations for the IPID have grown from R128.4 million in 2010/11 to R217 million in 2013/14, with an average growth rate of 19.1%.  The current allocations for the MTEF period 2014/15 to 2016/17, show the baseline allocation in 2014/15 being R234.7 million, growing to R262.3 million, which is an average growth rate of 6.5%.

The spending focus for the upcoming MTEF period will be on increasing the Directorate's capacity issues, especially in terms of its investigative capacity.  An example of this is the increase of 44 staff members over the medium term, most of whom will be investigators. The IPID also plans to spend funds on the enhancement of skills for its investigators.

Turning to appropriations per programme, she said there were four programmes, with Investigations and Information Management being the core strategic programme, receiving the largest appropriation of R151.1 million for 2014/15.  Next was Administration, which received R73.2 million; third is Legal Services, which was allocated R5.7 million; and lastly, Compliance Monitoring and Stakeholder Management, which received R4.7 million.  In terms of the economic classification of its spending, the most significant category was compensation of employees, at R162.4 million. Next was goods and services, at R68.9 million.

Ms Ngcongo detailed the budget per programme, and highlighted the spending focus for the 2014/15 financial year. The Administration programme was allocated R73.2 million, with the vast majority being spent on compensation of employees and goods and services, in line with the focus on capacitating the Directorate’s administrative support services and enhancing its internal controls for good governance.  Investigation and information management is the core programme, and was allocated R151.1 million.   Here the spending focus over the MTEF will be on engaging in investigations under section 28 of the IPID Act, as demonstrated by 92% of the allocation being dedicated to the investigations sub-programme.  

Legal services was allocated R5.7 million, and the spending focus will be on ensuring that sound legal advice is given to the investigators and referrals to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) are in the prescribed form.  There is also a projected growth in the need for its investigation advisory services in line with the IPID's strategic expansion plan.  Compliance monitoring and stakeholder management was allocated R4.7 million, and the focus here will be on promoting cooperative governance, which includes monitoring the IPID's compliance with reporting procedures and ensuring the quality of the recommendations forwarded to the South African Police Service and the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).  There is also funding for community outreach programmes.

Ms Ngcongo listed the mandates which the IPID hopes to pursue, but which are currently unfunded. These included Integrity Management, section 22(3) of the IPID Act; the investigation information processing unit, section 9(d) of the IPID Act; specialised training and equipment for investigators; and the strategic expansion plan.

Ms Nomkhosi Netsianda, Chief Director: Corporate Services, IPID, presented a more detailed overview of programme 1: administration, including performance indicators and targets. This programme's purpose is to provide for the overall management of the IPID and support services, which includes strategic support for IPID. This programme has five sub-programmes: departmental management, corporate services, financial services, internal audit and office accommodation. It has five strategic outcomes: public awareness campaigns, performance management systems, capacity building/human resource management plan; ICT plan and governance framework; and realignment of organisational functions and structures.  Key performance indicators for the capacity building/human resource management plan outcome were a targeted vacancy rate of less than 10% throughout the MTEF period, having 50% of females employed by IPID at a senior management level throughout the MTEF period, and having the retention policy approved in the 2014/15 financial year. Key indicators for the ICT plan and governance framework are the development of an ICT plan which will proceed from a Local Area Network (LAN) upgrade in 2014/15, to the implementation of the ICT continuity plan in 2015/16 and Environmental Data Management Systems (EDMS) being implemented in 2016/17.

Mr Matthews Sesoko, Acting Chief Director: Investigation and Information Management, IPID, presented a more detailed overview of programme 2: investigation and information management. This programme has three sub-programmes: investigations management, which develops and maintains investigations systems, procedures, norms, standards and policies in line with the IPID Act; information management, which handles information and knowledge management through a case flow management system, a database, the compilation of statistical data and also makes recommendations to the SAPS; and investigation services, which manages and conducts investigations in line with the IPID Act.

This programme has three strategic outcomes: the case management system, completed investigations and recommendation reports. A key indicator for the case management system are that the percentage of cases registered and allocated within 72 hours of receipt will grow from 98% in 2014/15 to 100% by 2016/17.  Key indicators for the completed investigations outcome are the percentage of investigations into deaths in police custody as a result of police action completed within 90 days, being at 65% in 2014/15, 66% in 2015/16 and 67% in 2016/17; the percentage of investigations into torture and assault completed within 90 days, being at 50% in 2014/15, 51% in 2015/16 and 52% in 2016/17; and the IPID aims to complete 18 investigations into systemic corruption each year throughout the MTEF period.  Indicators for recommendation reports include 100% of criminal recommendation reports being referred to the NPA within 30 days of the investigation being completed.

The Acting Chief Director: Legal Services, gave an overview of programme 3: legal services, which is tasked with the provision of investigation advisory and litigation advisory services. This programme has three sub-programmes: legal support and administration, which manages the IPID's legal obligations, including the production of systems, procedures, norms and standards to guide legal support within the IPID; litigation advisory services, which is responsible for civil and labour litigation, the coordination of granting police powers and the conclusion of contracts, including service level agreements; and investigation advisory services, which provides legal support and advice to investigators and ensures that recommendations to the NPA comply with the requirements for this process.

Three strategic outcomes have been identified: management of the IPID's legal obligations, including contracts, memoranda of understanding and service level agreements; legal advice to investigators and the granting of policing powers; and civil and labour litigation.  Key indicators for the first strategic outcome include a target of 90% throughout the MTEF period for the finalisation of contracts and service level agreements within 30 days, and a 90% target for the percentage of legal opinions provided and policies reviewed for compliance within 21 days of receipt.  Key indicators for the second outcome include four practice notes and directives issued per year throughout the MTEF period, a 90% target for both the percentage of legal advice provided to investigators within 24 hours and written advice provided to investigators within 48 hours.  The IPID also aims for 100% processing of applications for the granting of police powers within five days of request.  Key indicators for civil and labour litigation are 90% of civil matters, and 100% of labour matters, being attended to.
 
Ms Mariaan Geerdts, Acting Chief Director: Compliance Monitoring and Stakeholder Management, IPID, gave an overview of programme 4: compliance monitoring and stakeholder management, which is tasked with safeguarding the principles of cooperative governance and managing stakeholder relations through on-going monitoring of the recommendations made to the SAPS and municipal police services, and reporting on their compliance with reporting obligations in terms of the IPID Act. This programme has two sub-programmes: compliance monitoring, which monitors the quality of recommendations put forward to the SAPS, NPA and municipal police services and their responsiveness; and the stakeholder management sub-programme, which handles the IPID's relations with important stakeholders, such as the SAPS, NPA and civil society, while also liaising with Parliament and creating mechanisms for community participation in the IPID's work.

The strategic outputs identified under this programme are: monitoring and evaluation of IPID's recommendations to the SAPS, NPA and municipal policing services, while also monitoring their responsiveness to these and compliance with their reporting obligations under the IPID Act; and the organising of public awareness campaigns and regular engagements with key stakeholders. The indicators for the monitoring of the IPID's recommendations and the compliance of the entities receiving these recommendations, with their statutory obligations, is to be conducted through four reports per annum over the MTEF period.  The reports will deal separately with the quality of IPID recommendations, the implementation of IPID recommendations and the SAPS and municipal policing services' compliance with reporting requirements under the IPID Act.

Turning to indicators for stakeholder management and public awareness, the IPID plans to hold 308 community outreach events annually over the MTEF, participate in 40 community policing fora annually, have 12 formal engagements with key stakeholders at the national level annually, and 108 formal engagements with key stakeholders at the provincial level annually.

Mr McBride concluded the presentation by saying that the staff complement of the IPID was insufficient for it to fulfill its mandate, and the strategic expansion plan required the support of the Select Committee. The IPID also requires funding for the improvement of training for investigators. He and his team were fully committed to carrying out the mandate of the IPID.

Discussion
Ms G Manopole (ANC, Northern Cape) welcomed the report from the IPID, congratulated the Directorate for the number of women in the delegation, and wanted to know the reason why there is such a high staff turnover rate.  She called for more information on the staff retention plan, and about the timeframes for the appointment of the provincial managers, especially in the legal services programme, and in light of the IPID's plans to transform the satellite offices into 'full complement status'.  Regarding public awareness and stakeholder engagement, she wanted clarity on the results expected from the 2014/15 targets of releasing 40 media statements, the monthly national level consultative meetings and the 308 community outreach events, especially concerning rural areas. She asked what the difference was between the establishment of the Consultative Forum under section 15 of the IPID Act, and consultative fora under the compliance monitoring and stakeholder management programme.   She later asked about 'fiscal dumping' towards the end of the financial year, which was a problem when there was under-spending on things such as capital assets, even while there was insufficient funding for the IPID's full mandate.

Mr S Thobejane (ANC, Limpopo) said that the IPID had said that it had 349 staff members, but he had not heard what number would be ideal -- or at least sufficient to deal with the serious capacity shortages of which the IPID complained.  He therefore asked for a better understanding of how many staff were required and how much it would cost.  Referring to slide 6, regarding satellite offices, he was unsure about what exactly these were and what a normal provincial structure would be called. Referring to slide 8, regarding the lack of uniformity in applying investigative procedures in terms of the Public Finance Management Act, the IPID was expected to implement systems to deal with these challenges and he would have liked to see the IPID being proactive and creatively using systems to deal with the challenges inherited from its predecessor.  Referring to slide 22, he wanted to know who did the “grunt work” of the compliance monitoring, because he was aware of many government departments outsourcing such activities -- was the IPID is doing this monitoring itself?  He was also concerned that there were critical areas which the IPID was fully aware remained unfunded, especially specialised investigative equipment and training. He later raised a concern about whether the SAPS implements the IPID's recommendations and whether this impeded its work in any way.

Ms T Mokwele (EFF, North West) said she was concerned about the unfunded mandates, especially the investigation information processing unit under section 9 (d), because she felt it was crucial to the efficient performance of the IPID.  The IPID had identified inadequate geographical coverage as an environmental factor affecting the IPID, yet there was little about correcting this in the output targets of the various programmes.  How was the Select Committee to help when the Directorate had not provided a remedy?  Under challenges, she asked for further explanation on what the lack of uniformity in applying investigative procedures meant, and was very concerned about the non-compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act. She accepted the report with reservations, and was concerned about the performance of the IPID in the coming financial year.

Ms T Wana (ANC, Eastern Cape) wanted to know about the 120 media responses, specifically what image was being projected through these responses, and wondered whether the extent of media coverage of these activities could create a division between the state and the people. She was also concerned that the target for employing staff with disabilities was too low. She said that government should move away from apartheid principles, especially regarding reducing the dignity of people.  She was concerned that one could not have ranked officers or officials being locked up with criminals “because the categories of people are different and in other countries it is not done like this”.  She was also concerned that there was no provision for police being recommended for counseling, especially in respect of violent protests, because these were pressure situations which the police had to deal with.   There was a steady increase in targets under performance indicators, but she was concerned that the indicators themselves did not change.

Mr M Mohapi (ANC, Free State) said the Chief Director had spoken of a loss of critical staff, leading to the creation of a retention policy.  Was this policy available to the Select Committee? The Auditor-General had also raised an issue about non-compliance, particularly regarding the PFMA and the unavailability of the human resource plan, and he would like to know if there has been any progress.   Around the financial and management responsibility which was centralised and resulted in a cut in the spending patterns within the provinces, he wanted to know how far the IPID was in decentralizing this function so that the IPID could function better and embody the notion that South Africa is a unitary state. Lastly, on the payment of capital assets, he was concerned about fiscal dumping, because one observed that the expenditure performance was good, despite there having been a significant under-spend in the third quarter and an even more significant overspend in the fourth quarter.  He would like to know the reasons for this.

Mr J Julius (DA, Gauteng) asked which sector of the public the staff members of the IPID came from and whether the SAPS was a major feeder. He suggested that IPID look at engagement with private colleges or universities over courses, because it was easier to retain a person trained at a specific institution. He was concerned about what the targets were based on, and would appreciate past performance indicators and their achievement, to enable Members to gauge the performance of the IPID properly.

Mr M Mhlanga (ANC, Mpumalanga) on the issue of security and protection units, said he would like to know how far the IPID is in terms of protecting mayors in light of the violent protests.  It should also note the need for protection of Members of Parliament.

The Chairperson raised a point of order, saying that the protection of mayors and MP's was not relevant to the discussion and that the Member should wait for a presentation from the South African Police Services.

Mr Mhlanga continued, referring to the crime prevention measures aspect, wanting to know what the plan was regarding coordination of this with the national crime prevention strategy.  He also asked about progress with placing investigators at municipalities, especially considering the increase in violent protests.

The Chairperson referred to the key risks and challenges, and asked why there was non-compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and what was being done to address this. He also asked for specifics about the nature of the catastrophic events which threaten the IPID, and what measures are in place to deal with this. Also, how did the IPID gauge the effectiveness of the public awareness campaigns, particularly in rural areas?  He wanted more information on the case management system, particularly how it generated efficiency.  He also wanted details of the statistics which the IPID plans to produce, and asked who was doing the compilation.    How information is gathered from satellite offices?   Regarding legal services, he would like to know what is being done to ensure that provincial managers are being appointed, what the timeframe is for this and what form of training they receive. Regarding monitoring how is the quality of recommendations monitored, and how is the follow up with the South African Police Service's implementation of the recommendations monitored and managed?

Mr McBride replied that he would reply to the questions, but would refer to the IPID delegation where more information was required.   The IPID has had two full financial years in operation and during that time it has had instability in leadership, and he had been appointed in the last month of the past financial year, March 2014. This had been coupled with a high vacancy rate in senior management due to a lack of leadership, resulting in the problems experienced, especially the under-spending.

Ms Netsianda said that the reason for high staff turnover was analysed through exit interviews. The main reasons which came out are the lack of career growth and the disparity in entry level rankings and remuneration, when compared to other similarly placed institutions. The IPID has approached National Treasury to fund this disparity. Currently there is a draft retention policy and it is in the negotiation phase, consulting with labour and other stakeholders.

Mr McBride said, regarding provincial management, that the IPID is in the final stage of appointing provincial heads.  Regarding public participation fora versus the section 15 Consultative Forum, the consultative forum is a statutory body and is co-chaired by the IPID and the Commission for Police, and is meant to make recommendations to the Minister on policy issues, and has nothing to do with raising awareness around the IPID.

Mr Moses Dlamini, National Spokesperson of the IPID, said the IPID approached its public outreach by setting targets and according to the targets, 308 events are planned for 2014/15. The provincial offices are tasked with identifying where to hold these events, with a focus on rural communities. Local radio and newspapers are also used to advertise the events and cover these engagements. The IPID has produced a template for recording the number of people attending the events, as well as questions from the public and complaints that arise during these events, which are to be taken up by investigators. Regarding the targets for media statements and responses, this is prompted by cases which are already in the media.  The IPID responds by investigating these matters and communicates what the IPID is doing in response through the media.  There is a communications strategy in place, and the provincial offices use the template for reporting on a monthly basis.

Mr McBride said there is no yardstick for measuring the effectiveness of the media outreach and all that could be said is that more people now know about the IPID and its work, through campaigns with local municipalities and media coverage in indigenous languages. The effectiveness is also evidenced by a heavier workload for the IPID.

He said that the target for a full complement of staff was gauged on the number of police stations, number of police clusters, and the number of officers in various area and spatial locations, as well as historical intake information.   This led to a determination of the staff which they would require to staff the central and regional offices. The bare minimum full complement is 700 staff members and the costing is in the process of being finalised, but will cost approximately R60 million over the MTEF period.

Mr McBride then explained what the satellite stations were, saying that these were to establish a presence in areas which have a relatively high number of reports. This, however, is not sustainable and makes only piecemeal progress, so a full complement of staff is even more important.

The non-uniformity of investigation procedures was merely to give an environmental scan of the operations of the IPID.   The problem was the reorientation of the IPID's main mandate from complaints to investigation. This had resulted in more cases being forwarded to the NPA, and now standard operations procedures have been put in place for the submission of recommendations to the relevant bodies. Despite this, at times the standard operating procedures were not complied with, leading to the lack of uniformity.

The quality of recommendations was not where it should be and corrective measures have been put in place, part of which was going into provincial offices and taking a sample of their recommendations to test for compliance with the IPID's prescripts and standard operating procedures.

Mr McBride said that the IPID does not hire consultants for the monitoring of compliance. He then moved on to the unfunded mandates, saying that the issue is that the Act prescribes certain prescripts for the appointment of staff and certain mandated units, and certain non-statutory logical considerations mean that the IPID needs to have physical security.  Therefore, the IPID has reorganized its previous allocation in order to compensate for these problems.  This process had been hampered by the reprioritisation of political focuses, following in the wake of the new administration. The IPID is still to submit its human resource plan, but is taking account of the new political focus.

The reason for non-compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act was due to a lack of funding, but is being mitigated by training the security officers to help with compliance.

The IPID is sensitive to the issue of senior police officers who are accused of wrongdoing and their dignity.  However, it insists on detention where the officer could interfere with the investigation or poses a threat to witnesses.

Ms Netsianda responded on the issue of under-pending and fiscal dumping, and said that the IPID has also been concerned about delays in quarterly spending on operational plans, and this had been affected by vacancies in senior management, provincial and programme heads. Vacancies at other levels were filled towards the end of the financial year, and this had resulted in the peaked expenditure.  The IPID was monitoring itself to ensure it does not happen in this financial year.

Mr McBride then asked the Chairperson if the Members were satisfied with the answers provided.

The Chairperson, noting the satisfaction of the Members, thanked the delegation for the presentation and adjourned the meeting.