Internal Corruption: briefing by Department

Meeting report

HOME AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
15 OCTOBER 2002
INTERNAL CORRUPTION: BRIEFING BY DEPARTMENT

Chair: Mr Mpho Scott

Documents Handed Out:
Corruption in the Department: Introductory Remarks and Discussion with Officials (see Appendix)

SUMMARY
The acting Director General of Home Affairs briefed the committee about corruption in the department. Central issues raised included the issue of vetting at the Limpopo border posts, bogus immigration registration agents and the lack of witnesses coming forward to testify against alleged offenders.

MINUTES
The Chair pointed out that this is one of a series of meetings on the issue of corruption in the department. He then handed over to Mr Lambinon who was accompanied by Mr Strobos and Mr Rakgwale.

Mr Lambinon, acting Director General of Home Affairs, noted that since April 2002 84 cases involving corruption had been finalised in the department. He pointed out that the situation is very difficult because all of the 7000 plus employees in the department are faced with tempting situations every day involving the issue of documents such as ID books, passports and various certificates.

Structures to deal with corruption in the department include the Directorate for Security and Ethical Conduct which is working closely with the SAPS Crime Intelligence unit. Project Molopo which covers mainly Gauteng and the head office of the department will be expanded to include all the nine provinces in November 2002. This project fights against departmental corruption.

Mr Lambinon pointed out that currently adequate resources to investigate corruption are well established in Gauteng but the Department seeks to expand these resources countrywide.
He pointed out that although criminal hearing records are not available, it is estimated that the success rate in cases handled is at least 70%. Most cases involved immigrants. He added that training courses on the code of conduct are provided by the department for employees.

Discussion
Mr Morwamoche (ANC) asked why there is no mention of "vetting" at the Limpopo Beit Bridge area in the briefing by the department.

Mr Lambinon pointed out that as far as the Limpopo issue is concerned, he commends the media for bringing such things to light. He noted that an investigation with SAPS had been started and is ongoing at the moment. Mr Strobos added that the department is aware of this and, as highlighted by the DG, an investigation is under way and some arrests has been made. He was positive that more would follow soon. Mr Rakgwale continued that Beit Bridge is indeed one of the most corrupt border posts in the country. He would be going there that day (15 October 2002) to finalise some cases which could possibly show them the perpetrators of corruption within the department in the region.

Mr Skhosana (ANC) noted the comment in the briefing document: 'due to the absence of statistics in other departments'. He asked if this referred to the other government departments or to subdivisions within Home Affairs.

Mr Lambinon explained that there is no certainty because neither their department or any other department had conducted a survey of the statistics to analyse these trends and where they specifically belong.

Mr Waters (DP) asked what the department is doing about bogus immigration registration agents who convince immigrants that they will administer their registration but are often found to be corrupt.

Mr Lambinon replied that this is a worldwide trend that has to be nipped in the bud in this country. If properly administered, the system is supposed to help the department in the administration of the immigration workload that they would otherwise face on their own. However, like any system, it is susceptible to negative spin-offs or manipulation. Mr Strobos added that not all people acting as agents are registered with the department and the problem is that some of these people give applicants the wrong information and false promises.

Mr Lambinon pointed out that this issue goes to the extreme with commercialisation of application queue places so that some agents pretend to be queuing and then sell their place to those who want faster service. He added that agents are not allowed or entitled to a preferential hotline which allows them speedier processing of ID books and passports.

Mr Pretorius (NNP) asked if the Security and Ethical Conduct Directorate is strong enough has it been effective or can it be improved?

Mr Lambinon replied that the Minister had indicated that the structure of the department needs to be looked at and that this programme is operating within the ambit of this strategy. In order for effectiveness to be ensured, continuous monitoring of the issue needs to be prioritised.

Meeting concluded.

Appendix:
PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HOME AFFAIRS: CORRUPTION IN THE
DEPARTMENT: INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND DISCUSSION WITH
OFFICIALS

- How prevalent is corruption in the Department (number of cases investigated)?

On average, 20 to 30 cases are reported monthly. Since April 2002, 84 cases were finalised. Due to the absence of statistics on corruption in other Departments, the seriousness cannot be measured. It is respectfully submitted that the situation is of a serious nature, to say the least.

- What structures are in place to investigate corruption?

The Directorate: Security and Ethical Conduct of the Department has 12 Departmental Investigators who are investigating corruption in close collaboration with the South African Police Service, specifically Crime Intelligence, Organised Crime Units and the Scorpions. The Department has trained 99 officials to investigate lesser cases of corruption and other kinds of malpractices, eg., theft, in its regions, as well as 113 officials to preside at Departmental disciplinary hearings.

The Project Molopo which was embarked on in co-operation with Crime Intelligence, Pretoria and which concentrated primarily on Home Affairs officials working at Head Office and Gauteng Province will as from 1 November 2002 be expanded to include all provinces. Task teams with special knowledge of the Department and corruption, will be deployed to form part of joint operations with the South African Police Service.

Apart from this, a total line of communication to breed a culture amongst supervisors to take immediate responsibility, must be cultivated.

- Are adequate resources available to investigate possible cases of corruption?

Although available resources seems to be adequate for the existing investigators who are investigating possible corruption primarily in the Gauteng area, the employment of more investigators to work countrywide in co-operation with the South African Police Service, will have an enormous impact on combating corruption in the Department. The visibility of investigators who may at any time call on an office for a work performance inspection or investigation regarding possible corruption, will act as a deterrent. Supervisors must be adequately trained to prevent, that they, through their actions, do not open the door for corruption.

- What is the success rate of the Department in its fight against corruption?

For the period 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2002, 443 Departmental hearings took place, 60 officials received verbal warnings, 120 officials written warnings, 232 officials final written warnings and 31 officials were dismissed after disciplinary hearings were conducted. Although records of criminal hearings are not readily available, it is estimated that the success rate could be in the region of 70%. Most of the corruption cases involve illegal immigrants, who are needed to

testify in court. However, as a result that witnesses do not report for court hearings, cases are withdrawn.

On 25 July 2002, an operation launched by the South African Police Service, in an effort to deal with corruption in the Department of Home Affairs, resulted in the arrest of 45 officials countrywide, as well as 32 agents working with the officials and 1 232 illegal immigrants.

Training courses are Departmentally provided to all officials on the Code of Conduct and the names of officials who were found guilty in Departmental disciplinary hearings, are circulated in the Department and provided to the press on a monthly basis, as a deterrent measure.