National Prosecuting Authority 2018/19 Annual Performance Plan

This premium content has been made freely available

Justice and Correctional Services

24 April 2018
Chairperson: Dr M Motshekga (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), Shaun Abrahams, reported on the Annual Performance Plan and budget for 2018/19. He spoke of the work that his team at the National Prosecuting Authority had done and the successes that they had achieved but he highlighted his concern about the budget cuts which had placed an enormous strain on the NPA. He also spoke on a number of issues that he considered relevant or important to the Committee.

A number of the targets, relating to conviction rates that had appeared in 2017/18, had been revised in line with the resource challenges that the NPA was facing. The strategic objective had been reformulated in line with the request that all strategic objectives were outcomes-based; the reformulated objective was to ensure successful prosecutions. Other key performance indicators were introduced to place more emphasis on other crime typologies that impacted on society, such as the conviction rate in murder cases and money laundering. The NPA saw a need to focus on curbing cybercrime where information and communication was used to perpetuate crime. There had been a 98.5% conviction rate in cybercrimes. There had also been a focus on crimes committed by religious leaders and the murders of political leaders. The Asset Forfeiture Unit had been highly successful and had had obtained freezing orders on over R4 billion of assets in 2017/18. The unit was working on 17 cases and expected to collect billions of rand in South Africa and across the world in this financial year as well as the two outer years of the budget cycle.

The budget for 2018/19 saw a decrease of 0.96% in comparison to 2017/18 and an escalation of 4.41% over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, despite the anticipated Consumer Price Index of 5.7% in 2018/19. Compensation of employees took 88.8% of the budget in 2017/18 and in 2018/19, there would be a budget shortfall of R168.75 million for compensation of employees and a shortfall of R146.89 million for goods and services. In prior years, shortfall for compensation of employees had been funded through virements from the NPA operational budget and a virement from the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. In 2018/19, the NPA baseline would not be able to accommodate any virements from the operational budget. Critical posts remained unfilled.

The total moratorium on filling of posts since 2015/16 had had a negative impact on staff morale. NPA had lost 157 officials in 2016/17 and 205 officials during 2017/18. 850 prosecutors had applied for 208 posts in the magistrates’ courts in March 2018. Currently, 70% of all magistrate posts were occupied by former public prosecutors from the NPA who saw the position of magistrate as decidedly less stressful and less demanding than the role of a public prosecutor. The National Public Prosecutor emphasised that he was extremely concerned about the working conditions of public prosecutors who had no time for personal or family life and worked under enormous and unyielding pressure. It would be catastrophic if any more prosecutors were lost to the NPA.

He referred to a non-governmental organisation that had, opportunistically in his view, held a media briefing to announce that it would be conducting a private prosecution into the On-Point Engineering case involving Julius Malema. However, the only time a private prosecution could be conducted was when the NPA had decided not to act on a case. That was not the case in the On-Point matter as the NPA was at an advanced stage of investigation.

In November or December 2017, the National Public Prosecutor had written to Duduzane Zuma to request certain required documentation and only when the matter came back to him, could he announce his decision. In his view there was a reasonable prospect of a successful prosecution.

The NPA Head told the Committee that he vehemently and categorically denied all allegations that he had misused any vehicle. At no stage had he requested a vehicle for himself or security from the witness programme. There was no corruption whatsoever involved in the use of the vehicle. He stated that the charges and allegations were a desperate campaign by a particular non-governmental organisation to besmirch the NPA.

Members asked what the NPA was doing about managing the overcrowding iatthe correctional centres. Was alternative sentencing not an option? Members asked about the recent appointment of a deputy in the Office of the Deputy National Public Prosecutor who was alleged to have been improperly appointed because he was a friend of the National Head. They asked about the alleged instability within the NPA with respect to the awaited Constitutional Court decision on the High Court declaration that NPA Head appointment was unlawful. The Committee noted that 78 prosecutors had left, and many had applied for magistracy positions. How many prosecutors did the NPA have? Were they able to do the work? Why were prosecutors applying to be magistrates? Was it because of the salary package?

Members asked if the NPA did not have the capacity to investigate the Estina Farm at Vrede further. And why were officials only charged and not members of the Executive and the MEC? Members asked, in light of the On-Point Engineering case, whether only matters brought by AfriForum would be addressed by the NPA What about ordinary citizens with a sword hanging over their heads for years while they waited for the NPA to make a decision? Did the high targets set for the Asset Forfeiture Unit mean that the NPA believed that it was going to recover state capture funds? Were the Hawks and the NPA working together effectively?

The Chairperson stated that underfunding of the NPA was not good for the country and the Committee would support the NPA request for additional funding.

Meeting report

The Chairperson thanked Adv Shaun Abrahams for always being willing to appear before the Committee. The House was sitting that afternoon and Members might need to go and vote, so he requested Adv Abrahams to commence immediately.

National Prosecuting Authority Annual Performance Plan and Budget 2018/19
Adv Shaun Abrahams, National Director of Public Prosecutions, introduced his team, which included Dr Silas Ramaite, Deputy National Public Prosecutor, Adv Malini Govender, Special Director and Ms Hanika can Zyl, Acting Chief Director, Finance. Adv Abrahams spoke of the work that his team had done and the successes that they had achieved but he was concerned about the budget cuts that placed an enormous strain on the NPA. He reported on the APP and informed the Committee of a number of issues that he considered relevant or important to the Committee.

A number of the MTEF targets, relating to conviction rates that had appeared in 2017/18, had been revised in line with the resource challenges that the NPA was facing. The strategic objective had been reformulated in line with the request that all strategic objectives were outcomes-based; the reformulated objective was to ensure successful prosecutions. Other key performance indicators were introduced to place more emphasis on other crime typologies that impacted on society, such as the conviction rate in murder cases and money laundering.

The NPA was making sustained, and successful, efforts to curb corruption in the public service. The Asset Forfeit Unit (AFU) had sought to strike a balance between high priority cases and ordinary cases that did not capture media attention. The AFU had been highly successful and had had obtained freezing orders on over R4 billion of assets in 2017/18. The unit was working on 17 cases and expected to collect billions of rand in South Africa and across the world in this financial year as well as the two outer years.

The NPA saw a need to focus on curbing cybercrime where information and communication was used to perpetuate crimes. There had been a 98.5% conviction rate in cybercrimes. There had also been a focus on crimes committed by religious leaders and murders of political leaders. Gender-based violence and sexual offences convictions had reached an all-time high and a national forum on the Sexual Offences Act was held by NPA, the Department and Ministry of Justice and civil society. The role players targeted reporting and investigation as well as medical support at the Thuthuzela Care Centres (TCC). 74.5% of cases reported at TCCs had been successfully prosecuted. The Witness Protection Programme remained highly successful. The NPA was experiencing increased success in prosecuting gangsterism in the Eastern and Western Cape.

The Priority Crimes Litigation Unit was investigating cases of terrorism as well as cold cases from Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The NPA had re-opened the Ahmed Timol case and a verdict of suicide had been overturned. The court had recommended that three persons be prosecuted in relation to Mr Timol’s death. Further such cases were being investigated.

NPA Budget    
The NPA had spent 99.97% of its budget in 2017/18; Support Services having underspent by 2%. The total NPA budget in 2017/18, after the adjusted appropriation, was R3.68 billion. The budget for 2018/19 saw a decrease of 0.96% and an escalation of 4.41% over the MTEF despite the anticipated Consumer Price Index of 5.7% in 2018/19.

Compensation of employees took 88.8% of the budget in 2017/18. Funding for the Office of Witness Protection would be cut by 0.65% over the MTEF and the budget for Support Services would only increase by 0.52% over the MTEF. In 2018/19, there would be a budget shortfall of R168.75 million for compensation of employees and a shortfall of R146.89 million for goods and services. In prior years, the shortfall for compensation of employees had been funded through virements from the NPA operational budget and a virement from the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD). In 2018/19, the NPA baseline would not be able to accommodate any virements from the operational budget.

The total moratorium on the filling of posts since 2015/16 had had a negative impact on staff morale. NPA had lost 157 officials in 2016/17 and 205 officials during 2017/18. The restricted compensation budget had led to the suspension of the Aspirant Prosecutor Training while 53 officials had been transferred to DoJ&CD as part of the aspirant magistrate intake. Prosecutors were leaving the NPA, especially for the magistracy as the position was better paid and did not present the same unrelenting stress and demands on the time of prosecutors. 444 NPA officials had applied for 297 aspirant magistrate posts advertised on 16 March 2018. 850 prosecutors had applied for 208 posts in the magistrates’ courts. Currently, 70% of all magistrate posts were occupied by former public prosecutors from the NPA. The NPA was providing the magistracy with well-trained officials but it could not afford to lose more as the NPA was the centre of the criminal justice system.
Those appointments to the magistracy would add a further burden on prosecutors who remained in the NPA.

Adv Abrahams stressed that he was extremely concerned about the working conditions of public prosecutors who had no time for personal or family life and worked under enormous and unyielding pressure. It would be catastrophic if any more prosecutors were lost to the NPA. Other departments in the Justice cluster were advertising and filling posts but NPA, at the centre of the justice system, was not being given funds to fill posts although the Committee and National Treasury had recognised the case for investing in the NPA.

Adv Abrahams commented on some topical issues. He referred to the On-Point Engineering matter relating to charges of corruption against Economic Freedom Front leader, Julius Malema. He stated that an NGO had called a media briefing saying it would prosecute Julius Malema. That was a case that had been struck from the court roll in Limpopo when one of the accused had fallen ill. Adv Abrahams had, himself, initially approved prosecution and had reviewed the case when it was withdrawn for a somewhat flimsy reason. He had appointed a new investigating team and that team had already interviewed numerous witnesses. The NGO had opportunistically held a media briefing to announce that it would be conducting a private prosecution. However, the only time a private prosecution could be conducted was when the NPA had decided not to act on a case. That was not the case in the On-Point matter and a nolle prosequi certificate (indicating that the NPA had declined to prosecute) had not been issued as the case was at an advanced stage of investigation. Adv Abrahams was of the view that the NGO was grandstanding.

About the Duduzane Zuma case, Adv Abrahams reported that the Democratic Alliance had asked for a nolle prosequi certificate to institute a private prosecution. The matter had landed on his desk during the DA process. The NPA had to decide whether to prosecute. He was required to write to the person and request further documentation. In November or December 2017, he had written to Duduzane Zuma to request the required documentation and only when the matter came back to him, could he announce his decision. That was a normal process, and not specific to Duduzane Zuma. In his view there had been and there remained a reasonable prospect of a successful prosecution.

Adv Abrahams informed the Committee that criminal charges had been laid against him and other NPA staff. The allegations related to the use of a vehicle that he had allegedly utilised for his personal use. Further allegations had been laid against a number of NPA senior officials for an alleged fraudulent travel claim.

He vehemently and categorically denied all allegations that he had misused any vehicle. At no stage did he request a vehicle for himself or security from the witness programme. There was no corruption whatsoever involved in the use of the vehicle. He stated that the charges and allegations were a desperate campaign, based on an anonymous letter, by a particular NGO to besmirch the NPA. The remaining allegations were being investigated by other NPA members. He explained that the Integrity Management Unit (IMU) of the NPA had a mandate to investigate allegations of alleged misconduct by NPA officials and it was standard practice to refer allegations of criminality to the police. Regrettably, he could not comment further.

The NPA Head referred to report in a Sunday newspaper about alleged corruption in the rhino poaching unit. He had been briefed and the matter was receiving attention, but he had no further comment.

When appearing before the Committee the previous year, Adv Abrahams had spoken of the accountability structure. That was currently under consideration. In the event that it was concluded soon, it would go to the Minister who would forward it to the Committee. The NPA had been engaging with DoJ&CD on whether the NPA should be an entity within DoJ&CD or a separate entity. The NPA was of the opinion that it should be separate from DoJ&CD and that the NPPD should be the Accounting Officer for the NPA. If that were agreed to, it would require changes to the NPA Act.

He spoke about the legislation that currently allowed persons to appeal on fact and law, but the State could only appeal on matters of law. That Act was being reviewed and would be amended. The NPA was taking over the State Attorney’s role which required additional resources.

It would soon be the 20th anniversary of NPA Act of 16 Oct 1998. NPA would be reflecting on the 20 years. In September, the NPA was to host an international prosecutors’ conference. NPA would be attending the BRICS prosecutors’ conference. Lesotho had sent representatives of its prosecuting body to look at the Asset Forfeiture Unit as Lesotho was looking to prosecute corruption and money laundering crimes.

Discussion
The Chairperson thanked Adv Abrahams for a well-prepared report that showed he understood his mandate. He was concerned about those politicising the work of the NPA as it would confuse the public and create wrong impressions. Henoted that it seemed that the Hawks were running ahead of the NPA investigators but he expected that where there were reasonable suspicions about government, things had to be investigated. The difficulties experienced between justice agencies could not be attributed to the NPA because it seemed that Parliament had not ensured that the integrated justice system was fully functional. People wanted to live in a safe and secure environment.

His major concern had been that, where political role players were concerned, no prosecutions were taking place. However, it seemed that when things were ready, those people would be prosecuted without fear or favour. The Committee would not allow the NPA to be used to fight factions.

Mr M Maila (ANC) commented that the Chairperson had spoken of the integrated justice system. The previous week, Correctional Services officials had reported that there was a severe overcrowding problem but that the causes of overcrowding did not rest with them. They had referred to alternative sentencing and case management. What was NPA doing about managing the overcrowding. Was alternative sentencing not an option?

Ms M Mothapo (ANC) thanked Adv Abrahams for addressing very contentious issues in the public domain. The air had been cleared as people had been asking questions, especially about the Julius Malema issue. She asked Adv Abrahams about the recent appointment of Marco Voller to a newly created deputy position to Dr Silas Ramaite. There were allegations that the appointment was not properly advertised and that the NPA had created a position for a friend of the NDPP.

Ms Mothapo asked about the alleged instability within the NPA with respect to the Constitutional Court decision that was being awaited. What did he have to say about that? The NPA was making use of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act and PRECCA (Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act). Could the NPA explain the difference between the two Acts? Warm bodies were an important asset. 78 prosecutors had left and so many had applied for magistrate court positions. How many prosecutors did he have? Were they able to do the work?

Mr T Mulaudzi (EFF) was concerned about the effectiveness of the system in ensuring that no case dockets were lost. Over 5 000 cases had been reported to his organisation and they mostly related to key institutions like SAPS and NPA. Was the NPP aware of any docket referred to the NPA by Corruption Watch? On the Budget, there was a shortfall of R168 million for personnel compensation in 2018/19 and R435 million for the MTEF. The NPA had listed critical posts that could not be filled. Were all of those posts urgent?

Mr Mulaudzi noted that public prosecutors were applying to be magistrates. Was it because of the salary package? What could the NPA do about the situation? On Adv Abraham’s decision to charge Duduzane Zuma, he asked what consequence management would there be for the Johannesburg Director Of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who had ruled against prosecuting him. There was a gap between the NPA and the Johannesburg DPP. What was going on? He also asked for the statistics on rhino and elephant poaching.

He referred to the Vrede farm case that did not seem to have gone further than the initial charges. Did it mean that the NPA did not have the capacity to investigate further? Why were only officials charged and not members of the Executive and the MEC? It seemed very much as if the NPA could not investigate further. Mr Mulaudzi remarked that one could see the NPA teeth beginning to bite and he appreciated that.

Mr Horn referred to the matters in the public domain – the Duduzane Zuma and On-Point Engineering matters. Both matters had been non-starters as far back as 2015. It was now 2018 and, while he had to agree that, in principle, prosecutions are within the custody of the NPA, he was worried that it was only after NGOs began forcing the re-consideration of matters after three years – that the NPA was taking action, and that could never be acceptable. Everyone was entitled to finality if there were allegations against one. Did it mean that only matters brought by AfriForum would be addressed? What about ordinary citizens with a sword hanging over their heads for years while they waited for the NPA to make a decision?

Another concern was the ongoing discord between the NPA and the Hawks. Lt Gen Yolisa Matakata, Hawks Acting Head, had complained that the NPA took 12 months to decide on dockets. The two had kissed and made up following a U-turn by the Lt Gen Yolisa Matakata, in a Portfolio Committee and that Mr Abrahams had apologised in private. What was the situation and were the two agencies working together?

On the budget, Hr Horn asked to what extent budgetary constraints had caused a downturn in results, or had there been other causes. That morning Legal Aid South Africa had provided the Committee with measurable statistics to show that they were underfunded, such as the caseload per person and other details. He asked what caseload a prosecutor should have and what caseload did they actually have. He noted that targets for conviction rates in courts had been downgraded for 2018/19. How many prosecutors were now in the NPA as opposed to three years previously? What were the average court hours per prosecutor?

Mr Horn asked about the Thuthuzela Care Centres (TTCs) and Sexual Offences courts. What was happening there? The target for TTCs had been 68 and but had been adjusted downwards to 55. Was the NPA of the view that Sexual Offences courts should be phased out? He could not see that being advisable, not with scale of sexual and domestic violence in South Africa.

Data from the Quarter 3 of 2017/18 showed that a number of targets on corruption, freezing orders and recovery from government officials had not been met. The presentation today showed, on slides 13 and 15, lofty targets set for the current and the coming years. Targets of R6 billion had been set. Another target had moved from R2.5 million to a target of R2.5 billion. Were the units incorrect or did the NPA believe that it was going to recover state capture funds?

The Chairperson was happy that Members’ questions had been directed at the APP and the budget. But the Committee had to place on record that the Committee was not going to be driven by the media. Julius Malema was a high-profile politician. Did those who wanted to prosecute him do so for political gain? Must the NPA leave other matters and chase those matters that the media was interested in? The case of the North West Premier and the cattle he allegedly sent to Nkandla – would that be the next question from the media? He wanted to see a well-capacitated NPA that functioned effectively without others trying to drive the NPA agenda.

The Chairperson raised the question of the Hawks and the National Director. Why had the NPA not shared documents with colleagues and then had taken another document to the media. Were the two agencies working together effectively? However, one could not expect the NDPP to read the newspapers and to investigate according to what others wanted prosecuted.

Mr L Mpumlwana (ANC) asked about cases of people who had committed crimes during apartheid. Most of them did not go to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. How far was the NPA in trying to deal with those crimes? Currently, quite a number of crimes, like selling drugs, were committed by foreigners, for example, Nigerians. What did the Nigerians want in South Africa? Were they refugees? How did it affect the NPA? The NPA had to be proactive and negotiate with Home Affairs to resolve problems.

Mr Mpumlwana was not sure that he understood democracy as since it had come in 1994, a number of NGOs had come in and directed the state. He wondered who paid the NGOs. And then there were newspapers that pulled everyone in a particular direction. How did they affect the NPA? Maybe ordinary poor people were suffering because the money was pushed towards cases highlighted by media. People were murdered in rural areas and nothing happened. He asked the NPA to help vulnerable people.

How long was the average court day and how did it affect the work of prosecutors? How did the question of language in court affect the work? For example, a policeman wrote a report in English, which he did not understand, and then it was difficult to understand his report in court, which was usually held in English, but which the poor people could not understand.

Lastly, Mr Mpumlwana asked that when the NPA officials went back to their offices, could they please check which Acts and Regulations were hindering their work and indicate to the Committee what changes could be made and for what reason. They could write to the Chairperson who would then arrange for the Committee to assist the NPA.

Responses
Mr Abrahams replied about the integrated justice system and overcrowding. Firstly, the role of the prosecutor was significant in sentencing as the prosecutor made submissions on the sentence to be imposed. The prosecutor could also ask for a victim impact statement that would be read in court, and there was the probation report from the correctional supervision officer which made recommendations on supervision versus incarceration. In addition, there was a committee that met monthly to interrogate the situation of those awaiting trial in prison for a long time. The cases of those who had been given bail, but for whom the amount had been too high to make bail, were revisited and they might be taken back to court for the magistrate to adjust the bail conditions. The issue of parole lay with the Minister, Correctional Services and the Parole Board.

He responded to questions about Marco Voller. He was an attorney employed by the Department of Trade and Industry who had been transferred laterally to the Office of the National Director, seven months after Mr Abrahams’ appointment. He was not a Special Director, but a legal advisor appropriately appointed. He worked in Dr Ramaite’s office and his responsibilities were those of an NPA legal advisor, looking at contracts and other legal matters. He had filled the vacancy left by the departure of Gerhard Nel.

The question about instability was a question posed and answered in his previous appearance before the Committee. Everyone was waiting for the judgement of the Constitutional Court. The staff was concerned about how it would impact on the institution but there was no instability. On the previous occasion, only one out of the four Deputy National Directors of Public Prosecutions had indicated that there was any indication of instability. The rest had not been in agreement.

Adv Govender would respond to questions by Ms Mothapo about POCA and PRECCA and Dr Ramaite, the DPP who managed Administration, would respond to questions about warm bodies.

Adv Abrahams stated that it was highly unlikely that case dockets had been lost or misplaced. The NPA would be able to pick up if a docket was missing as there were registers of matters received and where they went to as each person had to log in to use a docket and indicate where it had gone to when that person was finished with it. He referred to the dockets that had been lost in Nyanga. 1000 dockets had gone missing, but they were found, read and the issues placed before court, where appropriate. There were mechanisms to find documents but the situation in Nyanga should never have arisen. He indicated that the NPA was happy to work with Corruption Watch, but he assumed that the NGO had a complaint and not a docket.

Were all posts urgent? Adv Abrahams was very definite that they were. He added that otherwise he would not raise the challenges. He would ask the Deputy Public Prosecutors (DPPs) to go back and look at court hours, dockets per prosecutor as they were things that had to be considered. He had already asked DPPs to further cut to the bone so that the NPA could revisit figures. He told the Committee that the work of prosecutors was immense. A typical day in the lower court meant that in the afternoon, after having spent the day in court, the prosecutor received a batch of dockets and charge sheets for the following day. The prosecutor had to interview witnesses and undertake legal research in order to make submissions to court. The prosecutor had to know the case, know the witnesses, prepare for court and start on time the following morning. The process was repeated on a daily basis. There were no weekends and no evenings, so the family suffered. The inability to fill vacancies led to more work per prosecutor who ultimately became ill or took to drugs or alcohol. Prosecutors dealt with stresses and pressures differently and no one even knew if the prosecutors had family problems.

Work in the magistracy was much less stressful and it was obvious that many prosecutors would find it a relief to work as a magistrate. Dr Ramaite would talk about other reasons for the problems, but Adv Abrahams knew of prosecutors who willingly took salary cuts to get other jobs.

Would he take action against the Johannesburg DPP on the decision take about Duduzane Zuma? The previous time that he had appeared before the Committee, he had given the figures for the number of times that he had disagreed and overridden a DPP decision. It had not been an oversight because the DPPs had applied their minds and the reality in their profession was that they sometimes disagreed, hence the legislation allowed the NPP to be final arbitrator. He would not take steps against the DPP who had not acted contrary to the Constitution, NPA policies or the rule of law.

Adv Abrahams would provide the Committee with the detailed statistics of rhino poaching in writing. Investigations were ongoing into the Vrede Dairy case and, unfortunately, he could not divulge information at that stage. He pointed out that it was not the NPA who actually undertook the investigations but the prosecutor on a case would guide the police in their investigations. It was known as a prosecutor-led investigation.

In response to the question about the delays in the Duduzane Zuma and On-Point matters, Adv Abrahams stated that delays were not deliberate. In the On-Point matter, he had received representation on the eve of the trial in 2015. He had decided on the Sunday that prosecution should proceed, but the matter was struck from the roll because of the illness of one of the accused. He personally did not think that there was sufficient reason for striking the case off the roll, but that had given time for further investigations, which he had requested the police to do. While the investigations were ongoing, but nearing completion, an NGO had written to say that it was already engaging on the matter. When the NGO had gone public, he was surprised because he was almost ready to prosecute.

On the Duduzane Zuma case, the inquest had been held but when it was concluded, the magistrate made the recommendation not to prosecute. However, the matter was not given to the NPA until recently, so there was no deliberate delay in that case.

The NPA was always willing to work with NGOs, especially those that worked within the law and upheld constitutional values. But NGOs were approaching the NPA with the aim of litigating but the doors of the NPA had never been closed to them. He cautioned that just because an NGO assumed a position, that did not mean that it was the correct position.

Adv Abrahams did not know about the story about Lieutenant General Yolisa Matakata and there had certainly been no apology from him in private or otherwise. He was currently in discussion with the Hawks about current and outstanding matters.

He stressed that the NPA was looking at itself and interrogating its systems and programmes before asking for additional money, but the equal distribution of work was important.

Adv Silas Ramaite, Deputy National Public Prosecutor, stated that Marco Voller worked under him in the national office, and, in that sense, worked under Adv Abrahams. He thought that he could give the administration circumstances under which he had come over from DTI. Gerard Nel had been the legal advisor and had checked contracts etc. but had resigned. Mr Voller had filled that position. In addition, he was the legal advisor to the NPA. He was a DPP and his functions were assigned by the NPA which included sitting in discussions to advise on decisions to be taken. Adv Ramaite was responsible for all administrative people and he had received various suggestions when the post became vacant. Generally, the persons proposed were not suitable but, ultimately, Marco Voller was taken as he was able to do the work, and he worked on reviewing contractual obligations. Marco Voller was engaged in relooking at the NPA to see where it could save. He had been instructed to look at communication contracts, computer contracts, etc. At the moment he was the only person suitable for the position.

The Chairperson indicated that he was happy, and the Committee did not want to engage in micro-management, so the NPA could move on. Dr Ramaite would submit a written reply to the questions about human resource details.

Ms Hanika can Zyl, NPA Acting Chief Director, Finance, stated that the NPA had a vacancy rate of 16% at the end of the previous financial year.

Adv Malini Govender, NPA Special Director, explained that POCA was the Prevention of Organised Crime Act which was intended to combat organised crime, money laundering and criminal gang activities. PRECCA was the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act which was intended to prevent and combat unlawful gratifications and benefiting from contracts. It aimed to prevent and fight corruption in government and in the private sector.

Adv Abrahams indicated that he was happy to supply answers in writing to the questions that still needed response.

The Chairperson informed Members they would have to attend the sitting in the National Assembly. He was of the view that the NPA consisted of professionals who had to act without fear or favour and in respect of the Constitution. He stressed that Parliament was not going to be driven by outside agendas. He appreciated the transparency and all the answers to Members’ questions. The NPA would be caught in cross-fire as people were brought to justice. He thanked Adv Abrahams for the report.

He understood the supplementary request for funding. Underfunding was not good for the country and the Committee would support the NPA request for additional funding. The doors were always open to attend to any issues. He also appreciated the NPA Spokesperson who was very eloquent and never misrepresented the situation. He reminded Adv Abrahams that the Committee had requested more detail on the warm bodies and details of the request for supplements to the Budget.

The meeting was adjourned.

Audio

No related

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.

Share this page: