Committee Programme, Focus Areas & Operational matters

This premium content has been made freely available

Justice and Correctional Services

12 February 2020
Chairperson: Mr G Magwanishe (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Committee meeting followed a two-day strategic planning session the previous week. The Committee Programme for Quarter 1 was revised to reflect decisions made at the strategic planning meeting and formally presented to the Committee for adoption. Principles underlying the revised programme included a need to address matters before things became a crisis. The Committee did not want to be found not to have met certain deadlines, so the Committee would deal with a range of issues and not just focus on one aspect of its work at a time. In addition, departments and entities could not be expected to answer questions on all areas in one meeting. By focussing on specific areas, the Committee could go deeper instead of wider in its questioning. Key briefings would be by the Department of Justice and the National Prosecuting Authority. A public hearing would be held on the Prescription in Civil and Criminal Matters (Sexual Offences) Amendment Bill (B22-2019) and the process of appointing a new member of the Information Regulator would take place.

The Sub-Committee on Correctional Services was included in the programme, as well as its report back to the full Committee on Tuesdays. Briefings in the first term would be by the Department of Correctional Services and the Judicial Inspectorate of Correctional Services.

The Committee Content Advisor presented the key focus areas for the Committee as identified in the strategic planning session. A key decision at the strategic planning meeting had been to look into ways of expanding public participation in the work of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services beyond public hearings on Bills and input during appointments. Public participation in the affairs of the Committee would be investigated, with stakeholders and the public generally being invited to propose ways in which there could be greater stakeholder/public participation.

Meeting report

Opening Remarks

The Chairperson apologised for changing the time of the meeting but explained that it had clashed with the meeting of the Joint Intelligence Committee meeting.

He explained that at the strategic planning meetings on 4 and 5 February 2020, it was agreed to finalise the strategic plan at this meeting, approve the Committee Programme for Quarter 1 based on decisions made at the strategic planning meeting, to note the key focus areas of Justice and Correctional Services and to listen to some preliminary thoughts from the Research Unit on increasing public participation following the decision at the planning meeting to focus on expanding public participation in the work of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services. That topic would not be concluded at the meeting as it would be an ongoing one. What had to be concluded was the programme for the first term, as well as the thematic areas for Justice and Correctional Services.

The Chairperson wished Mr W Horn (DA) the best for the new year as he had been unable to attend the planning session.

Mr Horn reciprocated the greeting to the Chairperson, Committee Members and staff.

The Chairperson wished all guests and the media the best for 2020. He requested the Secretary of the Committee to present the Committee Programme.

Presentation of the Committee Programme

Mr Siyabamkela Mthonjeni, Committee Secretary, noted that the secretariat had revised the programme and emailed it to Members only. Obviously the programme began with the day’s meeting and the State of the Nation Address (SONA) on the following day, 12 February 2020.

18 February 2020: Briefing on the Prescription in Civil and Criminal Matters (Sexual Offences) Amendment Bill (B22-2019), and on two treaties. The Bill had been advertised the previous weekend and invited public comment. There was a vacancy for a member of the Information Regulator (IR). Normally the Committee advertised on the website and asked applicants to complete a questionnaire. That process would have to be discussed at the meeting.

19 February 2020: Briefing by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on Quarterly Reports for the 2nd and 3rd Quarters – the focus would be on performance against expenditure, organisational realignment plan, key vacancies, consequence management and update of key focus areas. Briefing by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) on Quarterly Reports for the 2nd and 3rd Quarters – performance against expenditure, recruitment plan, progression in establishing the Investigative Directorate. The Auditor-General would also be invited to provide additional information.

21 February 2020: Sub-Committee: Department of Correctional Services (DCS) matters: 3rd Quarter Financial Performance DCS.

25 February 2020: Two Bills advertised – Public hearings: both on same day as there were few submissions; shortlisting of the Information Regulator.

26 February 2020: Briefing by DOJ – update on state litigation policy, etc ; Special Investigating Unit (SIU) update on State Attorney’s Office and Master’s Office; Deliberation on Customary Marriages Bill.

28 February 2020:  DCS Sub-Committee - Judicial Inspectorate of Correctional Services (JICS); Justice Cameron and his vision for JICS.

3 March 2020: DoJ – Response on the Customary Marriages Bill; Briefing by the Magistrates Commission - Disciplinary matters and systematic challenges in disciplinary matters.

4 March 2020: Interviews for a member of the Information Regulator.

6 March 2020 DCS Sub-Committee -  DSC detainees with less than R1000 bail and programmes for remand centres.

10 March 2020: Joint meetings with the Portfolio Committee on Police. The Chairpersons would discuss the agenda.

11 March 2020: Public hearings on the Prescription in Civil and Criminal Matters (Sexual Offences) Amendment Bill.

13 March 2020 DCS Sub-Committee: DCS – audit report: irregularities expenditure, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, Programme on Incarceration.

17 March 2020 – Debate on responses to the Sexual Offences Bill; deliberation on the IR nomination.

18 March 2020 – Adoption of Committee Report on IR vacancy; deliberations on the Bill.

20 March 2020 DCS Sub-Committee: Parole system and high profile inmates.

Discussion

The Chairperson called for comments on the programme.

Adv H Mohamed (ANC) asked for clarity around the principle position on the Correctional Services meetings on Fridays. Would it be a full Committee meeting or how would it be reconciled with the full Committee? Would the matters be finalised at the Friday meeting? For example, Judge Cameron would make his first appearance before the Committee as a new inspectorate judge. He supposed no decisions would be taken on Fridays; it would be more information-sharing.

Adv Mohamed pointed out that, regarding the filling of the vacancy in the Information Regulator (IR), the Committee would need time to address processes to be followed in the short-listing and so on.

Adv S Swart (ACDP) asked for clarity as why there was the urgency to finalise the extradition treaty to be addressed the following week? Why was it prioritised? It was just a question; he was not disagreeing. Was the Committee going to be briefed by the Departmental officials involved in international relations, and if so, what was the delay in the same extradition treaty and mutual legal obligations? He was not sure which entity or department would be responsible for that treaty. What were the challenges in the implementation of the United Arab Emirates treaty?

Adv Swart did not understand the numbers on the programme that followed the Correctional Services Sub-Committee agenda items. What was the correlation? He trusted that the engagement with the DOJ, the NPA and the Auditor-General would allow for more broad-based questions? For example, he wanted an update from the NPA on the prosecution of high profile cases and on the investigative directorate.

Ms N Maseko-Jele (ANC) added that she would want a report from the NPA on the off-shore cases where people took money out of the country. She understood that the agreement had been to look at all vacancies, not only those in the NPA. The internal cases at the NPA had to be reported on, particularly those that had been withdrawn, e.g. the South African Revenue Services case. The high profile cases were being delayed and withdrawn. She asked if those issues would possibly be covered by the discussion on the Investigating Unit.

Adv G Breytenbach (DA) asked how the vacancy in the Information Regulator had arisen. She was concerned because the IR had not done very much in the past three or four years. What the IR had done could fill the bottom of a thimble and so perhaps the Committee should investigate that aspect while filling vacancies.

The Chairperson said that before he attempted to answer the questions, he had to remind Members that the Committee could not deal with everything in the first term. The Committee had decided not to expect the entities to answer questions on everything under the sun, but to be specific. The entities would be alerted in advance about the areas to be focused on so that the Committee could go deeper instead of wider in its questioning. In the past, departments had arrived with 18 people because they were trying to cover every possible question that could be asked.  Anything not covered by the end of first term, would be covered in the following terms but the decisions had been to focus on specific issues.

The Chairperson recalled that it had been agreed to allow space in the Tuesday meeting for a report back from the Correctional Services Sub-Committee, so the secretariat had to make space for that report-back in the Tuesday meetings. Mr informed Adv Swart that the treaty was being addressed so that everything was addressed before things became a crisis. The Committee did not want to be found not to have met its deadlines. The Committee would deal with a range of issues and not just focus on one aspect of its work at a time. The issue of the United Arab Emirates Treaty should be a separate briefing. In the following week the Committee would deal with the Bangladesh Treaty.

The Chairperson informed Adv Breytenbach that he had reported the previous year, that one of the IR Commissioners, Prof Tana Pistorius had resigned, and the vacancy would be filled. The IR had to present on its Performance Plan later in the year and that would provide an opportunity to interrogate the IR. He explained to Ms Maseko-Jele that her question was similar to Adv Swart’s and the same reasoning of focussing on going deeper into issues applied, so her issues would also be addressed later in the year. The Committee could not address the whole programme of the Committee in the first few weeks. For example, some of the Bills, such as the Hate Speech Bill, was part of the programme but would be dealt with later because the Committee was awaiting the Constitutional Court decision.

Mr Q Dyantyi (ANC) noted that the meeting was intended to formalise two days of work the previous week. He appreciated the programme drawn up by the support staff. In briefings by departments and entities, the quarterly expenditure had to cut across all issues. Everyone had to account in respect of the quarterly report. He noted that the Committee would be dealing with Quarter 2 and Quarter 3 reports, but the interest was really in the quarter ending in December. He did not know if the Committee wanted to go back to the Second Quarter. The previous time that the NPA had presented, it had been asked to present a turnaround strategy. He cautioned that the Members’ expectations should be tempered as there were certain issues that could not be discussed by the NPA in a public meeting and the Committee needed to be aware of that, especially Members who wanted to hear about high profile cases. 

Mr Dyantyi informed Adv Swart that the numbers he had referred to on the programme related to the Sub-Committee on Correctional Services agenda which showed how the items linked to the strategic plan.

Mr Dyantyi told Adv Mohamed that either there was a Sub-Committee or there was no Sub-Committee, but it had a feedback loop. However, Adv Mohamed was welcome to attend the Sub-Committee should there be an item of interest, although the feedback loop would ensure that no one missed out. There would be no clash and no contradiction.

Mr Dyantyi alerted the Committee to the fact that the Chairperson of the Committee could adapt the Committee Programme, depending on any emergency issues. It was a dynamic programme. That was the way it would also happen in the Sub-Committee. Unannounced visits could not be programmed.

The Chairperson said that quite a bit of work had been identified and the House would be sitting and debating the SONA the following week. There were days where more time might be needed. The Committee would need to identify such days beforehand. He was particularly worried about the agenda for 19 February 2020. Secondly, the entities had to be informed of the programme immediately as they had to prepare.

Adv Swart pointed out that there were a number of constitutional deadlines facing the Committee and Members had agreed to be aware of them, especially as there were a number of Bills that were still not before the Committee.

The Chairperson stated that he would have to inform the entities about the changes that the Committee was introducing and maybe even meet with the heads of entities so that the Committee could present its new approach. He requested the Research Unit to present the focus areas of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services.

Presentation on key areas to focus on

Ms Christine Silkstone, Committee Content Advisor, asked for guidance as the Justice issues were quite long.

The Chairperson asked her to focus on the specific issues that had been identified in the strategic planning meeting. Those issues would be fitted into the Committee programme throughout the year by Ms Silkstone and the secretariat.

Ms Sikstone listed a number of item.

  1. Addressing the Qualified Audit Opinion of the DoJ:

-monitoring the implementation of the audit-turnaround and stabilisation plan;

-management of the cap on the salaries budget which was related to the organisational realignment plan;

- the management of the new financial management plan to replace the justice yellow pages -  part of the audit turnaround plan

- monitoring the supply chain management within the department;

- enforcement of discipline consequences for non-compliance, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure

2. Finalisation of the organisational realignment model:

    - monitoring the finalisation and implementation of the organisational realignment model;

    - filling vacancies at SMS level and in critical positions in line with the realignment model.

 

3. Improved service delivery:

 – monitoring the provision of training at the Justice College as well as its resourcing and capacitation;

 - monitoring of the service delivery improvement plan.

 

4.Integrated Criminal Justice Strategy, incorporating the Integrated Justice System(IJS):

-Monitoring the implementation of the plan;

-monitoring the roll-out and spending on the IJS, in conjunction with other affected departments.

 

5.Transformation of State Legal Services:

 - addressing the fragmented approach to litigation;

 - fraud and corruption within the state legal services - monitoring progress of SIU investigations;

 - abuse of legal processes leading to spiralling costs;

 - identifying the need for the development of legislation around the fragmented approach and policy around briefing patterns.

 

6.Transformed legal professions:

- monitoring progress of the Bill to regulate the paralegal sector

- monitoring progress on the Legal Practice Act

- engaging with stakeholders to identify problems within the legal sector and functioning as a whole.

 

7. Capital Works programme: new court buildings:

- monitoring of the with the Department of Public Works, the Expanded Public Works Programme, and the Development Bank SA.

- tracking expenditure.

- monitoring maintenance of court buildings with DPW.

 

8.Eradicating gender-based violence.

 

The Chairperson thanked Ms Silkstone. He noted that some of the issues were already in the programme but he thought that she should start linking the issues to the 2nd Quarter programme. He also asked that she should present a list of all operational decisions taken at the strategic planning session at the next meeting.

Expanding Public/Stakeholder Participation
The Chairperson informed Members that the preliminary views on the stakeholder participation was for discussion only and that no decisions would be taken at the meeting. The Research Unit had been requested to prepare a document on the question asked by Mr Dyantyi. That would be the starting point. He asked the Committee Researcher what progress she had made regarding the matter.

The Researcher explained that a memorandum had been developed on Expanding Public/ Stakeholder Participation. At present public/ stakeholder participation related to public hearings for Bills and the engagement of stakeholders when the Committee was involved in appointments to public bodies. In addition, stakeholders wrote to Chairperson or to individual Members. The limited engagement was largely as a result of the workload of the Committee and the lack of time to engage.

She added that, at the meeting the previous week, it was decided to ask for written submissions around events or issues such as the budget. The proposal was, therefore, to invite the public to make written submissions on particular events, such as the forward funding needs of a department. The risk was that the response might be overwhelming and the Committee had to be mindful of its own resources and of being respectful of the public. When asking for input, Members should be mindful of the associated risks.

The Chairperson stated that the proposals had not moved beyond the proposals of the previous week. He asked the Research Unit to circulate a document, but it needed careful application of the mind as the risk was that an overwhelming response could cause the whole thing to collapse. It was good that the Researcher was alerting the Committee to the risks. The Committee should first answer the question: what was wrong with what it had (in respect of public participation)?

Mr Dyantyi added that, even as they sat in that meeting, the public was with the Committee. Rape Crisis was attending the meeting. He suggested that the Committee should involve the stakeholders in the question of how to engage the public. They should advise what they think should be done to improve. The Committee should involve stakeholders even in the proposal. The Committee might think that it was doing well, but the stakeholders might think differently. He assumed that there was a database of stakeholders. The Committee should give stakeholders seven days to submit comments. Rape Crisis was mobile but what about other less mobile organisations that were not as accessible to resources as Rape Crisis was?

He added that improved involvement was an innovation, and not a result of the Committee doing anything wrong.

The Chairperson agreed. He did not believe there would be a counter to the proposal by Mr Dyantyi. He requested a proposal inviting stakeholders to comment.

Ms Maseko-Jele reflected on the issue of the stakeholders and citizens who sent complaints to Parliament. The Committee was trying to reach stakeholders and a lot of letters would be sent to the Committee. It would require time to deal with such things. Would the Committee have time to deal with the issues?

The Chairperson explained that the Committee would have to take a comprehensive look at the whole issue, including that aspect. The document from the Research Unit would look at all those issues, including inviting the public to contribute.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.

The meeting was adjourned.
 

Documents

No related documents

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: