Department of Justice Budget Briefing

Meeting report

SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
2 June 2004
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BUDGET BRIEFING

Chairperson: Kgoshi L Mokoena

Documents handed out:
Budgetary Document 2003/04 - 2006/07
Chief Finance Officer's briefing

SUMMARY
The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development briefed the committee on its 2004 / 2005 budget. The Minister and Deputy Minister also briefly commented on the controversy between the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Public Protector. The Committee was briefed on the Department's process of restructuring and activities that it had been engaged in over the last decade. Much of the briefing focused on the Department's efforts in restructuring SA's inefficient court system. The latter part of the briefing entailed a breakdown of the Department's budget. The Committee raised numerous concerns about the accessibility, efficiency, capacity and resourcing of South Africa's courts.

MINUTES
Mr V Pikoli, the Director General (DG), Mr A Mackenzie, the Chief Financial Officer and Mr S Jiyani, the Head of Court Services made up the Departmental delegation. The Minister of Justice, Ms S Mabandla and the Deputy Minister of Justice Mr J De Lange were briefly present as well.

The Minister commented briefly about the unfortunate incident that had played itself out in the media between the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Public Protector. She said that it was an indication of new norms and standards that needed to be set up. The matter was now before parliament and the Minister felt that it would be resolved.

Deputy Minister De Lange felt that the aforementioned incident would be exacerbated if it were to be made a political issue. He emphasized that it should be remembered that institutions were bigger than individuals. Mr De Lange said that greater interaction between the Department and the Committee should be encouraged.

The Ministers left the meeting shortly hereafter.

Prior to the commencement of the briefing, the Chair commented on the lack of briefing documents. Mr Pikoli apologized and explained that he had been under the impression that the Ministers were to do most of the speaking and that the rest of the delegation would be present mainly to answer questions. He was however able to circulate a very comprehensive document on the budget, which would later be used by Mr Mackenzie. The DG agreed to give a detailed briefing in the absence of documents.

Mr Pikoli undertook the first leg of the briefing by giving background to the evolutionary development of the Department since 1994. The Department had inherited a legacy of outdated and discriminatory legislation prior to 1994. Much of SA's old legislation had to be abolished and new laws had to be put in place reflecting SA's new constitutional dispensation. Prior to 1994 the Department had a fragmented structure. Each division was racially based and had to deal with its specific racial groups, for instance the Bantustan divisions. The process of amalgamation started in 1995 and ended in 1997. A new management structure was put in place and in essence it signaled the rebirth of the Department. Mr Pikoli said that our constitution was the guiding force behind the activities of the Department. To date 115 pieces of legislation had been passed and an additional 179 pieces were in the pipeline.

The Department was responsible for the running of 747 courts and the employment of 13000 people to staff them. Following the restructuring of the Department, regional offices had to be established since Justice did not have MEC's. The regional offices would be a direct link to the local courts so as to prevent delays. However with the inception of the new government in 1999, a new policy was adopted. It was decided to dissolve the regional offices as it was felt that running them were too costly. A new model was thus introduced at the end of 2000 and in 2001 it was implemented. Mr Pikoli said that the new model focused on the empowerment of courts themselves. The new model provided for the appointment of court managers to improve service delivery, in other words, quicker disposal of matters. In the past the administration of courts was often in the hands of magistrates. The DG said the impact of the change would not be felt immediately. It was by no way a perfect solution as the proper training of managers was where success lied.

The new model outlined the value chain from the moment of arrest up until the sentencing of perpetrators. A National Crime Prevention Strategy was put in place in 1996. It however required all government Departments to add value to the value chain.

Mr Pikoli continued with the Strategic Plan of the Department. He said that it encompassed two key result areas, viz. access to justice and the transformation of the justice service.

In the past inequalities had existed in access to justice. Rural and black townships were the worst hit. In 1994 a survey revealed that KwaZulu-Natal and Limpopo had the worst court facilities. Buildings were in a bad state of disrepair. The Department thus had to focus on the physical state of courts. Mr Pikoli was proud to announce that 50 new courts had been established. The Department together with the Department of Public Works was trying to fast track the upgrading of court buildings, as well as improving the functioning of courts as a whole. As a result the Re-agabuswa Project had been launched.

The DG noted that proper integration was needed for the Department to function well. Forty-five Integrated Justice Centers had thus been set up to facilitate the process. The focus was on co-ordination between the police, prosecutors and others to work together in order to ensure that matters were ready to be put on the court roll. Some of the issues would be to ensure that dockets were not missing or that witnesses were present.

Mr Pikoli said that non-payment of child maintenance was a major problem in SA. In many instances new legislation would be passed without consideration for its implementation. The Child Justice Bill was given as an example. The DG pointed out that new legislation often had budgetary implications on other Departments as well. He said that an inter-Departmental task team should be in place to assess the financial impact that the new legislation would have.

The Department was also engaged in the training of traditional leaders in the law. The Minister had the discretion to confer civil and criminal jurisdictions upon traditional leaders at local government level. This would ease the burden on the more mainstream courts.

Mr Jiyani kicked off the second leg of the briefing by giving some background on the Re-agabuswa Project that the DG had previously alluded to. It was started two years ago as a pilot project in KZN and had been implemented in a phased approach. Having been successful, the Department has initiated roll-out in Gauteng, the Free State and the Western Cape. The intention was to improve the performance of the courts. This would be done by appointing court managers and the required personnel to improve service delivery whilst at the same time keeping costs down. Mr Jiyani pointed out that the project in the KZN had saved the Department a total of R7.5m thus far.

Child maintenance was once again identified as a major problem. The huge bottlenecks at child maintenance courts were identified as a priority area. Successful efforts were being made to address problem areas. Increased staffing and the introduction of computers at maintenance courts had alleviated bottlenecks. Information Technology systems were also in place to assist maintenance investigators in the tracking of perpetrators.

Mr Jiyani elaborated further on the role of local courts over which traditional leaders would preside. Every effort was being made to bring the quality of service of these courts on par with mainstream courts.

Mr Jiyani noted that the process of rationalizing courts was on track as criteria for an interim act had been finalized. The jurisdiction of High Courts was to be aligned with that of the Constitution.

Mr Mackenzie undertook the third and final leg of the briefing by giving the Committee a detailed budgetary report. It comprised of a breakdown of figures of allocations and expenditures for the various business units of the Department for the financial years 2003/04 - 2006/07. He highlighted areas where budgets had increased or decreased. Court Services was identified as a problem area. Staffing was under-funded by 26%.

Mr Mackenzie said that much of the budgetary problems experienced by the Department were because it had inherited a legacy of debt of other Departments that Justice had undertaken to pay in the past. The total debt amounted to R156m and no records existed over the accountability of these Departments in repaying the amount to Justice. Mr Mackenzie said that the Department was in essence being under funded by this amount. The Department had been instructed to write off R60m against its savings in 2003. The Department hopes to write off the remaining R100m within the next two years.

Discussion
Mr B Mkhaliphi (ANC) requested more information about the Justice College. He asked how many people had been trained; what kind of training had been provided; and how it addressed the national shortage of skills. He then asked how the Department ensured access to justice for everyone. Mr Mkhaliphi also asked about the progress on the rationalisation of the High Courts, such as the Mpumalanga High Court located in Johannesburg. Lastly, he enquired about the decrease in the budget for forensic training.

Mr V Pikoli responded that the Justice College ensured that students got involved with prosecutors, judicial matters and the Master's Office. He noted that Mpumalanga like Limpopo would soon have its own High Court. The Department was in the process of building the internal capacity of forensics. Increases in budgets would be crucial to the completion of the process.

Mr J Le Roux (DA) asked about the Public Works Department's responsibility for the maintenance of court buildings. He wondered how the court managers would assist in speeding up cases in courts.

Mr Pikoli said that court managers had been appointed to ensure a system of separation of powers between magistrates, prosecutors and administrators. Courts needed persons specialising in management and administration matters so that magistrates could focus on their duties on the bench. He emphasized that there was a need to enable court managers at lower level to engage public works on issues of court maintenance.

Mr D Worth (DA) asked about the administration of courts and whether there was any solution to the backlog of cases. He proposed that the Department should consider the tagging of files in order to prevent it from going missing. Mr Worth also felt that the upgrading and renovation of court buildings should be a priority.

Mr Pikoli answered that an E-Justice programme was introduced to deal with problems relating to missing files. A pilot programme had been set up in Johannesburg and in Durban. He explained that an electronic version of dockets would be created in cases of stolen or missing dockets so as to prevent matters from being withdrawn from the court roll.

Ms P Hollander (ANC) asked what relationship existed between the Department and other government Departments. She also asked what the Department's efforts were in the provision of safe houses for women and children.

Mr Pikoli pointed out that the Department was considering the idea of more secure care facilities for children with properly trained staff. The Departments of Education and Correctional Services would be involved in the project.

Mr Z Ntuli (ANC) suggested the use of prisoners to upgrade and build courts. He then asked what mechanism had been used in trying to stop the disappearance of witnesses.

Mr Pikoli said that the use of prisoners for hard labour had been outlawed. The Department had budgeted a total of R250m to cover all needed services. This included the building and renovation of courts. Mr Pikoli noted that the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions had established a programme to deal with the problem of disappearing witnesses. Closer co-operation between police, the prosecution services and potential witnesses would be needed.

Mr A Moseki (ANC) asked why some courts had antiquated names, such as the Venda High Court. He felt that the Department needed to address the issue of gender equity as the delegation was entirely male-dominated. He asked why there was a shortage of skilled black lawyers in SA.

Mr Pikoli agreed that the Transvaal Division; Natal Division and Venda High Court were still misnamed but that efforts in re-naming them were currently before Parliament. The D-G responded that the Department had done relatively well with regard to gender balancing and would provide figures on the breakdown in terms of race, gender and disability to the Committee. The Department had an equity plan in place.
Mr Pikoli noted that the legal profession was of such a nature that it was difficult to gain entry into it. Individuals wishing to enter the profession needed to be strong and independent. Gender equality was present even in the courts where of 80 judges, 23 were females

Mr S Shiceka (ANC) requested the Department to provide the Committee with their strategic plan. He asked how they would address the question of various attorneys and prosecutors not having right of appearance in the High Court. He noted that the lack of co-operation between investigators and prosecutors led to the public having little confidence in the justice system.

The Department had at the outset of the briefing agreed to forward their strategic plan to the Committee. Mr Pikoli noted that in the past attorneys had obtained right of appearance in the high court depending on the experience they had.

A question was asked about the possibility of the Justice College being included under the portfolio of the Department of Education. It was asked what was being done to ensure the constitutionality of the Department's Bills.

A question was asked over the implications of racial remarks being passed from the bench. Concerns were also raised over the accessibility of the legal system to the people. The Department was asked to comment on the issue of lay assessors.

Mr Pikoli said that it would not be a good idea for the Justice College to be under the Department of Education because they were totally separate. The Justice College programme provided in-service training, the focus of which was on magistrates, prosecutors and interpreters. He noted that the possibility of relocating the College was being considered.

Mr Pikoli said that the Department tried to avoid problems with the constitutionality of its Bills at all cost.
Racial remarks passed from the bench would be dealt with by way of appeal or a letter of grievance. However, on actual legal issues, facts and the law one had to follow the required channels, which might end up going to the highest, court i.e. Constitutional Court.

Mr Pikoli mentioned dispute resolution as another way of ensuring access. It would be a viable alternative as litigation costs often prevented persons from going to court. In as much as Legal Aid provided free legal services, many individuals felt their services to be of an inferior quality. Lay assessors had also been appointed to sit with magistrates to assist in lay matters.

Mr Jiyane said that the launching of Multi Purpose Centers had improved access. He said that the Department should ensure that integration took place in terms of service delivery in accordance with security cluster initiatives like Justice Centers. The focus of the Justice Centers would be on previously disadvantaged areas. A total of seven centers had been launched in 2003. One-stop justice centers had been used in Port Elizabeth and Port Nolloth and further expansion was being planned

An IGS Court Centre had been introduced to avoid the over population of awaiting trial prisoners. The system focuses on two areas; first, swiftness of the court process (case preparation before matters are taken to court) and second, on the efficiency of courts (how courts increase capacity). The total case time had been reduced from 105 days to 30 days. The system reduced backlogs and encouraged greater co-operation between all stakeholders such as police and prosecutors.

It was mentioned that the Department had spent its entire budget for 2003. Service delivery could thus be improved and a number of courts had been opened in previously disadvantaged areas, like Tembisa and Khayelitsha. The idea was to make services available to the people.

Mr M Mzizi (IFP) said that a request had some time ago been made for the building for a court in Zonkizizwe but to date nothing had been done. He asked why the Regional court in Alberton had been moved to Germiston. It left people from Katlehong and Thokoza with no choice but to use the Germiston court. He also commented that on visits to several courts he had not seen the use of court managers.

Mr Jiyane said that the reason behind the idea of removing the court in Alberton was to create a mobile structure. He noted that court managers were not yet deployed countrywide as they needed to be trained. It was mentioned that KwaZulu-Natal had about 11 court managers.

Mr Shiceka (ANC) was concerned about the courts not functioning at their optimum level. In many instances persons would after waiting an entire day for their matters to come up be informed that the matters had been postponed. He regarded this as a total waist of money and time.

Mr Moseki asked whether lay assessors were included in the budget of the Department. He also asked whether the Department of Justice or the Department of Public Works was paying for the maintenance of courts. If it was the Department of Public Works was there any kind of interaction between the two Departments?

Mr Jiyani said that the appointment of lay assessors had been legislated but that lack of funding hampered its implementation. He said the idea of the Department was to take over the responsibility of maintaining the courts. Ministerial approval had already been obtained and the Department was in the process of looking at the possibility of transferring the budget from Public Work to Justice.

Mr Mokoena asked how ready the Department was with regard to Child Justice Centres. He also asked where the problem of poor services lied. He asked who was to blame, was it prosecutors and investigators or was it even the magistrates themselves.

Mr Pikoli said that the Department could not fill all vacant posts. Doing so would amount to over expenditure even though the overall budget had been increased by 5, 5%. The police were responsible for investigations, prosecutors to place matters on the roll and to prosecute, and magistrates lastly got the responsibility of being in charge of the court procedures in order to avoid poor services. He noted that Singapore was the only country that had no backlog of cases.

Mr Mackenzie said that courts had overspent their personnel budgets which resulted in vacant posts not being able to be filled.

Mr Shiceka thanked the Department for its transparency.

The meeting was adjourned.