Overview of Portfolio Budget, with Ministry present; Office of the Chief Justice and Judicial Administration 2023/24 Annual Performance Plan
Justice and Constitutional Development
02 May 2023
Chairperson: Mr G Magwanishe (ANC)
Meeting Summary
The Portfolio Committee met virtually to be briefed by the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development on an overview of the Department's annual performance plan (APP) and budget vote for the current financial year. The Office of the Chief Justice also briefed the Committee on their APP and budget.
The Minister gave details of the improvements that had been made in the Department’s performance, and provided updates on matters of interest such as the Gupta extradition, the arrest warrant against Russian President Putin and the issues involving the International Criminal Court and the Rome Statute, the National Prosecuting Authority's conviction rate and the status of corruption investigations, the latest developments in the Thabo Bester escape and the Mangaung Correctional Centre saga, and the new criminal record expungement procedure.
Members indicated concern over the continuous complaints it had received about the Department, and disputed many areas where the Minister claimed that there had been improvement, such as the Master’s Office, the increased criminality and corruption, and issues with the National Prosecuting Authority. Other issues raised were the delays in finalising the court administration model, progress in dealing with the court recording technology challenge, overcrowding in correctional facilities, and the aftermath of the cyber attack on the Department's computers.
The Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) provided insight into the three programmes -- administration,
superior court services, and judicial education and support -- in its APP, highlighting several key risks and the entity's plans to mitigate them.
The Committee raised concerns about the court infrastructure, particularly the libraries, the poor lighting and the leaks, and was critical of the stalling of court renovations. Members referred to the delayed roll-out of the online court system, and requested feedback on the matter. They wanted to know the reason for the high turnover rate of registrars, and also stressed the need for preventative measures to counter cybercrime.
Meeting report
The Chairperson welcomed the Portfolio Committee Members and other attendees to the meeting. He asked if the Minister was in attendance, and welcomed him to the meeting.
Mr Ronald Lamola, Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, greeted the Committee Members and other attendees, and indicated that Mr John Jeffrey, Deputy Minister of Justice, and Mr Patekile Holomisa, Deputy Minister of Corrections, were both in attendance.
The Chairperson said the purpose of the meeting was for the Portfolio Committee to be given an overview by the Minister on the Department’s annual performance plan (APP) and budget vote for the current financial year. The Committee would also receive a presentation by the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) on the APP and budget.
He handed over to the Minister to begin his briefing.
Minister's overview on APP and budget vote
Minister Lamola said that the performance of departments in the portfolio had improved during the current medium term strategy framework (MTSF) period. He highlighted the following examples: the Department of Correctional Services was no longer synonymous with negative audit outcomes; the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) was gradually regaining its footing; and Legal Aid South Africa continued to be a beacon of hope on accountability and good governance and has continued to obtain clean audit outcomes.
The Minister acknowledged that there were still challenges in the portfolio, and stressed that these challenges would not be swept under the carpet. When he had been appointed to the portfolio, the performance of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) had stood at a worrying 50%, and it had now improved to 80%. While this was a significant improvement, the Department would continue to implement measures to increase its impact on service delivery.
The Minister said that the Department was disappointed with the continuous complaints it received from people when interacting with the Master’s Office. The Department was committed to turning the situation around and addressing the systematic challenges that persisted in the Master’s Offices across the country. The Department was committed to turning the situation around for the benefit of the South African people. It would outline the progress made in the modernisation and digitisation project, which aimed to resolve some of the systematic challenges faced by the Master’s Office.
Highlighting some of the Department’s priorities for the 2023/24 financial year, he said it would focus on the modernisation and digitisation of the justice service platforms, increase access to justice services, transform the state legal services and legal profession, improve and transform the Master’s service, and advance constitutionalism, human rights and the rule of law. It would also heighten its fight against gender-based violence (GBV).
The Minister said that the transformation of the legal profession was a priority. In the next financial year, 83% value of briefs would be allocated to previously disadvantaged legal practitioners. In the previous financial year, the Department’s commitment to transformation could be seen through the value of the briefs allocated to previously disadvantaged legal practitioners.
He said that Committee Members were aware that the extradition request for Atul and Rajesh Gupta from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had been dismissed. It had been dismissed on technicalities and inexplicable reasons, and he had been in contact with his UAE counterpart, met the UAE representative in South Africa, and registered South Africa’s displeasure. The Department would announce a way forward for this case once engagement with the UAE had been finalised. The Department’s view was that it had complied with all the requirements of the extradition treaty between South Africa and the UAE, and that there was no basis for dismissing the application. The Department would deal with all aspects of the matter when discussions with the UAE were concluded.
The Minister said that out of respect for the NPA’s prosecutorial independency, the NPA would be able to explain matters related to the Section 174 Nulane matter discharge. Committee Members would be aware of this case, because it had been widely reported in the media.
He reviewed the extradition of fugitives, Mr S Bushiri (Chipiliro Gama) and his wife, Ms M Bushiri, and said that state law enforcement officials would travel to Malawi to testify in the hearing on a set list of questions. Malawi's prosecuting and central authorities had been regularly updating the Department and the South African central authority on the matter. He said that where there had been decisions to appeal matters in Malawi, it had been a joint decision between the central authority in South Africa, the central authority in Malawi, the NPA and the Malawian prosecuting authority. The matter had reached a stage where the officials would be deployed to attend and testify at the hearing once the Malawian authorities set a date.
Minister Lamola said that South Africa was a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which had been ratified on 27 November 2000. A central feature of the Rome Statute of the ICC was that state parties to the ICC were encouraged to investigate and prosecute ICC crimes domestically. South Africa had domesticated the Rome Statute by adopting the Implementation of the Rome Statutes of the International Criminal Court Act 2002 (Implementation Act). This affirmed South Africa’s commitment to an international justice system. South Africa was committed to fighting impunity for gross human rights violations and crimes against humanity, wherever and by whatever means it occurred. He said that international law recognised the sovereign rights of states to determine their domestic legal system and the obligations they were willing to voluntarily carry through ratifying international treaties or exiting, where no longer convenient to subscribe to them. Being party to the Rome Statute meant that the South African government had an obligation to cooperate fully with the ICC by surrendering suspects against whom a warrant of arrest had been issued, providing legal assistance in an investigation, and obtaining evidence.
He said that Committee Members would remember that on the basis of the governing party’s resolutions and the ANC’s previous positions on the international approach signalling countries of the continent's withdrawal, and robust engagements had positively impacted and contributed to the ICC being substantively reformed for the better. Only a few countries on the African continent had ratified the Malabo Protocol, which had delayed the establishment of an African Court of Justice and Human Rights. He said that the ANC and South African government had had to rescind the withdrawal from the ICC and intensify their lobbying for the ratification of the Malabo Protocol. Under the guidance of the previously mentioned resolutions, he withdrew the Bill that aimed to repeal the implementation of the ‘Implementation Act.’
The Department had agreed with the Amnesty International annual report about the inconsistency of the ICC in the execution of its work, which undermined the rule of law and the work of the court itself. The fact that an investigation into the atrocities in Palestine had been opened long before the Ukraine investigation, but had not yet been completed -- and that the ICC was citing financial constraints while member states were willing to find resources to aid the Ukraine investigation -- showed a clear double standard in the application of law by the ICC. He said this did not help with the rule of law across the globe. The people of Palestine were entitled to justice under the ICC, like any other citizen across the globe.
The Minister said that issuing the arrest warrant by the ICC against the sitting Russian President had brought the issue of the ICC into the public domain. The government was considering all options regarding the matter, including looking into the Bill that would amend the implementation of the Act so that it would be brought in line with international customary law, like that which was practised in Great Britain and Holland, where the executive had the power to exit or suspend the implementation of the Statute where it was not in the national interest to continue with its implementation.
He said that the NPA had successfully returned to a period of institutional growth and stability. Since the inception of the NPA, the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigations (DPCI) task force has thus far declared 89 investigations and enrolled 32 cases, involving 187 accused persons. They had a freezing preservation order to the value of R12.9 billion, and recoveries to the value of R2.9 billion, including the ABB landmark reparation case.
The Minister’s audio became unclear, and Committee Members were unable to hear what had been said.
Ms W Newhoudt-Druchen (ANC) notified the Chairperson of an issue with the Minister’s audio.
The Chairperson said that the Minister likely had a low bandwidth, and recommended that the Minister turn off his camera to improve the audio quality.
Adv G Breytenbach (DA) requested that the Minister repeat the last section on the NPA due to the poor connection and audio quality.
The Chairperson asked the Minister to repeat the last section he was speaking about.
Minister Lamola said that the NPA continued to contribute to increasing security in South Africa through the effective prosecutions that had been conducted. The conviction rate in the High Court for the 2022/23 financial year was 87%, and regional courts had a conviction rate of 74%. Conviction for cable theft cases was 80%. He said 334 people had been convicted of corruption or corruption-like offences in 2022/23. The conviction rate for complex commercial crime was 85.5%.
The Minister’s audio became unclear again. He said he would try to reconnect to the meeting platform to solve the issue.
He said that a new expungement procedure had become a public concern. Individuals who were denied the opportunities after failure to expunge their criminal records, should know that a lot of focus was being put on the issue. In 2022, the Department received approximately 20 000 expungement applications. All South Africans could apply for the expungement of their criminal records in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act 1977. He noted that the service was free of charge, and applications were made to the Director-General (DG) of the DoJ&CD. Anyone could apply to have their record expunged after ten years from the date of conviction had passed.
He highlighted other considerations for expungement: the individual had not been convicted or imprisoned to a sentence of imprisonment without the option of a fine during the ten years; the sentence was a fine not exceeding R20 000; the sentence was imprisonment with the option to pay a fine not exceeding R20 000 in place of the period of imprisonment; the sentence of imprisonment was suspended wholly; the sentence was a correctional supervision in terms of Section 276 (1)H of the Criminal Procedures Act. He acknowledged that more needed to be done on the matter of expungements. The Department would conduct more awareness campaigns surrounding the process and would capacitate the relevant unit to deal with the matter.
The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) continued to recover millions of rands and probed various allegations of corruption and maladministration. Support for the unit would be expanded in the new financial year. The Constitutional Court had given impetus to the work of the SIU in a legal judgment. The judgment resolved the issue relating to the jurisdictions of the special tribunal, and whether it could adjudicate and determine the legality of contracts entered into by state institutions and any other decisions made by state institutions. The Constitutional Court had ruled that the special tribunal had the jurisdiction to adjudicate and determine the legality applications. This would enable the SIU to continue to refer questionable contracts to the tribunal.
Minister Lamola said that the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) would continue to improve access to justice for all South Africans. Work was being done to ensure that calls were not disrupted by loadshedding. The Constitutional Court and Supreme Court of Appeal were unaffected by load-shedding, and generators had been rolled out to various High Courts nationwide.
The Minister said that the performance of the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) had improved from 70% in 2020/21, to 80% in 2021/22, and to 89% in 2022/23. It had recorded successive qualified audit opinions in the last two financial years. The Department would ensure that it received a clean audit until the end of its term.
He assured the Committee that inmates were incarcerated in inhumane conditions. In the 2021/22 financial year, there had been 22 escapes from a total inmate population of 143 223, but acknowledged that one escape was one too many. Security operations would be doubled to prevent escapes and address officials who failed to meet standard operating practices. The previous day, the National Commissioner had taken action in the Mthatha management area, where two inmates had escaped, one of which had been repatriated. Eight officials who were on duty on the date of the escape had not adhered to standard operating practices and had been suspended, and would be subject to disciplinary action.
The Department would continue to monitor adherence to the standard operating practices. Inmates were not sitting idly in their cells. Some prisoners were involved in infrastructure projects, including building pharmacies on their premises, houses for crime victims and renovating public infrastructure. Others were involved in producing food on farms and in gardens, creating vegetable gardens in schools in disadvantaged areas. This contributed to the fight against hunger and poverty and taught the prisoners valuable skills for when they would be released.
He said Committee Members were aware that as a result of the oversight that the Committee had done in the management area of the DCS, all centres were implementing the self-sufficiency and sustainability strategic framework (SSSF). The framework saved the government a total of R272 million in the last three financial years. He was confident that more money would be saved through the SSSF, because 70% of inmates would be working to improve the performance at farms and in workshops in the new financial year. The Department had been, and continued to be, entrepreneurial.
Minister Lamola said that the Department was being made to prioritise victim empowerment in its operations. This was not the Department’s responsibility alone, and there would be collaboration with other departments to ensure that victims of crime were empowered. There would be an effort to increase the number of victims participating in restorative justice programmes in the new financial year. There were plans to collaborate with the faculty of criminology or criminal justice at the University of Limpopo.
He said that the DCS had been in the news following the escape of Thabo Bester from the Mangaung Correctional Centre and his re-arrest in Tanzania. He confirmed that Bester was currently incarcerated at Kgosi Mampuru maximum security facility, and would be appearing with his co-accused on 16 May in Bloemfontein. The South African Police Service (SAPS) continued to make arrests in relation to this matter.
He confirmed that the DCS had served the Mangaung Correctional Services Pty with a notice to terminate. This followed the DCS seeking legal opinion, and it had been deemed that Bloemfontein Correctional Services (BCC) was unsuitable to continue with the contract. In accordance with the concession contract agreement, a termination period of 90 days had been served to the BCC, and thereafter the contract would no longer be valid. The DCS had already begun an internal exercise for the takeover process which would happen after the 90-day period ended.
The Minister concluded his briefing, and said that relevant entities under the Ministry would present detailed plans for the 2023/24 financial year. The Department was hard at work to create a better life for South Africans. He reiterated that there had been steady improvements in the Department’s performance, and noted that the Department would continue to confront any issues that arose. The challenges would not discourage the work of the Department, but would rather strengthen it to continue to improve its performance.
Discussion
Ms N Maseko-Jele (ANC) requested that the Minister provide an update on the modernisation efforts of the Department. She said that at the beginning of the term, the Committee had requested that the remaining apartheid laws that continued to be a hindrance to South Africa’s progress, be addressed. She emphasised that these laws had to be dealt with, because they hindered South Africa’s democracy.
She said that on the Committee’s oversight tour, they had seen the good and the bad, particularly regarding security issues, especially in the Northern Cape, where there were infrastructure challenges and the intensification of community services in terms of access to justice. She requested that if the Minister could not effectively answer the question at the time, he would look into it and respond at a later stage.
She commended the Minister’s focus on expungement. She said that communities were not aware of the mechanism available to them. She recommended that the Minister intensify the campaigns on the matter.
Mr S Swart (ACDP) said that many complaints had been received from communities, particularly with regard to the Master’s Office, maintenance issues and domestic violence. He acknowledged that Department officials may have been doing their best, but said that there was room for improvement. He had been impressed with the facilities at the High Court in Kimberley and the Magistrate’s Court in Colesberg. He expressed his appreciation of the Minister’s statement regarding loadshedding and the reduction of its impact at courts.
He asked the Minister to unpack the issue of the termination of the Bloemfontein Correctional Services contract. He commented that there would likely be litigation about it.
He said that the Minister had highlighted the Gupta extradition matter. He expressed disappointment at the decision of the UAE, and appreciated the Minister’s engagement on the issue. He asked the Committee if there was a plan for the way forward.
He said one of the issues that faced Members of Parliament was the perceived fact that there seemed to be an increase in criminality, particularly criminal syndicates. The main concern was the increase of criminal syndicates in the construction industry, such as the construction mafia, the mining industry (zama zamas), and Eskom. He stressed the impact of corruption and the criminal syndicates at Eskom in the form of loadshedding. He said this seemed to be the case despite the Minister of Electricity saying otherwise. Corruption and criminal syndicates also impacted other state-owned entities (SOEs). This was a great concern, and he asked the Minister to unpack the issue.
Mr Swart was concerned that the Minister had equated the possible ICC referral of Ukraine and the Russian President with the issue in Palestine, and said that this was unacceptable. The ANC government should relook at its foreign policy, often described as “clueless” and “immoral.” Government should consider gross human rights violations, such as those in Iran, China, North Korea, Burundi, and Syria, where the ANC government had consistently taken the wrong side in voting. This was a foreign policy issue, but he felt it necessary to effectively express his concerns regarding the Minister’s comments.
Mr W Horn (DA) said that on 3 May last year, when the Minister had delivered the previous briefing to the Committee, he had given a firm indication that the Cabinet would deal with the issue of the final Court Administration model within the previous financial year. He expressed his frustration that the Minister had not addressed the matter in his briefing and that the Committee and the public had not been made aware of any progress that had been made. This had been an issue for more than a decade, and he asked the Minister to provide an update on any progress. He asked the Minister to explain what was hindering it if no progress had been made.
He brought up the issue that the management of overcrowding at detention facilities seemed to be resting solely on concessions given to inmates, and releasing them before they qualified for parole through a Presidential decision. He said the Committee had previously stated that this could not be a permanent solution. The build programme regarding additional bed spaces had come to a halt, and he was concerned about this. The Committee had been informed that the new facilities at the Parys Correctional Centre had come to a halt because of issues with the contractor. He asked the Minister about the way forward regarding the capital works programme, and whether the Committee should make peace with the fact that this was going to be a constant issue.
Referring to the legislative programme, he said that last year the Minister had informed the Committee that the Lower Courts Bill would be introduced, but the Committee had since been informed that it had been halted again. He asked what the reasons for this were, and if any progress had been made before the process was halted.
Mr Horn highlighted the court recording technology issue, and said an update was necessary. During oversight, informal information indicated that the current interim contract had been extended by two years, and he asked if the Minister could confirm whether that information was correct. If the information was wrong, he asked the Minister to explain the status of the prevention of court operations due to a lack of recording technology.
While the Committee was on oversight, it gained the impression that the fallout of the computer hacking and its impact on the efficiency and speed of the online systems of the Department of Justice had not yet been settled. He requested an update from the Minister regarding the medium- and long-term plans to specifically address the efficiency and speed of the Department's online systems. The Master of the High Court had been clear when he said that since the hacking of Master’s Services, and by extension all other services, the Department had been present only in theory for most parts of the work week. He asked for an updated, transparent list of the court infrastructure, and noted that its maintenance was urgent. He acknowledged that the Minister had previously said that the Department was in the process of finalising the updated priority and assessment list. He said the Minister should provide feedback on the progress of that project.
The Chairperson noted that the Minister had been briefly locked out of the meeting due to network issues, and that he had not heard some of Mr Swart's comments. He asked if Mr Swart would repeat the last section of his comments after the next Committee Members had participated.
The Minister clarified the point at which he lost connection, and said that Mr Swart could begin at that point.
Adv Breytenbach asked if any progress had been made with the Integrated Justice System. She asked how much money had been poured into the project, calling it a “bucket with a hole in the bottom.” She remarked that the project seemed to be going nowhere. The Committee heard about the project every year, but there had never been any progress or improvement.
She argued that the statement that the Master’s Office was improving was not true -- the Master’s Office had gone from being completely dysfunctional to a train wreck. It did not work and did not satisfy anybody’s requirements. Nobody had been able to get anything done, and there was a constant backlog. The filing systems were chaotic. She said a few weeks ago, the Cape Town Master’s Office had sent out a letter saying that their business hours had been limited to one or two days a week, with no consultation or warning. She asked what the Minister had done about the issue, and why it was acceptable.
Adv Breytenbach said that the Minister had side-stepped any reference to the Steinhoff issue, and that she would take the issue up with the NPA. She asked why there was no progress, as getting into court was not a complicated matter.
She strongly disagreed with the statement that the NPA had found its footing, commenting that recent events supported her views, and not those of the Minister.
She highlighted government’s “embarrassing flip-flop” on the ICC, and asked the Minister to explain what had happened. The withdrawal -- and the subsequent withdrawal of the withdrawal -- had been confusing.
Adv Breytenbach said that the Minister’s view on Israel had been illuminating. He had chosen to pick on a country smaller than the Kruger National Park and to spend ten minutes telling the Committee how dreadful the country was. She was not saying that Israel was perfect, but rather that serious human rights abuses occurred across the rest of the world, and that the Minister had chosen to remain silent on those cases. The Minister should know better than to compare the Israel-Palestinian conflict with the Ukraine-Russia conflict. She strongly disagreed with the Minister’s views, and found them petty and childish.
The Chairperson requested that Mr Swart repeat the last section of his commentary.
Mr Swart repeated his concern regarding the increased criminality and criminal syndicates.
The Chairman thanked the Committee Members for their input, and handed over to the Minister to respond to the questions and concerns.
Minister’s response
Minister Lamola responded to the concerns over the issue of modernisation. He said that a lot of progress had been made with the Integrated Justice System (IJS) and its governance. A system had been developed that aimed to connect police stations with the NPA and courts around the country, called PVA. Various projects from other departments were improving. He said that the money for the project was taken not only from the Department of Justice’s budget, but that the expenses had been shared across various departments. The various departments involved were being coordinated to create an integrated system that would help resolve some issues. He said that the Thabo Bester case had shown that a lot of criminality could be averted by integrating the various systems of personal identity, fingerprinting and DNA. The project had existed for approximately 15 years, and approximately R7 billion had been spent on it in total.
He said that modernisation projects took a long time and depended on the buy-in from all relevant stakeholders. The Department was working to ensure that all the government departments worked cohesively to consolidate and ensure that the IJS would be a success. He admitted that there were challenges, but the Department would not shy away from them. Any issues that arose would be confronted through the governance structures.
Responding to the questions about the consolidated infrastructure programme, he said that the Department was engaged with the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) about infrastructure issues. It was a challenge for the DoJ&CD because its infrastructure projects were under-spending and they had become stagnant. Both departments were at a stage where they were individually able to identify any implementing agencies, as per the agreement with the DPWI. They were able to devolve some of the powers to both departments to be able to deal with infrastructure challenges. He was confident that when the Committee called the Department to deal with the issue with the DPWI, they would be able to unpack the issue in more detail. He knew that the Committee intended to call the Department back with the DPWI to respond to the concerns that had been raised.
The Minister responded to the concern over the old apartheid laws. He said that the Department was considering three laws to take through the process for the current financial year. The only difficulty was that they might not be processed before the end of the financial year or term. The Department would be able to table the Bills aimed at amending the apartheid legislation.
He agreed with the complaints received about the Master’s Office. The Department was of the view that the only way to improve the services in the Master’s Office was through rapid modernisation and digitisation. A lot has been invested in the modernisation and digitisation project. He believed that Committee Members would be able to see a change in the services of the Master’s Office before the end of the financial year due to the ongoing modernisation and digitisation efforts. He was confident that the Department would be able to turn the Master’s Office around and provide the services efficiently.
Minister Lamola responded to the questions about the termination of the contract with the Mangaung Correctional Centre (MCC). He said that the Department had received a legal opinion which showed that the systematic issues that had been experienced with the MCC over many years, including the latest issue of Thabo Bester’s escape, pointed to the fact that the concession contract could not continue as it was. The MCC had struggled to meet its contractual obligations, which was why the Department had decided to issue a notice of termination. He was unable to share more on the matter because it was an area of uncertainty. The notice had been served that morning.
Regarding the Gupta extradition, the Department would continue engaging with its UAE counterparts. In discussion with the Minister of Justice of the UAE, it was revealed that the matter could not be appealed because the decision had been that of the UAE Appeal Court, and the only way forward could be a resubmission. He said that the UAE would consider the expedited process, and that the various stakeholders, including the Central Authority and NPA, were still engaging with these issues. The Department was engaging with the NPA regarding the issues of resubmission. It was still unclear whether the Gupta brothers were still in the UAE, but the UAE was the last place they had been documented. Because of that, the Department would treat the issue as if the Gupta brothers were still in the UAE.
Minister Lamola responded to the concerns about the Lower Courts Bill. He said a policy was being developed on the judicial administrative model, which impacted the Lower Courts Bill and the Magistrates Bill. The former Chief Justice had started the process regarding the issue and the Department had dealt with it from the context of a single judiciary. A clear outcome could be given once the issue was properly dealt with. He confirmed that research had been concluded regarding what had been raised by the judiciary about the court administration, and the Department was ready to engage with it on what was believed should be the court administration model of the country. He emphasised that it was important to engage with members of the public, because this was a matter of public interest, and the public should play their role in the space.
Referring to the questions about the Court Recording Technology (CRT) contract, he explained that it was a long-term contract awarded through the State Informatton Technology Agency (SITA). The advert for the new CRT long-term contract had already been closed, and the SITA would begin the process of appointing the new contractor. The current contract had resolved more than 90% of the challenges that were related to the contract, and the other challenges had been caused by load-shedding, which was not a CRT issue. He added that there was a month-to-month contract until the new long-term contract was in place.
The Minister responded to the request for a transparent list of the court infrastructure. He said that the Department was engaging with the DPWI, and agreed that a list should be available. There had been movement on some infrastructure projects, including the Magistrates Court in Mamelodi, which he believed would be finalised soon. He said that where challenges arose, the Department continued to engage with the Department of Public Works.
He said that the NPA should be able to explain the concerns about the Steinhoff issue. In the last report, he had been told that the NPA was at an advanced stage of investigation and deciding what should be done. He said it was an important case for the Department because it involved a major white-collar crime in the country.
The Minister responded to the concerns about the ICC issues. He said that the errors regarding the country’s position on the ICC had been corrected by the Presidency. Government was looking into how it had domesticated the Rome Statute. He said that other countries, such as Great Britain and Holland, had domesticated the Statute so that the Executive had the power to exit or suspend the operations of the Statute if it was not in the national interest to implement it. He explained that South Africa had domesticated the Statute, but it did not allow for the space or authority to exit or suspend the operations of the Statute.
Responding to the remarks regarding the comparison of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, he said this was not his own personal view of comparison, but rather that it had been an observation of Amnesty International regarding the double standards of the ICC about the way in which it conducted its functions. The Palestine and Ukraine examples were not the only examples, and there were other matters that had not been finalised by the ICC and were stuck at the ICC's investigation stage. The ICC had cited resource issues as the reason. He said the Palestinian-Israeli investigations had been opened before the Ukraine-Russia issue began.
He emphasised that the ICC should act fairly and equally, and that all incidents should be approached without bias. The ICC should already have referred the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and crimes against humanity committed by the Israeli authorities, as the investigation had begun years ago, and a decision should have been made. He said the government was calling for fairness. He was sure Committee members would like to see fairness before the law, adding that the rule of law was undermined when the law was applied selectively.
The Minister said he had responded to all the matters he could during the meeting and would respond to those questions he had not answered at a later stage once he had reviewed the necessary matters. The various departments would also be able to provide more detailed responses.
The Chairperson asked about the judicial administrative model. The Minister had said that the Department was ready to engage, but he noted that the issue had been going on for some time already. He requested a projected timeframe of when the Department would engage with the different stakeholders, an estimate of when the engagement would be concluded and when the issue would be taken to Parliament. He said that since he had been a part of the Committee, the Committee had been struggling with the judicial administrative model issue. The Committee needed much more detail, beyond the vague statement that the Department was ready to engage.
The Minister responded that the first stakeholder that would be engaged was the judiciary, after which the matter would be taken to public engagement. Cabinet was internally reviewing the matter. He was hopeful that before the end of May, it would have been fully discussed by Cabinet, which would be able to provide guidance and parameters for engagement with the judiciary. The Department would find a way for the Portfolio Committee to share its input and any other stakeholders or individuals who had an opinion on the matter. He hoped that this engagement would be completed by October, after which a clear policy position could be taken and consideration given as to whether there was a need to amend any legislation. He would like the matter to be tabled before the end of the financial year.
The Chairperson said he had been confused by the Department sharing percentages on the work done. For example, the Department had briefed 83% of previously disadvantaged communities, but he commented that the 83% was not visible on the ground. The issue was that the actual values of the percentages were not clear. He referred back to his example, and asked 83% of how many cases had been briefed, and what the quality of the briefs was. He suggested that in the future, there needed to be a focus by Parliament on understanding matters beyond the statistics. The statistics were highly disputed when Members went to their constituencies or other forums. He emphasised that it was important for the Committee to have further engagement on the matter.
Deputy Minister Jeffery responded that the Department’s website had details of the briefs. and said that it would be valuable for the Committee to look at the website on a monthly basis. It had last been updated in February. The website detailed which advocates received the briefs and included demographic information on the advocate, who the advocate had been selected by, who the state attorney dealing with the matter was, who the client was, which government department was concerned with the issue, and what the nature of the brief was.
The Chairperson said that the information on the website would be helpful to the Committee.
Minister Lamola added to what had been said by the Deputy Minister. He said that the total briefs in the last financial year had been 6 075, and 2 525 had been issued to women, which was 42% of the briefs. The total value of the briefs was approximately R1.2 billion, and the total value given to previously disadvantaged individuals was R1.066 billion (86%). The total value allocated to women was R366 million, which was approximately 30% of the total value of the briefs. He said 5 693 briefs went to previously disadvantaged individuals. He reiterated that the information was available on the website. The challenge was that the budget for the state attorney was almost R1 billion, and observed that this was the same budget as some SOEs. The information on the briefs of SOEs, local municipalities and the private sector was not freely and transparently available. He agreed with the Chairperson’s suggestion, and said that to achieve the transformative objective, the state and all other role-players needed to play the necessary role and share the necessary details. This would allow the public and the Department to see how other stakeholders were contributing to the effort. It would allow for the impact to be measured.
He said that the legal sector code was in the process of getting comments from the Legal Practice Council (LPC), and the Department of Trade Industry and Competition (DTIC) was working on providing more information regarding the statistics and impact. Once the legal sector code was promulgated, it would help the work of the Department and the Committee to track the progress and statistics.
The Chairperson asked if the Minister of the DTIC had signed the legal sector code.
Minister Lamola said the DTIC Minister had not yet signed the legal sector code. The Solicitor General had informed him that the comments had been taken to the Empowerment Committee of the LPC to attend to. Once that process had been finalised, the Minister would sign it.
The Chairperson thanked the Minister for the briefing and for responding to Committee Members' concerns. He invited the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) to do their presentation.
Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) briefing on its APP and budget vote
Ms Memme Sejosengwe, Secretary General, OCJ, said that Mr Itumeleng Malao, Head of Strategy and Reporting, would begin the presentation and she would provide responses to any questions.
Mr Malao provided an overview of the presentation, which was divided into three parts -- overview; situational analysis; and measuring performance. He said the OCJ would also provide the necessary financial information and an updated risks management list.
The purpose of the presentation was to present the OCJ's APP and budget for 2023/24. It was the fourth APP contributing to achieving the outcomes and impact of the 2020-2025 strategic plan, and had been developed in line with the revised framework for strategic plans and APPs, the National Development Plan 2030, and the medium-term strategic framework (MTSF)for 2019-24.
Mr Malao said that a situational analysis was critical to formulating the APP and its effective implementation. He provided a detailed description of the external and internal environments which could have an impact on the implementation of the APP.
He gave the Committee an overview of the entity's three programmes.
Programme One -- Administration
The outcome for the programme was effective and efficient administrative support, and was focused largely on matters related to governance, and modernisation. Mr Malao outlined indicators aimed at improving the livelihoods of women, youth, and people with disabilities. He highlighted that it was also concerned with curbing fraud and corruption within the entity. He was proud to share that the OCJ had fully disclosed all financial matters.
Programme Two -- Superior court services
Mr Malao said the outcomes of the programme were improved court efficiency. He highlighted various targets the OCJ had set within this programme.
Programme Three -- Judicial education and support
He said that the outcome was advanced judicial performance, highlighting the importance of judicial education.
Ms S Mpheshwa, Acting Chief Financial Officer (CFO), presented the financial information. She provided a breakdown of the budget and highlighted the challenges that may arise due to the budget.
Mr Malao presented the key risks, highlighting the procurement risks and the risk of corruption. He briefly outlined the mitigation plans to deal with these concerns.
Ms Sejosengwe further emphasised the risks and mitigation plans to deal with load-shedding. She also highlighted water issues, and noted the efforts made to address them. She said they were also considering risk mitigation efforts regarding network concerns.
See attached for full presentation
Discussion
Ms Maseko-Jele noted the issues regarding budget constraints. She asked what was being done on the issue of libraries and updating the reading material. On the oversight tour, it was clear that there were several issues with the libraries and the available reading material. She asked how the OCJ would assist with the infrastructure problems experienced by the High Courts. There had been issues with the files and leaks -- what was going to be done about this?
She was worried about the constant issues emerging from the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) interviews. Concerns were emerging regarding the judgments of the acting judges. The concerns that had come out of the interviews had an impact on the training that was done for the judges. She asked for more information on the training issue.
She referred to the rights of judges. She had heard about the issue of disclosure by the judges, and asked the OCJ to elaborate on the matter.
The Chairperson said that some issues would be raised with the Chief Justice at a meeting the following Friday, so that some questions should be reserved for the Chief Justice, rather than the administration.
Ms Newhoudt-Druchen added to what had been raised by Ms Maseko-Jele regarding the libraries and leaks. She was concerned about the lighting in courtrooms, and said that the lighting was very poor and that one of the judges had had to use his cell phone as a light to be able to read documents. One of the Committee Members counted the number of light bulbs that were not working during the oversight tour. She expressed concern over the inability to deal with these small-scale issues, and asked how bigger issues would be dealt with. She asked for an update regarding the lighting and signage for women’s toilets, as there had been poor signage for the toilets and one had to ask for assistance from staff. She described the women’s toilet as being in a cleaner’s closet, which was unpleasant for the staff.
She was concerned at the high turnover of staff, and requested an update on the plans for human resources for recruitment.
She noted that various courts were being renovated or had renovation plans. She had seen no plans for the Malmesbury court that had burnt down, and there had been no update on the Malmesbury court in the presentation. Her constituency office had gone to check on the site and had reported that no work was occurring. She requested an update on the plans for the court.
She had observed that the OCJ's report had stated that it could not achieve the full implementation of the planned roll-out of the court online system. The presentation had spoken briefly about the matter, but she requested an update about the plans to achieve full implementation.
Mr Horn added to what had been brought up by Ms Newhoudt-Druchen regarding the planned roll-out. He said that the Northern Cape High Court had been identified as a court where the roll-out would take place during this year. During the oversight visit, the local role-players informed the Committee that the OCJ had already informed them that the roll-out would not happen this year due to the impact of litigation and ongoing investigations. He asked if there had been a communication gap. He was concerned about the conflicting statements between the presentation and local stakeholders because of previous assurances that the investigation and litigation would not hinder the roll-out and full introduction of the court online system. He asked if the Northern Cape locals had been informed that the roll-out would not happen this year.
He referred to slide 31, which highlighted the potential risks posed by cybercrime concerning the courts and online communication and systems. He was concerned that the risk was a repeat risk in terms of identifying the risk and the mitigation factors. He requested an update about what mitigation steps and protective measures had been taken since the risk had been identified two to three years ago. To what extent had internal steps been taken to fortify the systems of the OCJ against cyber crimes, and to what extent did this remain a project that would still be implemented?
Mr R Dyantyi (ANC) expressed his appreciation for the focus on the “three converging problems” in lower courts especially. The three problems had been identified as electricity, water and network. He expressed the hope that what had been presented was not just talk by the OCJ. By this stage, the risks and mitigation had become a priority for project management. He said that it was not enough to simply describe what was being planned. The Minister had said that he had various concerns that he would bring up at the Friday meeting with the Chief Justice. He noted that the agenda for Friday’s meeting addressed issues at all levels of the courts, and said that the Minister and Office of the Secretary-General were not well-versed on the issues of the lower courts. He said he was deployed in the space of lower courts, and there seemed to be no risk measures concerning the lower courts. He expressed his interest in hearing more about the issues and risk management in lower courts. He commented that many of the issues experienced at the other levels of the system started in the lower courts.
He referred to the high turnover of registrars, and asked about the 11 registrars leaving. He was interested in whether a process had been identified as to how this would be mitigated. This should be a priority, because registrars were critical to the functioning of the courts and the administration of justice.
He stressed his frustration that the risk mitigation did not do enough to attend to the chain of the administration of justice concerning the issues of the lower courts. He expressed his hope that the Department of Correctional Services would be able to share its risk management plan for taking over from the MCC after the contract was terminated.
OCJ's response
Ms Sejosengwe said she would not answer questions meant for the Chief Justice.
She responded to the issue of the disclosure of the registrable interests of judges, and said that the OCJ was the registrar appointed to manage the disclosures in terms of the JCS Act. The last status disclosure showed a 100% achievement, meaning that all judges had disclosed by the end of March.
Ms Sejoswenge referred the concerns around the JSC interviews and the training of acting judges to Dr Gomolemo Moshoeu, CEO, South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI), who responded that the SAJEI had begun to engage judges to initiate training in the division of aspiring judges to address the challenges that had been identified.
Ms Sejosengwe responded to the issue of the communication gap in the Northern Cape. She said it had involved a misunderstanding about how the message had been conveyed to the Committee. The court had been informed that the roll-out would not happen before March 2023, not that it would not happen in the current financial year. As soon as the courts sanctioned the interim arrangements, the roll-out would proceed to the sites that had been indicated. Each site would be checked in terms of its state of readiness to ensure that the roll-out would proceed as planned.
Regarding the concerns of cyber risks and the mitigation strategy, she said the OCJ had been engaged with the SITA to ensure that a vulnerability assessment was done. The cyber risks were being continuously managed, and this was not being removed from any plans because it was a constant threat. She confirmed that the OCJ had implemented anti-virus and firewall systems, and that there had been procurement of the vulnerability solutions. The OCJ had been working with the SITA to ensure that the system was protected.
Ms Sejosengwe said the online court system contained three parts. The reason that full implementation was not achieved was because one of the parts required consultation with the judiciary, because they defined the means of the system. She added that full implementation had not been achieved because of the review of the CaseLines, which was one of the three parts of the courts' online system. Once that had been completed, the roll-out would continue.
Responding to the concerns regarding the Malmesbury Court and the courts' infrastructure , she said she could not speak on behalf of the Minister regarding the power, water and network risks. The OCJ was not responsible for the infrastructure of the magistrates courts, so she would not be able to comment on the matter. She had a list of the 24 sites protected in terms of electricity, which indicated which courts had generators and solar power and the capacity and status of these mechanisms. Some of the generators at the time of procurement had not been for load-shedding purposes, and as a result, some of them needed to be replaced or updated. The OCJ was engaging with the DoJ and the DPWI on the matter. A list of the generators could be provided. Similar efforts had been made with water tanks, and a list was available if the Committee requested one. The OCJ's main concern had been the new courts in Mpumalanga and Polokwane, which had been struggling.
Ms Sejosengwe confirmed that there was a high level of staff turnover among the registrars. She said that when positions became vacant, the OCJ used either the mechanism of contract appointments to fill the gaps, or made sure it attracted external skills to replace what had been lost. This was sometimes difficult because the Occupation Specific Dispensation (OSD) was also part of what the registrar’s office was using. The OCJ was considering mentoring as part of the strategy to up-skill existing employees so that they would be prepared if a position became vacant. She said that the OCJ was managing the turnover to ensure that vacancies were filled.
She was aware of the concerns regarding the libraries and reading materials. Library services were shared with the DoJ, and the contracts were the DoJ's responsibility. There was a committee of judges who were considering measures for library services. This was because the DoJ had discovered that the costs of library services were too high. Concessions would be made regarding which materials would be cut and made available in the virtual library, and which hard copies would be retained. She said that judges had been allowed to have input on which materials were kept as hard copies, and what electronic materials would be used.
Adv Marelize Potgieter, Court Administration Services, OCJ, provided further detail on the concerns regarding library services. She reiterated that the libraries were a shared service with the DoJ, and said that they engaged frequently. Communication lines had been established. She would personally monitor the updating of research materials in the libraries on a quarterly basis.
Ms Sejosengwe referred to the infrastructure of the High Courts. She said that a committee of judges had been established to review court infrastructure, and recommended that the Committee raise the issue with the Chief Justice. She confirmed that the OCJ was aware of the issues, and said that a priority list had been requested.
She said that through the National Efficiency Enhancement Committee (NEEC) and the Provincial Efficiency Enhancement Committees (PEECs), led by the Chief Justice, the DPWI was accounting for and providing reports on the plans to address infrastructure issues. The OCJ was aware of the leaks and the lighting issues, which could be attributed to the old structure of the court buildings.
She referred to the issue of the files, and said that efforts to digitise the files were being undertaken. The national archives were full, and there was no space to store the files. The OCJ was working with the DoJ and the IJS to assist with the issue. The OCJ had reviewed what other departments had done regarding the digitisation of records, and was considering all its options.
Ms Sejosengwe said she would look into the toilet signage matter and provide feedback.
Ms Newhoudt-Druchen said that the lighting and signage issue was not at the Magistrate Court -- it had been at the High Court. Regarding the library issue, she said that it was not only the issue of updating materials -- she was also concerned about the files and books that had not been shelved and were lying on the floor. She was concerned that the materials were not being looked after.
Ms Sejosengwe noted the issues concerning the library, and said that she would have to investigate the issue to be able to provide a proper response. She would provide feedback as soon as she had reviewed the matter.
The meeting was adjourned.
Documents
Present
-
Magwanishe, Mr GB Chairperson
ANC -
Breytenbach, Adv G
DA -
Dyantyi, Mr QR
ANC -
Engelbrecht, Mr J
DA -
Holomisa, Nkosi SP
ANC -
Horn, Mr W
DA -
Jeffery, Mr JH
ANC -
Lamola, Mr RO
ANC -
Maseko-Jele, Ms NH
ANC -
Newhoudt-Druchen, Ms WS
ANC -
Ramolobeng, Ms A
ANC -
Swart, Mr SN
ACDP
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.