Advertisement for the Appointment of Public Protector & Committee Programme

Meeting report

The Chairperson welcomed members and thanked them for attending. He confirmed that they had a quorum for the meeting. There were two items on the agenda: the Committee program and the draft advert. The agenda was adopted. There were no apologies.

Presentation: Draft Programme of the ad hoc Committee to Nominate a Person for appointment as Public Protector

The Committee has until 31 August to complete their task and report to Parliament.

8 June 2023:                 Consideration of the Committee programme and draft advert.

12 June 2023:               Publication of advert through media statement, website, and newspapers.

10-21 July 2023:            Consolidation of information and CVs. Publication of CVs for public comment on website for two weeks.

24-28 July 2023:            Shortlisting of candidates.

1-18 August 2023:         Logistics for interviews and screening of shortlisted candidates.

21-25 August 2023:       Interviews take place in Parliament.

29-31 August 2023:       Committee deliberations and recommendation.

Discussion

Mr W Horn (DA) thanked the Chairperson. In principle, the programme, as tabled, should be supported. He supported publishing the CVs for public comments. Public participation is necessary and will enrich their decision making. He asked whether screening under the current circumstances would suffice. In 2016, when the previous ad hoc Committee embarked on the process of selecting a candidate to be nominated for the next public protector, the argument was made that screening is not sufficient, given that the public protector will have to qualify for top secret security clearance. Ultimately, the Committee settled for mere screening even though the then deputy public protector was a candidate, despite not being able to qualify for top secret security clearance as he was not a South African citizen. Mr Horn asked the Committee to consider whether screening, which is simpler and less intense than vetting, is sufficient in these circumstances. He thanked the Chairperson.

Mr G Magwanishe (ANC) thanked the Chairperson and agreed that the programme as presented should be supported in principle. He asked the Chairperson to meet with the Minister of State Security as soon as possible, to ensure there is dedicated support for the screening process. Otherwise, he doubted whether it would be done in two weeks. If they opt for a vetting process as per the recommendation from Mr Horn, they will not be able to complete their task by October. If no law restricts them, he will support the screening process.

Adv G Breytenbach (DA) thanked the Chairperson. She agreed that they would not be able to meet their deadline if there is vetting, but they do need a dedicated team for screening as well, as a very thorough screening process [is necessary]. The last screening process left quite a lot to be desired. She said they need to talk about the logistics of the interviews. The last round of interviews lasted 24 hours and the panel and the candidates were exhausted. They need to plan a little better to avoid that kind of situation.

Ms J Mananiso (ANC) thanked the Chairperson and welcomed the presentation. She agreed to adopt the document as a living document so they may amend it when necessary. She supported the idea of a dedicated support team for screening. She said they should use radio stations so that everyone is aware of the publication. All 12 official languages should be used for the official publication.

Ms M Tlhape (ANC) thanked the Chairperson and greeted her fellow members. She agreed to adopt the draft as a living document to ensure flexibility. She said after the consolidation of the information and the CVs, they should meet before they publish for public comments, so that when they shortlist, they know how many candidates there are. She agreed that they should facilitate some of the work through the Chairperson’s back office and contact the State Security Agency (SSA) so that everything that requires support is done on time.

The Chairperson thanked Members and said he wanted to check if he had captured everything that was said. He must secure a meeting with the Minister responsible for the SSA to give them a dedicated support team to assist with the screening process. Members emphasised that it was screening and not vetting. Their Human Resources (HR) unit in Parliament will also attend to that process. HR will work closely with the team that the Minister will provide. Last time the police were also used to check if candidates had any criminal record. The team put together for the screening process will be the SSA, South African Police Service (SAPS), and their HR division. Each of these parties will be attending to their own areas of interest. The Chairperson asked the Committee if they agreed with that. Members supported this.

The Chairperson said they would look at the logistics of the interviews once they’ve received the CVs and they know how many candidates there are. The team in Parliament will comment on the communication policy and there is a request that the advert is published in local radio stations as well. Of course, this will be in all official languages. The Chairperson asked for the team in Parliament to comment if this fits with existing policy.

The Committee Secretary said that the adverts will be published in all official languages. They will communicate with the communications team that the same applies to radio stations.

The Chairperson said they should report back on that. He said there was also a recommendation that they look at the consolidated information that comes from the elimination process. In the first shortlist phase, they will eliminate candidates that don’t meet the qualification criteria, whose papers are incomplete, and who do not have South African citizenship. They will also eliminate those whose CV does not demonstrate proven leadership and managerial skills. This information may not be clearly visible on the CV itself and may be required to be tested during the interview. The team will provide a matrix of all the eliminated candidates and the reasons why. Once the Committee accepts this, it will be the first shortlist.

The Chairperson said the second shortlisting process is the return of comments from the public. They will look at what the public has to say about each candidate. The second shortlist will involve the members of the Committee. The third shortlisting process is after they have received the screening process results. This shortlist should give the number of candidates who qualify for interviews. The Committee confirms that this is in order. The Chairperson moved on to the second part of the agenda, the presentation of the advert itself.

The Chairperson presented the draft advert to members. He said when they comment on the advert, they should ask when candidates fill in the questionnaire. If it happens during the nomination process, must this be indicated in the advert?

Ms Mananiso agreed that when they issue the advert, it must be detailed regarding the nomination process. All the supporting documents should be present.

The Chairperson noted that the Committee adopted the draft advert. He asked the secretariat to amend the draft so that candidates are required to fill in the questionnaire. The Chairperson said they would move on to briefing the process itself.

Presentation: Appointment of the Public Protector

Ms Christine Silkstone, Content Advisor, highlighted some of the key constitutional mandates of the Public Protector, such as ensuring government accountability through investigations and remedial action. See the presentation.

The presentation covered the fundamental powers of the Public Protector, such as the power to investigate maladministration, abuse of power, and improper conduct and enrichment. The appointment process of the Public Protector is per section 193 of the Constitution, which includes the requirement of approval of the National Assembly and appointment by the President. The selection criteria for a prospective Public Prosecutor include South African citizenship, specialised knowledge/ experience in the administration of justice, public administration, or public finance. Suggestions were made given regarding a process for nominating candidates for the position of Public Protector. Questionnaires, shortlisting, screening, interviews, and reports are recommended.  

Discussion

The Chairperson thanked Ms Silkstone and asked her to bring up slide 15, as he wanted Members to comment on it. They have already established that a questionnaire will be distributed before shortlisting as part of the nomination process. After a candidate’s nomination, they will be requested to fill in a questionnaire. The Chairperson asked the Committee if they had any comments.

Mr R Dyantyi (ANC) suggested they do the questionnaire after shortlisting. Otherwise, it will create an unnecessary administrative load.

Ms Tlhape agreed with Mr Dyantyi that the questionnaire should come after shortlisting. She requested the Committee hold a preparatory meeting before the interview process, so they are thoroughly prepared.

Ms M Lesoma (ANC) also agreed that questionnaires should be done after shortlisting.

The Chairperson said they will convene a meeting to consider the consolidated information, on the 11th or 12th of July, before they publish the CVs. The Chairperson thanked Members for their time.

The meeting was adjourned.