Zambian Parliamentary Committee on Legal Affairs Visit

Meeting report

SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
25 August, 2004
ZAMBIAN PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AFFAIRS VISIT

Chairperson: Mr B Mkhaliphi (ANC) (Acting Chairperson)

Documents handed out:
Parliament Research Information Services briefing
Combating Corruption in South Africa

SUMMARY
The Committee hosted a delegation from the Zambian Parliament and briefly explained how the South African Parliamentary and electoral system worked. The Committee also gave a very brief overview on the legislation enacted to prevent corruption.

MINUTES
The Chairperson briefly explained the set-up of the South African Parliament and the role that the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) played. He explained the role and responsibilities of the permanent delegates and how they received their mandate from their provinces. He also reviewed the procedures that were followed when the Select Committees deliberated on legislation and policy.

Discussion
Mr A Nakalonga (Leader of Zambian delegation) asked about the oversight of resources.

Mrs I Wina (Zambian MP) asked who deliberated on legislation on the provincial level and to what extent the public were involved.

The Chairperson explained the procedure of legislation promulgation on a national and provincial level and the involvement of the public through public hearings. He also explained how the provincial legislature kept the permanent delegates accountable by calling them back to their provinces. During this time the delegates had to give feedback on the implementation and effectiveness of the legislation and policy the Select Committee had passed. He explained that the NCOP also included organised local government and could arbitrate between local and provincial government.

Mr A Moseki (ANC) added that the Committee could intervene as it worked directly with the Minister of Local Government.

Mr Nakalonga asked if the two houses experienced any clashes due to their similar mandates.

Mr J Masowe (Zambian MP) asked for clarity on the composition of the provincial legislature.

The Chairperson explained the different meeting points between the two Houses, which included meetings between the Ministers and the Members of the Executive Councils, Joint Sittings of Parliament and the Joint Committees. He also explained the function of study groups in this regard.

Mr Moseki added that the National Ministers usually presented proposed legislation at both the National Assembly and the NCOP, and answered questions from both Houses. He explained the two different ballots used during the general elections and the how the sizes of the NCOP parties were determined.

Ms Wina asked how MPs were held accountable by the public as they were not voted in on a constituency basis. She also asked how the Committee treated International Conventions to ensure that their implementation benefited rural areas.

The Chairperson explained the allocation of constituencies to Members of Parliament, constituency offices and the responsibilities these entailed.

Mr D Worth (DA) explained the difference between the Westminster Parliamentary System employed in Zambia and the Proportional Representation System used by South Africa.

Mr Nakalonga asked how the resources for the constituency offices were divided.

Mr Moseki explained that it differed from province to province, but was dependent on the support base a Party enjoyed in that a particular area. He explained that the resources were allocated to the political parties who had to decide how to best utilise them.

Mr Z Ntuli (ANC) added that the elections helped establish a party's level of support in different areas, and Members of Parliament were allocated accordingly.

Mr Nakalonga asked what provisions South Africa made for the physically disadvantaged and minorities.

The Chairperson stated that the various Joint Committees were dedicated to monitoring the rights of women, children, youth and people with disabilities. Other legislation, such as the Employment Equity Act, advanced the interest of minorities and disabled persons. Parliament also tried to accommodate disabled people as an example of the implementation of these provisions. International Conventions were at present applied by the National Assembly, but it had been suggested that they be treated as Section 76 matters. This would make them NCOP matters that would have to be canvassed broadly in the provinces.

Mr Nakalonga asked how conventions and protocols were 'domesticated'. The Chairperson answered that Section 231 of the Constitution gave the State President and the Executive authority to ratify conventions on behalf of the government. These would then be brought before Parliament and legislation would be enacted to enforce them.

Mr B Chiti (Zambian MP) asked how openly defence and security matters were discussed, and if this compromised the security of the nation.

The Chairperson replied that transparency was South Africa's chosen mode of political operation. Most matters were discussed openly except for particularly sensitive matters. These were open to all Members of Parliament but not to the general public. Police security was open to public scrutiny but intelligence matters were private. As defence was not a provincial matter, the Committee played a lesser role in this regard.

Mr T Bwalya (Zambian MP) asked if security was subject to the Auditor-General's Office. The Chairperson responded that it was audited by the Auditor-General and those documents became public documents.

Mr R Chipampe (Zambian MP) asked how election corruption was dealt with, and if electoral petitions occurred.

Mr Nakalonga asked how long electoral petitions took.

Mr Worth explained the Independent Electoral Commission's (IEC) role in the elections and their procedures to avoid corruption. The Chairperson continued the explanation of the IEC's function after the general elections had been held. Due to the IEC procedures and precautions, most contentions did not last long.

Mr Ntuli said that voters had to register before elections so the IEC knew how many people would be voting. Mr Worth added that all voters needed an Identity Document and that their thumbnails were marked, thus preventing corruption.

Mr Nakalonga asked how intimidation was prevented in the run-up to the elections. The Chairperson explained the cool-off period prior to elections and the regulations on the day of voting.

Mr G Nang'omba (Zambian MP) asked if the Constitution allowed extension of the electoral date. Mr Worth answered that that the State President and the ruling party could set the election date three months before or after the previous election date. On polling day itself, only the hours could be extended and the date could not be changed.

The Chairperson then gave a brief presentation on how corruption was dealt with in South Africa legislatively and administratively. He spoke about the promotion of transparency and accountability, which was observed and adhered to by all departments. He spoke about the corporate governance of parastatals and the peer review mechanisms. He discussed the role of annual reports and budget hearings in accountability and the functions of internal "whistle-blowing" mechanisms. He referred to the recent Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Bill, and the many Acts that supported it such as the Promotion of Access to Information Act, the Protected Disclosures Act, the Public Finance Management Act and the Witness Protection Act.

Mr Worth commented on the role of the Auditor-General's Office and the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA). The Chairperson continued that SCOPA aimed to detect possible corruption at its early stages. He apologised for the lack of time to continue this discussion.

The meeting was adjourned.