Electoral Reform Consultation Panel update; IEC Commissioners remuneration; PPFA resolution (with Minister & Deputy Minister)

Meeting report

The Chairperson welcomed everyone. He indicated that the Committee invited the Minister and ERCP to provide an update on the latter's work on its mandate to examine the current electoral system. This followed a decision taken by Parliament in the Sixth Administration to establish the ERCP to determine whether the current electoral system was working. If it is found not to be functional, the Panel would need to submit proposed alternative systems for Parliament to consider.

Parliament expects the Panel to consult extensively with political parties, stakeholders and broader society.

This was the Committee’s first meeting with the Panel since its establishment in May. It is being held virtually because the engagement will only focus on the Panel’s programme plan, the timeline to complete each phase of its work and the resources it may require to carry out its duties independently and within the stipulated deadline, he outlined.

After concluding its engagement with the Panel, the Committee will consider and adopt its draft report on the remuneration of Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) Commissioners, the minutes for its previous meetings, and allow the committee secretary to read out two letters it recently received. 

After that, he asked if any apologies were recorded.

Mr Eddie Mathonsi (Committee Secretary) said the Committee received apologies from Rev Kenneth Meshoe, who would not be attending the meeting, and the Minister, who would have to leave the meeting early.

Mr T Mogale (EFF) indicated that Mr Yazini Tetyana would be running late.

The Chairperson noted the apologies and asked the Director-General (DG) of the DHA to introduce his delegation.

Mr Tommy Makhode (DG of the DHA) introduced all the DHA officials present.

The Chairperson asked for the Chairperson of the ERCP to introduce his delegation.

Adv Richard Sizani (Chairperson of the ERCP) introduced his delegation.

The Chairperson said the Committee’s next engagement with the Panel would be in-person.

After saying that, he asked the secretary to present the letters sent to the Committee.

Mr Mathonsi indicated that he could not upload them on the screen and asked if he could read them to Members.

The Chairperson stressed the need for members of the public to have sight of the letters.

Mr Mogale asked if the secretary could share the letters on the Committee group, as Members had not yet received them.

The Chairperson asked the secretary if the letters had been forwarded to Members.

Mr Mathonsi admitted that he had not sent them out to Members.

The Chairperson was displeased with this development and proposed that the Committee return to the matter later in the meeting.

Afterwards, he invited the Minister to provide an overview of the presentation.

Minister’s Remarks

Dr Leon Schreiber (Minister of the DHA) said he could not say much except that the ECRP was an independent panel tasked with investigating electoral reform in the country, in consultation with the public, and making recommendations (through a report) to the DHA and Parliament. Due to the nature of the process, the department will only provide input after the report is submitted next year.

The Ministry has told the Panel that, given the fundamental nature of its work, which deals with the most essential feature of our democracy, everyone involved must respect its independence. He continued that the department supported the Panel’s work and would ensure secretarial services were provided to assist it in carrying out its work.

The Chairperson indicated that Parliament has given the Panel time to examine the current electoral system and the different systems that could be implemented. He then invited the Panel to present its report.

Mr S Ngubane (MK) asked if the presentation would provide a background on the establishment of the ERCP, the framework of its work, and its mandate for new Members of the Committee. The uMkhonto We Sizwe party has a vested interest in matters related to the IEC as it has first-hand experience with the institution in relation to the elections.

The Chairperson indicated that details about the Panel's establishment would be provided to all Members after the presentation, and a separate meeting on the matter would be organised at some point. For purposes of the meeting, however, he decided to provide Members with a brief history of the Panel’s establishment.

In line with the Constitutional Court (CC)’s judgement in June 2020, the former Minister of the DHA, Mr Aaron Motsoaledi, appointed a ministerial advisory committee (MAC) to look into electoral reform, particularly how the Electoral Act could be amended to allow interested persons to run for a seat in Parliament and provincial legislatures as independent candidates. The MAC’s report was subsequently tabled in Parliament, and a decision was taken to establish an ERCP that would include experienced individuals tasked with consulting the public on possible electoral reform and submitting a report to the Minister containing recommendations.

Several candidates submitted their CVs, but the department nominated only nine. The department then tabled a report to the Committee for a vote. The approved names were later adopted in the National Assembly, and the Panel was established.

Once the Panel completes its work, it will submit a report to the Minister next year. The department will then table an amendment bill for Parliament to consider, and another public participation process will ensue.

He pointed out that the IEC would not brief the Committee in the meeting on its report regarding the 2024 general election. This briefing has been scheduled for the end of October.

Mr Ngubane thanked the Chairperson for providing that brief background. He highlighted that the MKP held a vested interest in the panel's work, given its horrific experience with the IEC during the election. Due to this experience, the MKP might have greater insight into the country’s electoral system.

The Chairperson said all parties represented in the Committee shared a commitment to processing the Panel’s work.

Briefing on the work of the ERCP so far

Adv Sizani took the Committee through the presentation. He began by providing the same brief background provided by the Chairperson on the establishment of the Panel. The panel is comprised of nine members and is supported by a secretariat. A draft budget has been prepared between the Panel and the DHA, which the latter manages. Provisional items in the budget include funding for public participation events, the publication of adverts in the media to solicit public submissions, a high-level conference and the researcher who has already been identified.

The Panel has been given twelve months from the date of the 2024 elections to submit its final report containing recommendations on the possible options for electoral reform for the election of the National Assembly and the election of the provincial legislatures which must include reasons, potential advantages and disadvantages; the legal and constitutional implications; and the financial implications for each proposed electoral system or electoral reform identified by the Panel. If the Panel cannot submit the report within the deadline, it can request a six-month extension from the Minister.

The Panel issued a press statement on August 26th, 2024, calling for public submissions on proposals for electoral reform by September 30th, 2024.

(See Presentation)

The Chairperson opened the floor for discussion.

Discussion

Mr Mogale mentioned that while the EFF supported the Panel and its work, it objected to its composition due to the addition of Adv Pansy Tlakula, who the party viewed as improper and unfit to serve on the Panel based on the finding of her misconduct in the past.

He stressed that the Panel should pay attention to party political funding, especially the increasing influence large donors have over political parties. In addition, he encouraged the panel to widen the public consultation process as much as possible so that all citizens could get involved.

He asked for clarity on whether the Panel sought a secondment from the department to appoint a researcher or if the appointment would be made through the usual hiring process. Additionally, he asked the Panel to provide clear timeframes for when each phase of its work is supposed to be completed, as this had not been outlined in the presentation.

Adv Sizani asked if it would be fine for Members to state which parties they belong to when called upon to speak.

The Chairperson indicated that it was up to Members to decide whether or not to introduce themselves when called upon to speak.

Ms F Muthambi (ANC) acknowledged the progress made by the Panel so far.

She asked if the Panel could share the quarterly progress report it has submitted to the Minister, whether it had developed a strategy to stage public hearings in the rural areas, where the call for written public submissions had been advertised if it was accessible in all the country’s official languages, and to the poor in the rural areas; and if the Panel believed that its recommendations would be carried forward first by the department, and then Parliament, and not brushed aside as was done with the recommendations contained in the Van Zyl Slabbert Report.

Mr Ngubane indicated that previous debates on electoral reform focused on whether the current proportional representation system should be left as is or if a mixed system includes the direct election of public representatives to the National Assembly and the provincial legislatures. In his opinion, the number of issues recorded in the recent election – like busing people from one ward to vote in another and sending individuals to act as observers in the election by international companies – highlighted the need for electoral reform beyond just how representatives are elected. Now there is a need to look into how to best make sure that the IEC can conduct future elections in a free and fair manner, he said. He proposed that the Committee re-look at the Panel’s scope. By doing so, the Committee would be making a vital contribution to eradicating corruption in the management of elections and ensuring any child, despite their circumstance, can rise in any political party and compete fairly against other candidates.

Like the EFF, the MK party also rejected the composition of the Panel, he said. This was due to its non-inclusion of ordinary citizens and representatives from political parties. Instead, the Panel was made up of the same people who were involved in the Van Zyl Slabbert Commission. He proposed that two or three representatives from political parties be seconded onto the Panel.

He was frustrated that the progress report did not include a date or timeline for each task's completion. He added that the committee had to be made aware of the timelines and the delegation of responsibilities so that it could properly monitor the Panel’s work.

He stressed the importance of the Committee ensuring that the Panel does its work transparently and ethically. Thereafter, he asked if the changes to the electoral system would be implemented in time for the 2026 Local Government Election so that they could be tested before the 2029 national and provincial elections.

Ms S Khojane (PA) posed a range of questions to the Panel. The first set was: what information has been shared with the public regarding what motivated the questions of why, how and when electoral reform, if necessary, should be implemented, as the public was left confused by the three-ballot system introduced in the recent election; what were the criteria of the two-ballot system and the reasons for adding an additional ballot, and what would be done to improve voting ques; and how the Panel would ensure there is impartiality when members of the public go to voting stations wearing party regalia, going against the principle of free and fair elections.

The second set focused on whether there are existing strategies on the structures, policies and procedures, as well as technical innovations, required to make informed voting accessible for especially women, the youth and people with disabilities; whether there was a gender balance in the Panel’s support staff; how the Panel would ensure that there would be no direct influence from international donors around what changes should be made to the electoral system; whether the Panel has identified the variety of written, virtual, radio, and social media platforms, and what the criteria was given the importance of reaching areas in the rural areas; and if the Panel could share its quarterly report with the Committee. She said that multilingual members of the panel will need to assist in informing the public of new developments.

Mr A Roos (DA) was concerned that the Panel had only recently requested a research secondment from the DHA, as the research component of its work is supposed to be completed by 30 September. With this in mind, he wondered if the Panel would complete its work in time.

Like other members, he also underlined the need for the panel to provide a clear roadmap for when it will complete its work. He asked that the gantt chart in the presentation be sent to the secretary so the Committee could better understand the Panel’s schedule. This was important as the Committee has been accused of taking too long to process bills, but those who made the accusations were not aware that this was because it is often due to a delay in the submission of key documents by the department.

There were two other concerns. First, the fact that the Panel may have to apply for a six-month extension to submit the final report in November 2025, which would only allow the department to start putting the new bill together at the beginning of 2026. The second is that the adverts have been put in forums easily accessible for the middle class and not the poor. He asked what efforts have been made to engage with all sectors of society so that they could be well informed to meaningfully participate in the discussions, and whether steps have been taken to ensure prisoners and voters abroad can have an input on the process, and how.

Ms M Modise-Mpya (ANC) shared other Members' concerns about the lack of timeframes. Based on the presentation, it seemed that an extension may be required for the Panel to conduct a thorough process that reaches all citizens and stakeholders and ensures meaningful public participation. She urged the Committee to allow the panel to do its job with no undue influence.

She said the Panel's establishment and subsequent work were informed by the views of civil society and the public, demonstrating Parliament’s positive attitude towards the views of ordinary citizens. In addition, she asked the Committee to appreciate the Ministry’s willingness to provide sufficient support to the Panel’s work, which would benefit the country and its people. Once the Panel does its work, the Committee must interrogate its report and decide what electoral system must be implemented.

She was concerned that the Panel had yet to appoint a researcher and pleaded with the department to provide the necessary support for the panel to complete its work on time.

The Chairperson said the Panel had to guide the Committee on two issues. One is on whether to extend the deadline for public comment on electoral reform from 30 September to the end of October so that political parties have sufficient time to make submissions. Two, on whether the issues raised on the IEC’s conduct during the elections. In his opinion, some of the issues raised by Members might unduly influence the Panel’s work and compromise its decision-making processes.

Furthermore, he did not believe that the Panel’s scope had to be re-looked at, as it was already clearly defined in the Electoral Amendment Act. Instead of doing that, the Committee would be better served to assist the Panel in carrying out its work, he felt. As part of the process, the Committee and individual political parties must take collective responsibility to create awareness of the Panel’s work.

He added that the Committee must decide how it would engage with the Panel.

On the timelines, Dr Albertus Schoeman (Member of the ERCP) thought that the full quarterly report had been shared with the Committee because if it had, Members would have seen the Gantt chart, which outlines the timelines established. The chart is a work in progress, and adjustments will be made as the Panel continues with its work. Some key dates are the call for public submissions by 30 September 2024.

In addition, the Panel has started its research programme. It has various deadlines for each of the workstreams, and it will have initial panel discussions on the various areas that need to be researched. All of that will work towards the discussion paper, which will be published at the start of December. The discussion paper will serve as the basis for the in-depth public consultations and will be shared with the Committee.

Multiple opportunities for public participation will be available, initially through written submissions in the first stage of the process and in December, running into February with the start of the public hearings. After that, a high-level conference will be established, and international experts will come to address some of the issues from the public participation process and add further input, which will feature in the final Panel report that is to be submitted to the Minister on 29 May for tabling in Parliament for consideration.

On the calls to make the process more accessible, he said the Panel had noted the issue of accessibility through language, which was most notable when the Presidential Commission on Climate Change held public hearings in rural communities. Having noted this, the Panel has tried to be strategic in constructing the public participation programme so that it is more accessible and can be easily understood by citizens. One suggestion the Panel has made is to publish adverts in community newspapers across all nine provinces; another is to conduct a survey that will look at the public’s views around electoral systems.

In relation to the suggestion that political parties be represented on the Panel, he stated that political parties had an important role to play in engaging with their constituents, members, and the broader public to understand their views, what they believe is important to them in how they want to vote, and how they engage with the voting system.

The Panel’s role is to collect the public's views and evidence on the different options for electoral systems and prepare a range of recommendations for Parliament to consider, as the type of electoral system decided upon was ultimately a policy decision.

He informed the Committee that the Panel had identified an individual to bring on board as a researcher, with discussions already underway. However, the fact that the position was still vacant did not mean no research work was being done. The Panel has already been working on its research programme, with a few panellists forming part of the process. The researcher will assist in drafting the larger reports, especially the discussion document and the final report. He or she will supplement the Panel’s existing research efforts.

Adv Sizani welcomed the committee's views, and some of the questions will be responded to in writing. He appreciated the committee's assistance and said the Panel would need it, particularly during the public participation process. The Panel intends to conduct a wide and in-depth public participation process.

Touching on the questions related to the accessibility of the Panel’s work, he confirmed that the Panel has been looking into how best to get its messages across to all citizens. To this effect, the Department of Communications has assisted in contacting the South African Broadcasting Company (SABC) and the Government Communication and Information System (GCIS). Moreover, the Panel plans to speak to the Cultural and Linguistic Commission on how to assist citizens in making written submissions in their language of choice. Discussions with traditional leaders and civil society are also underway, he added.

Regarding the vacant researcher position, he mentioned that research was not only a function of external support. The Panel members have also contributed to the body’s research by conducting literature reviews on the previous commission reports and other case studies. However, he admitted that the Panel will need assistance, but he is pleased to have received support from the DHA. Research will be done throughout the process, not only in the first phase.

He clarified that the appointment and secondment are to be made through the DHA's Director-General (DG).

Referring to the concerns around international organisations influencing the Panel’s work, he said the DHA and Ministry assured the panel that the government would fund its work, not donors. Nonetheless, the Panel will consider the Committee’s input on the role of money in electoral politics.

At the moment, the Panel cannot determine whether it will require an extension. Once it has completed its review process, it will return and inform the Committee of the outcomes.

Regarding the report submitted to the DHA, he explained that the Electoral Amendment Act requires the Panel to submit quarterly progress reports to the Minister.

Mr Makhode mentioned that the department would continue to provide the Panel with the necessary support. The department is currently finalising the appointment of a researcher.

Mr Njabulo Nzuza (Deputy Minister of Home Affairs) pleaded with the Committee not to confuse the Panel’s scope and mandate with that of the IEC. As a Chapter Nine institution, the IEC will appear before the Committee and present its assessment report on the elections.

Providing a brief background, he mentioned that the Panel was established after the CC Judgment in the New Nation Movement matter, which instructed Parliament to amend the legislation to allow independent candidates to contest in the national and provincial elections. Based on the judgement, the previous Minister of Home Affairs appointed the MAC to look into the question of electoral reform in the country.

The MAC subsequently released a report in which the minority proposed minimal changes to the legislation, allowing only independents to contest in the elections, as per the CC judgement. The then Minister favoured this option due to the limited time available to implement broader reforms before this year’s election. He said the question of broader electoral reform—which does not only look at the system used to elect public representatives—would be deferred to the yet-to-be-established Panel.

After the enactment of the Electoral Amendment Act, an advert calling for the nomination of nine individuals to serve on the Panel was released. A public consultation process scrutinised the credentials of the nominated individuals. Once that process was finalised, the department deliberated and tabled the names of the nine individuals it preferred to serve on the Panel in Parliament. He added that these names were agreed to and adopted by the Committee and later the National Assembly.

He stated that it is the Panel’s responsibility to gather different views and pieces of evidence it can package into a comprehensive report that will also include recommendations for Parliament to deliberate on. The department’s role is to provide the necessary technical and resource support to the Panel in carrying out this work.

He indicated that the department recently received the Panel’s first quarterly report and was able to share it with the Committee if necessary.

Regarding public consultation, the Panel has not been tasked with drafting a new electoral system alone. Political parties have had – during the process of appointing the Panel members – and will have a significant role in overseeing its work, during the public participation process, and the approval of the final system.

At the end of his final remarks, he asked if the department could be excused from the meeting as it had other engagements.

The Chairperson thanked the department and Panel for the engagement.

The Committee, he said, noted the update given by the Panel and the progress made so far. Based on what was presented before it, the Committee was confident in the Panel’s ability to conclude its work efficiently and unbiasedly. Nonetheless, the Committee was still responsible for providing the Panel with the necessary support to carry out its duties. In doing so, the Committee should always recognise and respect the Panel’s independence, he said.

The Committee will request that the Panel provide another update report sometime in October. He hopes that in between that time, the Panel will use all communication platforms to engage with the public.

After making those remarks, he released the department and the Panel from the meeting and asked what the next item on the agenda was.

Mr Adam Salmon, Committee Content Advisor, said it was the reading of the two letters received.

Letter from the Speaker to the Committee

Mr Salmon read out the letter to the Committee. In the letter, the Speaker of Parliament requests the Committee consider the High Court Judgement delivered on 16 August 2024 ordering Parliament to process the resolution contained in Section 24 (1)(a) of the PPFA, which requires that the President makes regulations to set the amounts for the upper limit and disclosure threshold, acting on a resolution of the National Assembly.

The Chairperson mentioned that the Committee support staff will draft the resolution and circulate it to members by Thursday for them to consider. Members will then deliberate on the resolution during Tuesday’s meeting to adopt and table it in the National Assembly. Once the resolution has been adopted, the Committee will respond to the Speaker.

Mr Roos stressed the importance of the content advisor circulating the resolution by Thursday morning.

The Chairperson asked if the Committee accepted his proposed way forward.

Ms Modise-Mpya and Mr Roos supported the Chairperson’s proposed way forward.

Letter from Ms Chohan to the Minister of Home Affairs

Mr Salmon read out the letter sent on 27 August 2024 to the Minister. In the letter, Ms Chohan informs the Minister of her decision to quit from the panel's secretariat due to personal reasons.

The Chairperson noted Ms Chohan’s resignation from the panel's secretariat.

He asked what the next agenda item was.

Mr Salmon said it was the presentation of the report on the remuneration of IEC Commissioners.

Mr Mogale proposed that the briefing be postponed until after the Committee received a briefing from the IEC on its 2024 national and provincial election assessment.

The Chairperson acknowledged the proposal but clarified that the Committee would only be noting the report with the intention of deliberating on it in the next week.

Both Mr Ngubane and Ms Modise-Mpya supported the proposal.

Mr Mogale still felt that it would be proper for the Committee to first receive the IEC’s report before engaging on the remuneration of IEC Commissioners.

The Chairperson explained that the Committee will only deliberate on the report’s recommendations in Tuesday's meeting.

Report on the remuneration of IEC Commissioners

Mr Salmon took the Committee through the presentation. On 28 May 2024, the Committee received a notice from the President requiring the National Assembly to consider determining the salaries and allowances of members of various institutions, including the Commissioners of the IEC, in terms of the Determination of Remuneration of Office-Bearers of Independent Constitutional Laws Amendment Act for the 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 financial years.

After its deliberations, the Committee agreed with the President’s determination on the remuneration adjustment of IEC Commissioners that a retrospective salary increase of 3% be implemented for the 2023/2024 financial year and 2.5% for the 2024/2025 financial year. This equates to a total remuneration of R2.65 million in 2023/2024 and R2.7 million in 2024/2025 for the chairperson, and R2.3 million in 2023/2024 and R2.365 million in 2024/2025 for full-time Commissioners.

The Chairperson asked for the outstanding minutes to be displayed for Members.

Consideration and adoption of the meeting minutes dated 23 July, 20 August and 27 August 2024

Mr Mathonsi took the Committee through the three sets of minutes.

The Chairperson requested a mover to adopt the minutes.

Ms Khojane moved for their adoption.

Mr Roos seconded the mover.

The minutes were duly adopted.

The Chairperson said the draft resolution will be circulated to Members on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. for their parties to consider. Members will be allowed to deliberate on the salaries of IEC Commissioners during Tuesday’s meeting next week.

The meeting was adjourned.