E-Government and National Anti Corruption Forum: Briefing
Public Service and Administration
30 August 2006
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
PUBLIC SERVICES AND ADMINISTRATION PORTFOLIO
COMMITTEE
30 August 2006
E-GOVERNMENT AND NATIONAL ANTI CORRUPTION FORUM BRIEFING
Acting Chairperson: Mr R Baloyi
(ANC)
Documents handed out:
National
Anti-Corruption Forum Presentation to Portfolio Committee on Public Services
and Administration
DPSA E-Government
Update
SUMMARY
The Department of Public Service and Administration gave the Committee
an update of the developments related to the E-Government programme which aimed
to facilitate a single public service. While most members were excited about
the E-Government programme many had reservations related to the Department’s
ability to implement it. Concerns were also raised around whether the
communication infrastructure and technology would be accessible to people in
rural areas and those who were illiterate.
Following the Department’s briefing the different sectors involved in the
National Anti Corruption Forum (public sector, business sector and civil
society) briefed the Committee on its successes and the challenges it faced.
Members were particularly concerned about the need for the three sectors’ to
work together effectively. Concerns were also raised about the apparent
irregularities in the punishments and penalties meted out to those involved in
corruption. Ms Fraser Molekti, Minister of Public
Service and Administration was concerned that the media failed to present the
successes the forum had had.
Minutes
Deputy General’s opening remarks
Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) Director General, Prof
Richard Levin, said that his office had on several occasion addressed the
Committee on matters related to e-government i.e. the access strategy and the single
public service. They had emphasised that information technology was a key
enabler for service delivery. If one wanted to improve service delivery one
needed to find ways in which one could use information technology (IT) in a
manner that would allow for integrated services, provide a more efficient and
effective system of service delivery to citizens. The presentation to be made
that day would provide information on the context in which e-government was
taking place in South Africa. It would detail the DPSA’s
conceptual view of e-government and specific challenges to delivering it in an
appropriate manner. It would also look at some the specific issues, which they
believed could lead the way in generating buy-in from Government, from citizens
as well as from broad sectors of society including business sector. They would
then take a look at the proposals and discussions around the governance of the
programme. He said that Government was the largest enterprise in South Africa
and its machinery was huge. Considering the different spheres of Government (National,
provincial and local) it was obvious that integration was critical if one were
to optimise the value that e-government and information technology could add to
service delivery improvement. Consultation would be an important part of taking
the programme further.
E-Government Presentation
Mr Romie Barjaktarevic
DPSA Chief Information Officer briefed the Committee briefed the Committee on
the conceptual view and framework of the programme as well as its strategic challenges.
The two primary catalytic projects were the track and trace application which
would allow citizens to use cellular SMS technology to enquire about services
from certain citizen facing departments, and the E Health application which was
aimed at improving public access to health care. Other projects included the elmbizo Customer Relationship Portal and the SMS enabled Batho Pele Gateway. The
presentation also included an overview of the consultative processes that had
been taken, the anticipated schedule for the completion of the programme and
the outcomes achieved so far.
Discussion
Mr Baloyi agreed that the creation a single
public service was a very important matter. South Africa had not yet achieved
this but was on its way towards it. The process would be particularly relevant
to the Department of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG) as well.
Mr I Julies (DA) understood that e government was aimed at achieving service
delivery and that the DPSA decided to embark upon this programme because they
were serious about service delivery. He was very excited about what would happen
once the programme was in place. He thanked the DPSA for the work it had done.
South Africans would be pleasantly surprised by how service delivery would be
improved once the programme was in place.
Ms M Matsomela (ANC) agreed that the developments
were very exciting. She sought clarity on what measures the DPSA had taken to
ensure that information would be reliable, accurate and received timeously.
Ms Matsomela reminded everyone that service delivery
happened at a local level yet the presentation only made mention of extending e
government to the national and provincial levels. She wondered when it would be
rolled out at a local level.
Ms Matsomela felt that the e-health application was a
very exciting development especially as far as improving the delivery of health
services to rural areas. She wondered what the DPSA would do to ensure that the
necessary communication infrastructure would be in place to ensure the effective
roll out of the programme.
Mr K Khumalo (ANC) was also very excited but had
reservations about the possible abuse and shortcomings of e-health. He
commented that more should be done to guard against abuse. He was particularly
worried about the misdiagnosis of disease which could lead to death for which
doctors would be held liable. He warned that although it was an accepted
practice it should be used with great care.
Mr Barjaktarevic said that security was an ongoing
issue. As apart of the architectural design work the DPSA would ensure that
information was not freely available but would be secure and available only to
those who needed it. The National Intelligence Agency (NIA) had a very strong
mandate to guarantee information security and would be partnering with the DPSA
to ensure that Government systems and data would be secure.
Mr Baryaktarevic pointed out that e-governance was
largely about people. Similar to abuse in Government, e-Governance would also
be a possible target for abuse. He assured the members that from an engineering
point of view DPSA would do their best to design systems that would be safe and
designed in such a way that information would be secure and made available only
to those that needed to access it in order preserve its integrity and to
safeguard the interest of citizens. The DPSA would partner with accountable partners (such as NIA) within Government to
ensure that system designs and the selected projects were acceptable.
Mr Khumalo said that the Committee would appreciate
if the DPSA could provide it with clear timeframes for the implementation and
completion of the programme.
Prof Levin responded that the general observation that could be made about IT
and the IT industry was that it “promised heaven on earth and often struggled
to deliver half of what it promised”. The fundamental question related to
actual timeframes. Once the DPSA could only commit itself to actual timeframes
once it had actual substantive proposals. He admitted that the DPSA was
probably moving to slowly in relation to when e-governance first came onto the
agenda. The DPSA took note of the concern and needed to respond to it quite
decisively as the programme moved forward.
Mr Barjaktarevic explained that it was very difficult
to present the Committee with a detailed timeline. Each phase represented
hundreds of individual projects that would be completed within their own unique
time zone. He had tried to broadly illustrate the completion of substantial
efforts within each phase. Each project would have defined starting and completion
dates and the DPSA would track any slippages in terms of project management
practices. These were sometimes unavoidable and one simply needed to understand
the reason for them. It was very important there was a link between the end
user of an ICT application and those who deliver the application. In his own
experience problems often arose when ICT was left to its own devices to deliver
solutions that did not always talk to the needs of the business. If there was a
big gap between the business and ICT one invariably ran into difficulties. This
could be avoided by using the governance mechanism as illustrated in the
presentation. Application project clusters would be headed up by business. The
DPSA believed that the ownership should at the moment exist in the data project
clusters and the department would like the Department of Home Affairs to be its
leading agent since it had the most interest in securing effective, safe and
integrated data.
The application project cluster and the access channel project cluster should
be headed by DPSA because it was fundamentally a transversal ministry bearing responsibility
for the whole public service. It was ideally positioned to head that cluster. Substantial
ICT skills and efforts would be applied at lower levels but the business would
have the accountability to ensure that all projects that were committed to,
signed off and approved would be delivered.
An official wondered what risks were involved in the programme and asked
whether they had been included in the challenges that were mentioned in the
presentation.
Mr Barjaktarevic said that risk management was a very
important matter, particularly in the light of the very many disasters around
the world when large scale ICT system implementation was involved. He warned
that risks stemmed from under funding, unskilled and unavailable personnel,
lack of executive support etc. The governance framework would largely be responsible
for identifying and managing such risks. In an effort to contain and mitigate
risk a risk schedule would be drawn up to fit the overall programme as well as
each individual project level. There was no doubt that, as with any large
undertaking, this was a risky effort. Risk management would have to form part
of ongoing project management.
He explained that it all boiled down to the proper engineering of solutions.
The governance framework had a clear line of accountability from the programmer
at the State Information and Technology Agency (SITA) to Cabinet. If things
went wrong there ought to be a mechanism in place to ensure that those errors
were captured and addressed before they became crises.
An official wondered how the Multi-Purpose Community Centres (MPC)
would be incorporate within the programme so as to make sure that e-governance
would enable service delivery acceleration. She was particularly concerned
about the many challenges that already surrounded the MPCs.
Prof Levin believed that the public service had to be engineered through other
elements of the single public service project. Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) was an enabler that assisted and supported the single public
service initiative. ICT was a crucial enabler allowing the single public
service to improve and integrate service delivery so as to provide a single
view of Government to the citizens. It provided technologies which enhanced the
process of integration. ICT would enable and support integrated service delivery.
It would facilitate it but could not generate it on its own. Alignment with MPCCs was absolutely fundamental. These centres had general
service counters where operators used the Batho Pele Gateway Portal. There already existed an alignment
with phase one of the e-governance programme but as the programme proceeded
into the transactional phases a lot of possibilities opened up for these MPCCs, which would be rebranded
as Batho Pele or Tusong community centres. IT gave infinity of possibilities
but the key challenge remained to deliver tangibles.
Mr R Skekana (ANC) sought clarity on what was meant
by “one single public service”.
An official asked whether a mechanism to access the effectiveness of
e-governance had been provided.
Mr Barjaktarevic explained that if one reflected on
the governance framework one would see that it in itself provided monitoring
and evaluation due to the upward flow of accountability. The e-Governance
programme executive steering committee would from time to time request updates
on programmes from the programme management office. They would of course be
examined, monitored and evaluated for effectiveness. The DPSA had to bring all
Government activities that dealt with ICT under one
roof because some of the problems resulted from fragmented initiatives.
Substantial work happened in all three spheres, yet one did not have the
opportunity to see that work and evaluate it under one government mechanism. He
was of the opinion that this programme would be the start of such an effort. It
would allow one to ensure that those departments that made commitments would be
held to account before matters reached to high a level of escalation. The ICT
work could be managed across all spheres, not in a centralised way, but in a
manner that would allow for accountability. Departments would still contribute
much effort to their unique needs but would remain consistent with the policies
and strategies of e-governance.
Ms L Maloney (ANC) reminded everyone that there were 12 million people who
could not read and write. They were still using outdated means of communication
such as telegrams yet the DPSA spoke of e governance being enabled by amongst
others, cell phones. Many people would not be able to access all the “fancy
hardware” associated with the technology that would be used. She too raised
concerns about whether information would be secure when using cell phone
technology.
Prof Levin agreed that mobile technology would be one of the crucial issues in
terms of access. Vast numbers of people, be they in urban or rural areas, they
would not have the kind of access that would make e-governance the ideal
solution to much of South Africa’s problems. Mobile technology would be a
catalyst. The question the member had raised was interesting and the DPSA would
have to respond to it. The concerns around e-health, patient confidentiality
and its protection, were valid and needed to be responded to.
Mr Barjaktarevic responded that literacy was very
important and would not likely to be sold with technology but rather with
education and also intermediation. DPSA recognised that intermediaries such as
community workers were needed in some instances. They would utilise the various
channels of information and then translate them to the citizens that required
that element of interface due to illiteracy, disablement or poverty etc. The
DPSA hoped that this intervention would to a degree address the needs of those
who were poor or disabled.
He agreed that in the rural areas there was a dearth of infrastructure and the
DPSA would like the Department of Communication to be the head of the
infrastructure project cluster to help facilitate the availability of communication
infrastructure.
Ms Maloney wondered what the DPSA would do to ensure that other departments bought
into the programme at an early enough stage so that all possible pitfalls could
be provided for.
Prof Levin concurred that getting the buy in of other departments was one of
the key challenges in much of the work that was being done. The DPSA may have
the best frameworks and ideas but if the public service as a whole did not buy
into them the DPSA would face a major challenge. Currently there were about 139
departments and more than 1 million public servants and their support and
involvement was absolutely necessary. It would also be necessary to talk to the
different spheres of the administration of the executive arms of Government including
the legislative and judicial branches and explain how e-governance could
support them. The issue of buy in was a fundamental issue which also related to
change management which spoke to the culture changes that were required inside
and outside of government in order for the vision of e-governance to be
actualised.
Mr Baloyi agreed that the technology was a tool to
facilitate communication towards service delivery. The agents of service
delivery would still be the people involved and they could determine success or
failure. The principles of Batho Pele
as a policy of service delivery would need to be internalized. He felt that
attitude played an important role and wondered to what extent people were ready
to soil their hands so as to have things happening the way they ought to
happen. If one considered the presentation and viewed it against the public
protector’s finding and reports on the investigation into issues related to
communication between government departments as well as between the people and
government it was clear that there were challenges and that e-governance might
be a possible intervention. He reiterated that people drove systems and
positive attitudes needed to be built and obligations internalised.
Mr Baloyi agreed that the communication between the
citizens and Government needed to be improved but pointed out that improved
communication between government departments themselves was vital. He wondered
how one could ensure collective responsibility for the buy in of other
departments.
While members were excited about the theory of the programme they held concerns
around its practical implementation. Members of Parliament would remain part of
the structure to ensure implementation. The DPSA should not view their
excitement as a willingness to sign “a blank cheque”. The programme was a work
in progress.
Ms Maloney wondered what role SITA would play since only the private sector was
mentioned as a role player as far as communication infrastructure was
concerned.
Mr Baryaktarevic said that SITA was represented
throughout the governance model. Its chief executive officer would sit at the
executive steering committee level. It would be represented at the various
subsidiary levels for programme and project managers. Importantly its officials
would be in total control as the implementers i.e. as the IT managers of
Government. SITA thus had a very strong position in terms of its contribution
to e-governance. He added that they would of course partner with industry. Many
partnerships would be developed in order to assist SITA with developing reliable
and effective technology solutions under the leadership and ultimate coordination
of Government. In the past some observers had noted that SITA tended to not
always align itself with the interest of Government. These measures would
ensure that this alignment would happen.
Ms Matsomela sought clarity on how the DPSA visualised
the uniformity they wanted to create between different departments who, at present,
had different websites.
Mr Baryaktarevic explained that at a very fundamental
level the DPSA envisioned that every department and every municipality that had
a website should have a link to the Batho Pele Gateway Portal. They should have a “common look and
feel”. The DPSA would consult with Government Communication and Information
System (GCIS) who were the business owners of the Batho
Pele portal in order to devise a look and feel that
related to Batho Pele and
would engender support and trust from citizens. This in itself would represent
a more uniform interface to Government. He assured members that it would not be
a drastic redesign at all. Much local content could be localized to the
communities. The DPSA was not seeking to control how department and municipal
websites looked in terms of content but when it came to legislated and
regulated services information needed to be accurate and the DPSA saw the Batho Pele Gateway Portal as a
reference portal for reliable information about services. Duplication on other
portals would not be such a big concern but citizens should at least have the
assurance that if they went to the Batho Pele Gateway Portal they would obtain truly accurate and
valid information.
Mr Baloyi wondered how sensitivity around
e-Governance would affect the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM). He was
concerned about the security of information moving across boundaries.
Prof Levine clarified that there had been a number of dilemmas with the
development of the APRM’s programme of action. The
government programme of action was reported on to Cabinet on a bi-monthly basis
and this report was pasted on the Government website. He said that one wanted
to avoid duplicating projects from the government plan of action in the APRM
programme of action and to put e-governance into the APRM programme of action
would represent duplication. The DPSA would need to seek the cooperation and
participation of other sectors and put the necessary elements into the APRM
programme of action.
Mr Baryaktarevic added that so far the information in
the Batho Pele portal was
freely available to the citizens and could freely flow over borders. This was
not really a concern. In the subsequent phases of the programme the DPSA would
begin to transact with citizen-related information and data and one would then
need to be very cautious. There would be a need to implement secure transaction
processes using proper identification and authentication mechanisms which had
already been piloted. There was, for instance a concept called public key
infrastructure (PKI) and the notion of a smart card token with biometric
verification information that would ensure that whoever was transacting was the
authorised person. Together these two were internationally recognised as
reliable mechanisms. In South Africa much work had been done in this regard in and
further developments could be leveraged off these. NIA would have an important
role to play in terms of devising encryption algorisms that would provide
ultimate safety to data.
Minister’s opening remarks
Minister of Public Service and Administration Ms Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi led the DPSA’s
presentation on the National Anti-Corruption Forum (NACF). She explained that
the presenters would present on the progress as far as the initiatives it was
engaged with. It would be an opportunity for the Committee to directly engage
with the respective contributors in order to reflect whether as a forum the
sectors were making progress and inputs within their sectors and whether the
national impact of the work of the forum was being felt.
She thought it necessary to indicate that the Committee should particularly consider
whether progress had been made on the national anti corruption programme that
was adopted in June 2005. It was drafted after the Anti Corruption Summit that
was held in March of that year.
Some of the key issues to be highlighted in the presentation included the
implementation of the sectoral anti corruption
programmes, the provision of platforms of national, provincial and local
engagement on issues related to the fighting of corruption, the promotion of
ethical practices and activities, advocacy on the rights, obligations,
sanctions and protection offered by anti corruption legislation and the
implementation thereof as well as how the NACF was being utilised as a vehicle
to establish a national anti corruption consensus and to provide leadership in
this regard.
She concluded by saying that both internationally and in the Africa region
there was much focus on the current composition and model of the forum itself
as well as on its achievements and challenges particularly because it was quite
different in composition. She said that it could be argued that much could be
done to improve the forum’s functioning. Parliament needed to ensure that the
mode was jealously guarded and that it actually performed its function. She urged
members to in terms of their oversight role put pressure on the functioning of
the forum.
The forum was set up before there was a peer review process. Peer review meant
that one did an assessment of the work in the country as a whole, looking at
all sectors of society including Government. If there were lessons that the peer
review mechanism had to consider it could turn to the forum and consider how it
could avoid some of its challenges and build on some of its successes.
Department of Public Service and Administration Presentation
Prof Richard Levine, Director General of the Department of Public Service
and Administration gave the Committee a brief overview of the NACF which was
established in 2001 and comprised of equal representation from business, civil
society and public sectors. He briefed the Committee on the second national
anti-corruption summit and the resolutions made there. He then proceeded to
talk to the national anti-corruption programme’s strategic objectives and
funding and detailed the institutional arrangements of and the public sector’s
involvement in the NACF.
Business Unity South Africa Presentation
Jacques Manevick of Business Unity South Africa
(BUSA), briefed the Committee on the business sector’s role in the NACF. He
detailed the common dangers that threatened the business sector as well as its
anti corruption programme which was aimed at amongst others designing
programmes that would reduce the incidence of and the harm caused by
corruption. The business sector had also been quite effective in the
establishment of commercial court centres that would efficiently convict those
guilty of fraud and corruption. Between 1999 and 2005 the business sector had
managed to through interventions reduce commercial crimes by 50%.
Civil Society Network Against Corruption Presentation
Alison Tilley convener of the Civil Society Network Against Corruption
(CSNAC) briefly described the different civil society organisations that formed
part of CSNAC and detailed each organisation’s involvement in the network. The
organisations included the Open Democracy Advice Centre (ODAC), the Public
Information and Monitoring Services (PIMS) and the Institute for Security
Studies (ISS). She explained that the civil society sector was challenged by
the bleeding of leadership skills, the diversion of donor resources and varying
specific areas of concern.
Discussion
Mr Khumalo noted that Business Against Crime (BAC) appeared to be inactive in a number of
provinces notably the Northern Cape. The Northern Cape was a semi-rural
province and he felt that such areas were being left behind. In such areas
corruption was never exposed because the focus was on urban areas. He wondered
how the organisation was structured at a local level.
Mr Khumalo wondered how projects were assessed.
Ms Maloney said that she appreciated the “holy marriage” that had been sealed
between the DPSA, civil society and business. She asked whether Government,
business and civil society were represented in all the NACF’s
structures.
Mr Baloyi commented that Ms Maloney’s question was at
the heart of the matter. He wondered whether one could now speak of a forum
that could project itself as an entity and not as a fragmentation of structures
operating in an unrelated manner. He assured the presenters that the forum
would not be under any threat of it spoke honestly about its shortcomings and
was honest about whether all sectors were able to work together as a team.
The Minister referred the Committee to the NACF’s
institutional arrangements. The implementation committee of the NACF comprised
the Deputy General of DPSA, the CEO of BAC and the convener of the civil
society network. Each sector has specific tasks and they worked separately but
there efforts needed to be collaborated. They dealt with the implementation of
various programmes initiated by sectors and their implementation necessitated
collaborative work even though it was not always seen that way. Civil society
was involved in work that may monitor how Government was responding or in
specific training initiatives. She agreed that in order to be successful the
sectors needed to work together.
Mr Skesana said that the forum was launched in the
1990’s which was a long time ago. It was beginning to bear fruit since at that
time it did not include the key organ of corruption i.e. civil society. It
always bothered him when corruption was referred to as being rooted in Government
only. Government officials came from civil society too. Most of the elements of
corruption were entrenched in civil society yet this aspect was never focused
on. He was pleased that the civil society was represented in the discussion and
hoped that something would come from their involvement.
The Minister quoted from a speech President Thabo
Mbeki had made on 14 April 1999 while he was still Deputy President:
“Sometime during the 1960’s and English judge sat in his court to decide the
complex question whether it was possible to corrupt a corrupt person. The
hearing was occasioned by the fact uncontested that a vendor of pornographic
material had sold literature to a young man who had not yet reached the legally
defined age of maturity. The law having defined pornographic material as
corrupt, it further prescribed that it was illegal to sell this material to
minors because it would result in corrupting the young. The shopkeeper argued
that it was clear to him that by the time the young man visited his shop he was
already familiar with pornography and was therefore, in the meaning of the law,
already corrupt. Hence the question is can you corrupt a corrupt person. The
judge found the vendor guilty; nevertheless because of the complexity of the
question, he ruled his own finding should be reviewed by a superior court. He
had found the law was broken but was uncertain as to whether the social
morality of the English generation of the 1960’s had been violated. If we
follow the English judge’s ruling…we too should make the determination that the
issue of corruption, about which we have convened, is about two distinct
matters: one being the matter of the law and the other being the matter of
social morality. Between these two clearly what must come first is the matter
of social morality. This would suggest that we who are gathered here are faced
with the challenge to draw up a moral schedule of rights and wrongs”.
The Minister felt that much progress had been made on the mater since the
President’s speech. The progress report very clearly indicated that they were
no longer merely confronted with the question of whether one could corrupt an
already corrupt person. Since that time the Prevention of Corruption Act had
also been passed.
She thought that the interfaith sector should probably engage and determine
whether the matter of social morality had been adequately dealt with. At this
particular time the forum could, without fear of contradiction, say that
significant progress has been made on the anti corruption agenda. She said that
there was a tendency in the media and elsewhere to underplay this fact. The
media only focussed on aspects that were of a sensational nature. She lamented
that in many instances the forum’s achievements were almost seen as our
Achilles heel.
A study that was done jointly with the United Nations drugs and crime structure
said that more than 60% of the cases that were exposed and had been acted upon
were as a result of their exposure through the various agencies within Government.
It also pointed out that only 8% of cases exposed were as a result of investigative
journalism. At that time it was felt that there was probably a need to
strengthen investigative journalism.
Ms Tilley added that she knew that though civil society projected a holier than
thou image there was also corruption within its ranks. This had to be taken
seriously and had to be dealt with. There were a number of initiatives around
this reality. Civil society took the matter as seriously within their own
sector as it did within the sectors of business and government.
Ms Matsomela said that the presentation created the
impression that the forum was still at its very early stages with much
development still occurring. She sought clarity on the level of operation that
has already been achieved.
Mr Isaacs was concerned about whether the forum could suggest any punishment
for those that committed crimes related to corruption. Recent reports indicated
that many people were stealing money. He noted that some people were simply
allowed to pay back what they had taken unlawfully while others were punished
with long term jail sentences. He asked what role the forum played as far as
suggesting punishment.
Mr Baloyi said that some questions might be better
posed to the National Prosecuting Authority who would still make a presentation
to the Committee. They would address the practical aspects of the investigation
of cases related to corruption.
The Minister explained that the forum was not structured in such a way that it
would advise courts in terms of sentences. Such advice was not part of its
mandate. She cautioned against such a practice since it would contravene the
rues that governed the separation of powers that existed in South Africa. There
was a clear separation of powers and the DPSA respected that.
She added however that “If the DA so wished to change things around the
separation of powers, inform us in this committee, and we would definitely
…engage in a debate around this matter”.
She added that the NPA, the South African police Service (SAPS), the Scorpions and
other such organisations had a role to play as far as advice on punishment was
concerned. The interdepartmental structure brought the various agencies and
departments together to collaborate on issues. She reiterated that the NACF
played an advisory and information sharing role as far as punishment, etc. was
concerned.
Mr Manevick pointed out that in terms of the Prevention
and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act it would be illegal to keep cases
involving R100 000 or more out of the system. These cases had to be reported to
the police and companies could exercise no discretion. The company he worked
for had a policy that whenever there was an indication of criminal activity it
was reported to the police and it was left to the prosecuting authorities to
decide on a way forward. The company certainly did not accept repayment of the
money stolen as a bargaining tool. The repayment was non negotiable – the money
had to be returned and the guilty party still faced prosecution. The
appropriate punishment was left to the prosecutor. There was no interference
from the company. Most parties he interacted with shared that approach.
Prof Levine explained that the general practice within the public service w was
to deal with fraud in a twin track process. This would involve administrative
processes (implementing the disciplinary codes) as well as reporting the case
to the SAPS. This sometimes led to particular problems in terms the duplication
of the roles and functions of internal disciplinary process investigations and
investigations by the crime prevention agencies. The DPSA preferred to
automatically implement disciplinary procedures and deal with such cases
decisively through that mechanism. Often people were dismissed from the public
service while having to face criminal charges as well.
A BAC representative explained that BAC was actively present and had offices in
six provinces. BAC’s nine major projects were
implemented a national level however. In the Northern Cape the organisation had
an implementation committee and not an office. In the Free State they worked
with the Department of Education and the Department of Community Safety even though
they did not have an office in the province. In the North West the big business
and mining companies invited them and helped them to establish an office in the
province.
In some of the provinces such as the Western Cape and Limpopo
there were provincial anti corruption fora and the
public sector was working on a project to get all of these coordinated and then
doing a presentation to the NACF.
Ms Maloney asked whether there were any programmes for receiving those criminals
because they often return to civil society after their prison terms. She
wondered whether they could not perhaps be used as role models.
Ms Tilley said that the National Institute for Crime Prevention and the
Rehabilitation of Offenders (NICRO) dealt with the rehabilitation of prisoners.
In many ways civil society’s focus on corruption and issues around it tended to
be positive. They focussed on the benefits of having a good system around
corruption rather than engaging in naming and shaming type strategies. Business,
Government and civil society could gain much by putting good strong management
systems around transparency and whistle blowing in place.
Ms Maloney saw that the commercial sectors were being dealt with drastically.
She wondered whether those offenders who had settled outside of court had been
included in the statistics.
Mr Julies wondered who decided whether a person who had taken part in corrupt
activity repaid the money or faced charges.
Minister’s closing remarks
The Minister thanked the Committee for the opportunity to deliver the
presentation. It reflected that yet another milestone had been reached. The
NACF welcomed the opportunity to come before the portfolio committee because it
gave the opportunity for the voice of the forum to be heard differently through
Parliament. It was important for consistent briefings to take place especially
in the light of oversight and evaluating whether the progress was as it should
be. It also created an opportunity for a voice that reached the citizens
through Parliament itself. The NACF would like to ensure that this happened on
an ongoing basis. She said that the NACF had had opportunity to do
presentations before some provincial legislatures. It would like however to
ensure that the House where it had had its first conference was one that
remained in touch so that it got a real sense of whether the kinds of synergies
that were required were in place.
She added that during the previous week the business working group had met with
the President and during that meeting there was the launch of a joint campaign
against crime and she wanted to inform the Committee that the anti corruption
thrust also formed part of that campaign. This reflected the seriousness with
which corruption was viewed irrespective of where the corruption took place. It
was very important that no money was extorted and used for personal gain when
it could be used for public good, contribute to economic growth or reach direct
beneficiaries in communities.
The Minister concluded by thanking all members of the NACF for all the work
they had done, civil society for their insistence to
take matters forward and organised business for the ongoing work they were
involved in.
She suggested that at some point the Committee should consider the grand corruption
report which she thought was quite an important document. Government was
looking at aspects of the report that needed to be considered and taken
forward.
The meeting was adjourned.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents
Present
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
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.