Question NW2385 to the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Reply:

Background: Lifestyle audits, according to DPSA guide on lifestyle audits, are a critical and legitimate management tool and forms part of a department’s system of risk management. Accordingly, heads of department are required, in terms of Regulation 22 of the Public Service Regulations of 2016 to analyse ethics and corruption risks as part of their department’s system of risk management.

The DPSA guide on lifestyle audits divided the lifestyle process in three phases that include lifestyle review by using the financial disclosure framework as a tool, then the second phase is to conduct investigations if the lifestyle review is indicating that the declared interests are not commensurate with the lifestyle of the particular designated employee, and lastly a full lifestyle audit is to be conducted if the investigation has found indications or suspicions of the designated employee living beyond their means.

a) In the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the steps taken to ensure the audits are undertaken include the following:

(i) lifestyle reviews were done through the Financial Interests Disclosure Framework, as part of the lifestyle audit process for the previous financial disclosure periods. All the Senior Management Service members were verified, an assessment report with findings was provided by the Public Service Commission, and no SMS member was recommended for a detailed profiling in relation to their affordability and standard of living.

Secondly, lifestyle reviews were done for other categories of employees designated to disclose financial interests that include financial administration employees, supply chain management employees, Middle Management Service members and equivalent OSD designated employees, assistant directors and equivalent OSD designated employees. In this category, there were no referrals recommended after the reviews were done.

Furthermore, the Department has a risk management policy in place and is in the process of reviewing the Anti-Corruption and Ethics management policy to include lifestyle audits as one of the tools to prevent, investigate and ultimately deal with employees who are found to have acted unethically or committed any offence that include fraud, theft, conducting business with the organs of the State and corrupt activities in general.

​(ii) Steps taken to ensure the audits are undertaken in Department and entities reporting to the Minister,

• In the NPA, lifestyle review and lifestyle investigations were conducted for all SMS and Non-SMS members. During the 2021/22 financial disclosure period, 203 SMS members (Level 13-16) and 982 non-SMS members (Level 9-10 including OSD) submitted their financial declarations through the e-Disclosure system. These categories of employees were verified and there were no referrals recommended for detailed profiling in relation to conducting full investigations. In addition, the NPA conducted a total of 1185 random lifestyle reviews for both SMS and Non-SMS. Out of the 1185, a total of 7 officials were referred for lifestyle investigations.

• The Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) has drafted a lifestyle audit policy, which is in the consultation stage. However, lifestyle reviews are conducted in accordance with the Financial Interests Disclosure Framework, as provided by Regulation 18 of the Public Service Regulations, as the OCJ’s policy has not been approved, no audits have been undertaken in terms thereof and no outcomes can therefore be reported.

b) Are the details of the outcomes of any audit that has already been undertaken?

Regarding the Department as well as the two institutions/entities reporting to the Minister, there were no referrals emanating from lifestyle reviews for further investigations and therefore no audits have been conducted in the preceding periods.

There are no outcomes that can be reported at this stage.