Questions and Replies

05 October 2018 - NW2683

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(a) What number of applications for (i) passport, (ii) citizenship, (iii) birth certificate, (iv) refugee status and (v) identity document is his department in possession of, which it has not processed yet, (b) why have the applications not been processed in each instance and (c) on what date was each application submitted?

Reply:

(i) 1 079 Passport applications from abroad

(b) Special Investigation

Citizenship Verification

Manual Fingerprint Verification

HANIS Investigation

Manual record retrieval

(c) 2017 – Tourist Passport (Adult) 417

Travel Document (Minor) 9

426

2018 – Tourist Passport (Adult) 78

Maxi Passport 2

Travel Document (Adult) 567

Travel Document (Minor) 6

653

 

Total 1 079

 

(ii) 3 931 Citizenship applications

(b) Manual verification of permanent residence permits.

(c) A few of the applications date back to 2006. They were transferred in October 2011 to Head Office when centralisation of decisions on such applications was effected. Prior to this period, applications for citizenship were processed by office managers.

(iii) According to the National Population Register (NPR), there are 233 461 birth certificates applications that have not been processed yet. This information is derived from the NPR report dated 14/9/2018. Of these applications, 96 053 are No records cases. The department has already effected Function 170 on 96 053 applications requesting client to reconstruct a records which could not be found in the repositories. To date, these records have not been reconstructed, or are slowly being reconstructed. There is additional 10 215 missing records for clients who are already deceased and the reconstructed records have not been furnished. The remaining work in progress is 127 193 birth certificate applications.

(b) Except for the unavailable/missing/misfiled records, the department continues to retrieve available records to modify certificates for backlog applications, as well as new Birth certificate application cases. Some of these applications could not be processed as there are no records. Some birth records are either missing or hard to find. In some instances where these records are available, such records have faded to a point that it would be difficult to read the little available information. The Records Management Centre is mainly paper based. These records are susceptible to heat (fade) and are often misfiled (misfiling) due to human errors. The unit does not have sufficient human capacity to retrieve these records. The majority of officials responsible for records retrieval are old.

(c) The report on Birth Certificates applications not finalised dates from

2002/03/04 to 2018/09/14

(v) There are approximately 10,000 Smart ID card applications for documents which have not been processed at Front Offices and 12,484 applications pended by Back Office.

(b) Applications which are pended at Front Offices are due to incomplete supporting documents having been submitted by the applicants. In these instances, the Department has implemented an SMS functionality which will indicate to the applicant which outstanding documents are requested from him / her in order to process the application further and enable it to be finalised.

At Back Office, applications are pended due to slow manual retrieval of birth records for verification purposes. The Department is in the process of improving the birth record retrieval system by means of a digitization programme in conjunction with Stats SA, which will create one central, digitized source for all records.

(c) The applications which are pended at Back office dates from 2015 until 2018. There are three (03) cases in 2015, twenty-five (25) in 2016, three thousand one hundred and eighty-two (3 182) in 2017 and eight thousand six hundred and nine (8 609) in 2018. For front offices three (03) SMSs will be sent to the client of which after the third SMS an application will be cancelled and client will need to re-submit a new application.

(iv) There are 641 active cases as extracted from the National Immigration Information System on 10 September 2018.

  • Firstly, four hundred and eighty nine (489) applications from various Refugee Reception Offices are awaiting finalisation by Refugee Status Determination Officers (RSDO). The RSDO is expected to finalise these within 180 days and the delay is as the result of no shows by applicants for interviews by RSDO, and RSDO conducting further research on country of origin conditions.
  • Secondly, one hundred and fifty two (152) are applications of applicants who are now resurfacing and who approached the Cape Town Refugee Reception Office as a result of the court order in the matter between Ntumba Guella Nbaya & Others v Minister of Home Affairs case no: 6534/15 which forced the Department to extend permits of asylum seekers who applied in Refugee Reception Offices other than Cape Town. Their permits are being extended to allow officials to request their files from those offices.

18 September 2018 - NW2485

Profile picture: Macpherson, Mr DW

Macpherson, Mr DW to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(a) Which Home Affairs offices are (i) designated to be open on Saturdays in KwaZulu-Natal and (ii) not and (b) what are the reasons for the decision not to open the specified offices on Saturdays?

Reply:

a) (i), (ii) No offices are designated to be open on Saturdays in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) and other provinces.

b) The withdrawal of working hours’ circular of 2015 on 15 June 2017 at the PSCBC led to the collapse of Saturday opening. The Department engaged organised labour on working hours at the Departmental Bargaining Chamber with a view to ensure service delivery is not affected and that our offices open on Saturday. The Department is in favour of a shift system to enable Saturday work within a 40 hour week (Monday – Saturday or Monday – Friday) but organized labour requires payment of overtime as the staff is not prepared to work ‘voluntary’ after completing their 40 hour work week Monday to Friday.

18 September 2018 - NW2567

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)(a) What is the total number of (i) deputy directors-general and (ii) chief directors that are employed in (aa) an acting and (bb) a permanent capacity in his department and (b) what is the total number of women in each case; (2) (a) what is the total number of (i) chief executive officers and (ii) directors of each entity reporting to him and (b) what is the total number of women in each case?

Reply:

Department of Home Affairs

(1)(a)(i) Total number of Deputy Director-Generals employed in:

(1)(a)(i)(aa) An acting capacity: 3, of which 1 is a woman; and

(1)(a)(i)(bb) A permanent capacity: 4, of which 1 is a woman.

(1)(a)(ii) Total number of Chief Directors employed in:

(1)(a)(ii)(aa) An acting capacity: 3, of which 3 are woman; and

(1)(a)(ii)(bb) A permanent capacity: 28, of which 5 are woman.

(2)(a)(i)(b) Total number of Chief Executive Officers: 1 x Director-General (1 male, in an acting capacity); and

(2)(a)(ii)(b) Total number of Directors reporting to Minister: 0.

Electoral Commission

(1)(a)(i) 3 Deputy Chief Electoral Officers (equivalent of Deputy Director-General)

(1)(a)(i)(aa) None

(1)(a)(i)(bb) 3

(1)(b) 2

(1)(a)(ii) 16 Senior Managers (Equivalent of Chief Director)

(1)(a)(ii)(aa) 2

(1)(a)(ii)(bb) 14

(1)(b) 6

(2)(a)(i) 1 Chief Electoral Officer (Equivalent of Chief Executive Officer)

(2)(b)(i) None

(2)(a)(ii) 4 Commissioners (Equivalent of Board of Directors)

(2)(b)(ii) 1

Government Printing Works

(1)(a)(i) 4 Deputy Director-Generals (DDG)

(1)(a)(ii) 6 Chief Directors

(1)(a)(aa) 2

(1)(a)(bb) 8 (2 DDGs and 6 Chief Directors)

(1)(b) 6 (3 DDGs and 3 Chief Directors)

(2)(a)(i) 1

(2)(a)(ii) 0

(2)(b) 1

18 September 2018 - NW2516

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What amount did (a) his department and (b) each entity reporting to him spend on (i) advertising and/or (ii) communication services on the (aa) Africa News Network 7, now known as Afro Worldview and (bb) New Age newspaper, now known as Afro Voice, (aaa) in the (aaaa) 2016-17 and (bbbb) 2017-18 financial years and (bbb) since 1 April 2018?

Reply:

a) Department of Home Affairs

(i)(aa) R0

(i)(bb)(aaaa) R50,944.32 on advertising in support of the 2016/17 Mkhaya Migrants Awards Call for Nominations Media Campaign.

(i)(bb)(bbbb) Not Applicable

(i)(b)(bb) Not applicable

(ii)(aa-bb) R0 spent for communication services in (aaaa), (bbbb) and (bbb).

b) Electoral Commission

The Electoral Commission has not spent any moneys on (i) advertising and/or (ii) communication services on the Africa News Africa News Network 7, now known as Afro Worldview and (bb) New Age newspaper, now known as Afro Voice, (aaa) in the (aaaa) 2016-17 and (bbbb) 2017-18 financial years and (bbb) since 1 April 2018.

b) Government Printing Works

(i) None

(ii) None

(aa) None

(bb) None

(aaa) None

(aaaa) Not applicable

(bbbb) Not applicable

(bbb) Not applicable

11 September 2018 - NW2530

Profile picture: King, Ms C

King, Ms C to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Is the information and communication technology system of his department synchronised with the SA Police Service’s systems for biometric identification; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

Yes, SAPS have access to the HANIS system via the interface between Integrated Justice System (IJS) and Department of Home Affairs (DHA). DHA has developed a “DHA-IJS HUB” used by SAPS for verification or identification of SAPS clients whose biometrics are stored on HANIS.

If the person of interest’s biometrics are stored in HANIS, the following fields are returned as requested:-

Person Name; Person Facial Image; Person Contact Information; Person Birth Date; Person Birth Country Code; Person Living Indicator; Person Death Date ; Person Gender Code; Person Marital Status Code; Person Marital Type Code ; Person Marriage Date; Person Identification; Person Residential Address; Person Postal Address.

10 September 2018 - NW2230

Profile picture: Figlan, Mr AM

Figlan, Mr AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)Whether he has put any plans in place to reduce the long queues and waiting times at his department’s offices; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) what has he found to be the causes for the long queues and waiting times at his department’s offices?

Reply:

1. Yes, the Department has drafted a strategy and action plan to address and reduce the long queues including waiting times at its offices. The action plan would be rolled out with short, medium to long term interventions. The Department held a media briefing on 22 April 2018, to pronounce to the public the “War on Queues” campaign, as part of its plans to ensure that notwithstanding the high volumes experienced amidst inadequate physical infrastructure, unstable systems and general lack of resources, our clients are served at the shortest possible time.

The action plans put in place encompass the following critical components, namely:-

 

  • Assessment report on immediate interventions at identified offices (Alexandra, Soweto, Pietermaritzburg and Umgeni) showing reductions in waiting times and what has been done in ensuring people are not waiting outside offices to be served.
  • Categorising of offices based on performance in order provide interventions at such offices.
  • The Department has introduced a steering committee that sits every two weeks to monitor all offices that are still experiencing long queues and make interventions where required.
  • Some interventions include but is not limited to; a one-stop workstation that takes fingerprints and photographs, a streamline of processes and a reduction of time clients spend in Home Affairs offices.
  • Revisiting the working hour arrangements negotiations with labour; to address the issue of unpredictable walk-in clients and inadequate resources.
  • Proposals on how to measure customer experience and waiting times in offices, and on how to deal with structural challenges of long waiting times.

The Department, informed by the action plans, is finalising a customer satisfaction survey, it commissioned to get the client contact centre
working optimally, find a solution for unpredictable walk-in clients and for
front office space, explore possibilities of a new shift system, attend to the unstable system, scale-up unannounced visits by senior managers to offices, improve workflow and beef-up communication with clients.

2. Long enduring queues emanating from high client volumes caused by unpredictable walk-ins, discontinuation of Saturday working hours, inadequate footprint and front office space, unstable systems (networks and applications), inefficient work flow process and uncoordinated communication strategies.

10 September 2018 - NW2431

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What is the (a) name of each investing company that has invested on land owned by (i) his department and (ii) each entity reporting to him and (b)(i) nature, (ii) value and (iii) length of each investment?

Reply:

The Department and entities responded as follows:

(i) Department of Home Affairs

(a-b) The Department of Home Affairs does not own any land and therefore the question as to who invested on land owned by the Department cannot arise.

(ii) Government Printing Works

  1. None
  2. Not applicable

(iii) Electoral Commission

  1. None
  2. Not applicable

05 September 2018 - NW2246

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)Whether, with reference to his reply to question 1768 on 8 June 2018, the figures in Table 1 include the total number of decisions taken by Refugee Status Determination Officers (RSDOs) and referred to the Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs (SCRA), or simply those decisions finalised by the SCRA; (2) what number of (a) decisions were taken by RSDOs in each calendar year since 1 January 2008 and (b) the specified decisions were (i) referred to and (ii) decided by the (aa) SCRA and (bb) Refugee Appeals Board (RAB) in each case; (3) what number of the specified decisions referred to the SCRA and RAB were (a) taken on review and (b) set aside following the judicial reviews in each case in each calendar year; (4) whether the (a) RSDOs, (b) SCRA and/or (c) RAB are experiencing any backlogs with the processing of decisions and appeals; if so, what are the full details of the backlogs in each case?

Reply:

(1) Those are decisions finalised by SCRA.

(2)(a)&(b) The information is tabulated in the tables hereunder:

(aa) FOR SCRA

Year

Decisions taken by RSDO (a)

Unfounded (In cases of appeal referred to RAB) (i)

Manifestly Unfounded automatic refer to SCRA (ii)

2008

69114

Not Available

2009

50622

18856

27199

     

Upheld
18239

Set Aside
472

2010

77071

24827

42161

     

Upheld
30995

Set Aside
196

2011

43953

16875

20275

     

Upheld
6680

Set Aside
13

2012

63228

25037

31965

     

Upheld
38628

Set Aside
263

2013

68241

35402

25553

     

Upheld
9404

Set Aside
94

2014

75733

29545

36958

     

Upheld
22972

Set Aside
247

2015

60640

14093

44048

     

Upheld
16884

Set Aside

1777

2016

41241

21693

16391

     

Upheld
24516

Set Aside
1894

2017

27980

6819

18894

     

Upheld
15534

Set Aside
1843

Please note: In 2008 the statistics for rejections were not divided into unfounded and manifestly unfounded.

(bb) FOR RAB:

CASES RECEIVED BY RAB AS UNFOUNDED AND FINALISED

YEAR

UNFOUNDED REFERRED TO RAB (i)

RECEIVED

FINALISED (ii)

2008

Not Available

3877

1550

2009

18856

4601

4139

2010

24827

4879

3420

2011

16875

4362

5434

2012

25037

4958

4886

2013

35402

9413

2743

2014

29545

15452

4466

2015

14093

14475

4993

2016

21693

4455

2670

2017

6819

10117

5261

3(a) The information is as follows:

Year

(aa) Asylum Seeker

(bb) Refugee Status

2013

630

712

2014

399

523

2015

1089

1021

2016

435

792

2017

238

1115

2018

14

758

Total

2805

4921

Grand total of litigation instituted by asylum seekers and refugees to date is 7,726 (2805 + 4921)

3(b) Litigation brought against the Department by asylum seekers is essentially contextualised as follows:-

New Asylum Seekers: These are illegal foreigners detained at Lindela Repatriation Centre (“Lindela”) or Police Stations, seeking urgent court orders to be released from detention on the basis that they are new asylum seekers who want to be afforded opportunity to apply for asylum. In most such cases, courts do not award costs to the applicants and simply order their release, so as to allow them to apply for asylum. This is in line with the Supreme Court of Appeal judgment of BULA and Others / Minister of Home Affairs and Others in which the court held that once intention to apply for asylum is indicated, asylum seeker is entitled to protective provision by the Republic under International Law. These court applications are mostly not settled in both parties favour in that asylum seekers (applicants) are released from detention and afforded the opportunity to apply for asylum and no costs order is made against the Department.

Asylum Seekers Appeals to the Refugee Appeal Board (“RAB”): These are asylum seekers whose applications have been rejected by the Refugee Status Determination Officer (“RSDO) on the grounds that their applications are unfounded. Such asylum seekers may appeal the RSDO’s decision to the RAB. During the period 2013 – 2016, the RAB experienced capacity challenges which led to a huge backlog in finalising the appeals. This resulted in litigation in which asylum seekers whose applications are pending before the RAB would launch court applications compelling the RAB to either furnish them with interview dates and/or finalise decisions. Because of the nature of this litigation, the Department and/or RAB had no legal grounds to oppose them and as a consequence, there were costs orders occasioned by these applications. However, since the capacity constraints have been addressed at the RAB, this nature of litigation has ceased.

Failed Asylum Seekers: These are those asylum seekers/applicants whose applications have either been rejected by the Standing Committee on Refugee Affairs (“SCRA”) or RAB. The rejection by SCRA or RAB renders such asylum seekers illegal foreigners in the Republic and therefore liable for arrest and detention for the purposes of deportation. Upon arrest, failed asylum seekers approach the courts to seek orders to review and set aside the rejections. Such applications are normally brought in two parts, namely, Part A and Part B. In Part A, the applicants seek orders to be released from detention pending finalisation of Part B. In Part B, they seek orders to review and set aside the decision of the RAB or SCRA. Ordinarily, in Part A of the application, there are no orders as to costs. However, in Part B, parties incur costs. Part B is seldom set down for hearing as the intention of the failed asylum seekers is never to prosecute the review, but rather to secure the indefinite stay in the Republic. Costs in these review applications are also reserved pending the finalisation of these review applications.

The nature of litigation instituted by refugees against the Department is mainly two-fold:

(i) Certification in terms of Section 27(c) of the Refugees Act

These applications are meant to compel SCRA to recognise the applicants as indefinite refugees.

(ii) Refugees Identity and Travel Documents

These applications are meant to compel the Department to issue refugees with South African Refugee Identity Documents (“refugee IDs”) and/or Travel Documents.

Ordinarily, the Department does not oppose these applications as there are no legal grounds to oppose them. The applicants merely seek orders to compel the Department to finalise their applications for refugee IDs and/or Travel Documents. In such matters, costs are confined to the issuing of high court applications only.

4(a-c) The information is as follows:

Area of responsibility

2017

Legacy

Total

RSDO

623

997

1620

SCRA

9836

30490

40326

RAB

5246

142548

147794

27 August 2018 - NW2252

Profile picture: Vos, Mr J

Vos, Mr J to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

With regard to his announcement to include the names of both parents in the passports of minors, (a) what is the name of the company that was awarded the contract and (b) what amount is projected to be paid by taxpayers in this regard?

Reply:

a) No contract was awarded specifically for this enhancement. The current DHA system was enhanced via the DHA modernisation/ Who Am I Online (WAIO) scope and printing is still done by Government Printing Works (GPW).

b) The price of passport has not changed.

17 July 2018 - NW1993

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Whether, with reference to the reply to question 896 on 9 April 2018, any money from the Independent Electoral Commission was used to pay for any personal court review applications of a certain person (name and details furnished), in respect of the specified Public Protector’s report; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) what was the total cost of each review, (b) who authorised the expenditure and (c) what were the outcomes of each court review?

Reply:

The question was referred to the Electoral Commission which responded as follows:

The Electoral Commission did not pay for the review of the Public Protector’s Report for the person referred to as there was never a review application instituted.

(a) Not applicable

(b) Not applicable

(c) Not applicable

16 July 2018 - NW1821

Profile picture: Esau, Mr S

Esau, Mr S to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)Whether (a) his spouse and/or (b) an adult family member accompanied him on any official international trip (i) in each of the past five financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2018; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what (aa) is the name of the person(s), (bb) was the (aaa) purpose and (bbb) destination of the trip and (cc) was the (aaa) total cost and (bbb) detailed breakdown of the costs of the accompanying person(s) to his department; (2) whether each of the specified trips were approved by the President in terms of the provisions of Section 1, Annexure A of the Ministerial Handbook; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(1-2) Yes, the Ministerial Handbook allows for a Minister to be accompanied by his wife and I do not have to seek the president’s permission for that. However, I can choose my wife or any of my children to accompany me in place of my wife.

I have not been accompanied anywhere by my wife or any member of my family in the only international trip I have undertaken since 1 April 2018

10 July 2018 - NW896

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(a) Who took the decision to appeal the report by the Public Protector entitled Inappropriate Moves, (b) can he provide Mr M Waters with the minutes which reflect the decision that was taken and (c) what was the total cost of the appeal to the Independent Electoral Commission?

Reply:

The question was referred to the Electoral Commission which responded as follows:

a) The Electoral Commission did not file an appeal against the Public Protector Report.

b) There are therefore no minutes reflecting that decision.

c) There were no costs incurred as there was no appeal against the Public Protector Report.

06 July 2018 - NW2132

Profile picture: Dreyer, Ms AM

Dreyer, Ms AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

With regard to his reply to question 895 on 17 April 2018, who are the (a) trustees and (b) beneficiaries of the Riverside Trust (IT Nr IT3670/2009)?

Reply:

The question was referred to the Electoral Commission which responded as follows:

(a-b) The information requested is not immediately available and the current owners of the Riverside Office Park have been instructed to provide the details of trustees and beneficiaries of the Riverside Trust (IT Nr IT3670/2009).

Upon receipt by the Electoral Commission, the information will be forwarded.

06 July 2018 - NW2128

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1) With regard to his reply to question 839 on 17 April 2018, where he states that the details of the complainant in the matter is currently unknown to the Commission, why did the Electoral Commission of South Africa not file a complaint in relation to the Public Protector’s report; (2) whether he has found that the Commission complied with section 34 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, Act 12 of 2004; if not, how was this conclusion reached; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

The question was referred to the Electoral Commission which responded as follows:

1. A hitherto unknown complainant filed a complaint with the Directorate for Priority Crimes Investigations (DPCI). The Commission became aware that a complaint had been lodged whilst it was still considering the report of the Public Protector and when some of its officials were being interviewed as part of the DPCI investigation.

2. Having noted that a complaint had already been laid and that an investigation was already under way, the Commission regarded the reporting required under section 34 of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act (POCCA), Act 12 of 2004 as no longer needing its further consideration as the investigation in terms of section 22 of the POCCA Act had already commenced.

27 June 2018 - NW1862

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)What (a) is the total number of incidents of racism that were reported to the human resources offices in (i) his department and (ii) entities reporting to him in (aa) 2016 and (bb) 2017 and (b) are the details of each incident that took place; (2) was each incident investigated; if not, why not in each case; if so, what were the outcomes of the investigation in each case?

Reply:

The Department and entities responded as follows:

(i) Department of Home Affairs

(1)(a) No incidents of racism were reported to the human resources office in 2016 and 2017.

(1)(b) Not applicable

(2) Not applicable

(ii) Government Printing Works

(1)(a)(aa) 2016 – 1

(1)(a)(bb) 2017 – 1

(1)(b) 2016 – Racist incitement

   2017– Social media posting

(2) Yes. The employee was dismissed in the 2016 incident and 2017 case employee not found guilty.

(ii) Electoral Commission

(1)(a) No incidents of racism were reported to the human resources office in 2016 and 2017.

(1)(b) Not applicable

(2) Not applicable

27 June 2018 - NW1970

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)What number of rejected asylum applications were (a) taken on review, (b) opposed by his department and (c) successful at court (i) in each of the past five calendar years and (ii) since 1 January 2018; (2) were any directives given to or policies adopted by (a) the State Attorney or (b) refugee reception offices to oppose or reject (i) every application for the review of asylum, (ii) all applications or (iii) applications from specific countries?

Reply:

(1)(a) As per the table below:

Year

Judicial Reviews

2013

746

2014

522

2015

1282

2016

887

2017

1128

2018

723

Total

5288

(1)(b) All these judicial review applications were opposed.

(1)(c) The Department does not have a litigation case management system in terms of which matters that were won or lost in court are recorded. The only system that is currently in use is a basic system that merely records new court matters.

2. There are no directives given to or policies adopted by the State Attorney and/or Refugee Reception Offices to oppose or reject every application for the review of asylum, all applications or applications from specific countries.

27 June 2018 - NW1971

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What (a) are the minimum educational and experience requirements for (i) Refugee Status Determination officers, (ii) Refugee Appeal Board members and (iii) Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs members and (b)(i) training and (ii) support materials does his department provide for the specified members? (2) were any directives given to or policies adopted by (a) the State Attorney or (b) refugee reception offices to oppose or reject (i) every application for the review of asylum, (ii) all applications or (iii) applications from specific countries?

Reply:

Section 10 (4) and 13 (2) of Refugee Act 130 of 1998 states that one member of SCRA as well as RAB must be legally qualified to serve on the board. The Department of Home Affairs (DHA) however requires that a member of SCRA as well as RAB should have LLB/Legal degree or equivalent qualification with three years of experience in Legal or Immigration Field relevant to Asylum Seeker Management Environment.

Section 8 (3) of Refugee Act 130 of 1198 requires that the DG should ensure that Refugee Reception Officers (RRO) and Refugee Status Determination Officers (RSDO) appointed under this section receives the additional training necessary to enable them to perform their functions properly.

The Learning Academy annually plans and provides Asylum Seeker Management related training to RROs and RSDOs. This training is offered mainly through NQF 5 qualification (National Certificate: Home Affairs Services) registered with the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). Some of the Unit Standards offered within this qualification are Adjudicate a claim for Refugee Status, Refugee Affairs, Human Rights and Counter Xenophobia. The Learning Academy further provides additional relevant training outside the National Certificate: Home Affairs such as systems training (NIIS), Case Management System, Performance Management, Diversity (LGBTI), Automated Booking Terminal System and DHA 1590 Application Forms (New Application Forms).

The Learning Academy has planned four training and development interventions (Refugee Law, Country of Origin Research, Counter Xenophobia and Social Cohesion and Foreign Languages) during the financial year 2018/2019 to capacitate RROs and RSDOs. The Learning Academy consults regularly with SCRA on training related matters as depicted in section 8 (3) and 39 of the Refugees Act, 1998.

The Learning Academy has provided training to SCRA and RAB administrative staff in the past. SCRA and RAB board members fall outside the scope of the DHA as they are appointed according to Refugee Act 130 of 1998 and not the Public Service Act. They are also expected to function without any bias and maintain their independence at all times as specified in section 9 (2) and 12 (3) of the Refugees Act, 1998.

27 June 2018 - NW2002

Profile picture: Rabotapi, Mr MW

Rabotapi, Mr MW to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Whether the Independent Electoral Commission has sufficient funding for two national registration weekends in its 2018-19 budget; if not, (a) what amount has been allocated to the commission for the national registration weekends and (b) what is the shortfall; (2) what (a) was the total cost of conducting each national registration weekend in the past five financial years and (b) is the budgeted cost for the remaining registration weekend(s) for the 2019 national elections?

Reply:

1. No, the Electoral Commission does not have sufficient funding for two national registration weekends.

(a) During the 2017 MTEF National Treasury allocated R630 million in 2018-19 for two main registration weekends and some NPE 2019 election related activities. Of this amount, approximately R581 million related to the two main registration weekends and the remaining R49 million related to preparatory work for the 2019 NPE such as the procurement of components of the bill of materials.

(b) Due to inter-alia the lack of funding by National Treasury in relation to initiatives taken by the Electoral Commission with regards to the rectification of voters’ addresses on the national voters’ roll stemming from the Constitutional Court ruling, the cyclical ICT hardware and platform refresh and the partial funding of the new voter registration devices, the overall shortfall in the 2018-19 financial year is R346 million. This budget shortfall necessitated that funds amounting to R211 million which was earmarked for the registration weekends, be reprioritised to address these critical unfunded projects. The remainder of the shortfall (R135 million) was funded by delaying and reprioritising certain projects.

It should be noted that the R211 million that was originally allocated for a second registration weekend does not include the imperative to have an average of three electoral staff members per voting station. At the time of the 2017 MTEF it was envisaged that there would only be two staff members per voting station.

2. (a) The actual cost of the registration drives held over the past five financial years are as follows:

  • November 2013: R280.5 million
  • February 2014: R209.9 million
  • March 2016: R314.7 million
  • April 2016: R192.5 million
  • March 2018: R219.6 million

(b) The budgeted cost for the planned February 2019 registration drive for the 2019 NPE is R419 million. This includes an additional staff member per voting station (R32 million), necessitated by the need to harvest addresses, and an additional training day (R17 million) on the new voter registration devices.

27 June 2018 - NW2021

Profile picture: Mazzone, Ms NW

Mazzone, Ms NW to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What are the details of the (a) number of accidents that vehicles owned by his department were involved (i) in each of the past three financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2018, (b) cost for repairs in each case and (c)(i) number of and (ii) reasons for vehicles being written off in each case; (2) Whether all vehicles owned by his department have tracking devices installed?

Reply:

(1)(a)(i) and (ii) as tabulated hereunder:

 

2015/16

2016/17

2017/18

2018/19

Number of State owned DHA vehicles involved in accidents

69

72

50

5

Number of State owned vehicles written off

15

21

5

1

Please note ‘accidents’ involve all incidents where damage is caused to a State owned vehicle. This includes cracked windscreens and burst tyres.

(1)(b) For detail see schedule attached marked annexure A.

(1)(c)(i) See table above

(1)(c)(ii) Uneconomical to repair

(2) None of the State owned DHA vehicles are fitted with tracking devices.

27 June 2018 - NW1913

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)What (a) is the total number of incidents of sexual harassment that were reported to the human resources offices of (i) his department and (ii) entities reporting to him in (aa) 2016 and (bb) 2017 and (b) are the details of each incident that took place; (2) was each incident investigated; if not, why not in each case; if so, what were the outcomes of the investigation in each case?

Reply:

The Department and entities responded as follows:

(i) Department of Home Affairs

(1)(a)(aa) One

(1)(a)(bb) One

(1)(b) 2016

  • The case involved a female foreign national (the complainant) and an immigration officer at level 8 (the alleged perpetrator). Charges of misconduct were preferred against the Officer and a disciplinary hearing was held. The Officer was found guilty and a sanction of dismissal was pronounced by the chairperson of the disciplinary hearing. The dismissal was implemented. From the employee side the matter have been taken for review of the decision of the presiding officer.
  • The employee took the matter to the Labour Court for review – the case is still pending.

(1)(b) 2017

  • This case was registered as a grievance but the case was investigated and an outcome was issued. The employee consequently registered a dispute with CCMA based on sexual harassment. The Commissioner ruled that the employee must be compensated for sexual harassment. The department implemented the sanction and the employee was compensated.
  • The case is completed and concluded - closed.

(2) Yes. The outcomes of the two cases investigated are detailed in (1)(b) above.

(ii) Electoral Commission

(1)(a)(aa) None

(1)(a)(bb) None

(1)(b) Not applicable

(2) Not applicable

(ii) Government Printing Works

(1)(a) (aa) None

(1)(a)(bb) One

(1)(b) There was an allegation of unacceptable utterances (sexual comments) reported.

(2) Yes. The employee was given verbal warning.

27 June 2018 - NW1901

Profile picture: Mulder, Dr CP

Mulder, Dr CP to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)Whether all members of the senior management service (SMS) in his department had declared their interests for the past year as required by the Public Service Regulations; if not, (a) why not, (b) how many of the specified members did not declare their interests and (c) what are the (i) names and (ii) ranks of the specified noncompliant members of the SMS; (2) whether noncompliant SMS members have been charged; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (3) what number (a) of employees in his department at each post level are currently suspended on full salary and (b) of the specified employees at each post level have been suspended for the specified number of days (details furnished); (4) what is the total amount of cost attached to the days of service lost as a result of the suspensions in each specified case?

Reply:

1. All SMS members save for one, submitted their financial interests as required by the law.

(1)(a) The SMS member was appointed on the 01st March, 2018, and failed to submit her financial interests within 30 days of her appointment.

(1)(b) One.

(1)(c)(i-ii) R M Tlou - Director.

2. The SMS member was charged and sanction of Final Written Warning was meted out.

(3)(a) Post Level 6 = 21

Post Level 8 = 1

Post Level 10 = 1

(3)(b) Post Level 6:

(i) Less than 60 days=0

(ii) 60 to 90 days=0

(iii) 90 to 120 days=21

(iv) Longer than 120 days=0

Post Level 8:

(i) Less than 60 days=0

(ii) 60 to 90 days=0

(iii) 90 to 120 days=1

(iv) Longer than 120 days=0

Post Level 10:

(i) Less than 60 days=0

(ii) 60 to 90 days=0

(iii) 90 to 120 days=1

(iv) Longer than 120 days=0

4. Total amount of cost attached to the days of service lost as a result of the suspensions is R 1 068,490.13

27 June 2018 - NW1769

Profile picture: Figlan, Mr AM

Figlan, Mr AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(a)What number of legal cases were initiated against (i) him and (ii) his department in each year since 1 April 2013 by applicants for (aa) asylum and (bb) refugee status, (b) what number of the specified cases did his department (i) win, (ii) lose and/or (iii) receive a cost order against them in each case and (c) what total amount did his department incur in legal expenses (i) to defend the specified cases and (ii) in respect of cost orders granted against them?

Reply:

(a) The information is as follows:

Year

(aa) Asylum Seeker

(bb) Refugee Status

2013

630

712

2014

399

523

2015

1089

1021

2016

435

792

2017

238

1115

2018

14

758

Total

2805

4921

Total litigation instituted by asylum seekers and refugees to date is 7726.

(b) The Department does not have a litigation case management system in terms of which matters that were won or lost in court are recorded. The only system that is currently in use is a basic system that merely records new court matters. However, litigation brought against the Department by asylum seekers is essentially contextualised as follows:-

New Asylum Seekers

1. These are illegal foreigners detained at Lindela Repatriation Centre (“Lindela”) or Police Stations, seeking urgent court orders to be released from detention on the basis that they are new asylum seekers who wish to be afforded the opportunity to apply for asylum.

2. The Department does not seek to oppose such applications and simply consent to court orders releasing these applicants. These court orders invariably carry cost orders. However, in most such cases, courts do not award costs to the applicants and simply order their release in order to allow them to apply for asylum. This is in line with the Supreme Court of Appeal judgment of BULA and Others / Minister of Home Affairs and Others in which the court held that once the intention to apply for asylum is indicated, an asylum seeker is entitled to protective provision by the Republic of South Africa under International Law.

3. These court applications are more often than not settled in both parties favour in that asylum seekers (the applicants) are released from detention and afforded the opportunity to apply for asylum and no costs orders are made against the Department.

Asylum Seeker Appeals to the Refugee Appeals Board (“RAB”).

1. These are asylum seekers whose applications have been rejected by the Refugee Status Determination Officer (“RSDO”) on the grounds that their applications are unfounded. Such asylum seekers may appeal the RSDO’s decision to the RAB.

2. During the period 2013 – 2016, the RAB experienced capacity challenges which led to a huge backlog in finalising the appeals. This resulted in huge amounts of litigation in terms of which asylum seekers whose applications were pending before the RAB would launch court applications compelling the RAB to either furnish them with interview dates and/or finalise their decisions.

3. Because of the nature of this litigation, the Department and/or RAB had no legal grounds to oppose them and as a consequence, there were costs orders occasioned by these applications.

4. However, since having addressed the capacity constraints at the RAB, this nature of litigation has ceased.

 

Failed Asylum Seekers

1. These are those asylum seekers/applicants whose applications have either been rejected by the Standing Committee on Refugee Affairs (“SCRA”) or the RAB.

2. The rejection by the SCRA or the RAB renders such asylum seekers illegal foreigners in the Republic and therefore liable for arrest and detention for the purposes of deportation.

3. Upon arrest, failed asylum seekers approach the courts to seek orders to review and set aside the rejections. Such applications are normally brought in two parts, namely Part A and Part B. In Part A, the applicants seek orders to be released from detention pending finalisation of Part B. In Part B, the applicants seek orders to review and set aside the decision of the SCRA or the RAB.

4. Ordinarily, in Part A of the application, there are no orders as to costs. However, in Part B, parties incur costs. Part B is seldom set down for hearing as the intention of the failed asylum seeker is never to prosecute the review, but rather to secure an indefinite stay in the Republic. Costs in these review applications are also reserved pending the finalisation of these review applications.

The nature of litigation instituted by refugees against the Department is mainly two-fold:-

1.Certification in terms of Section 27(c) of the Refugees Act

These applications are meant to compel the SCRA to recognise the applicants as indefinite refugees.

2. Refugees Identity and Travel Documents

These applications are meant to compel the Department to issue refugees with South African Refugee Identity Documents (“refugee IDs”) and/or Travel Documents.

Ordinarily, the Department does not oppose these applications, as there are no legal grounds to oppose them. The applicants merely seek orders to compel the Department to finalise their applications for refugee IDs and/or Travel Documents. In such matters, costs are confined to the issuing of High Court applications only.

(c) The Department is not in a position to furnish information on legal costs, as such information is not readily available to the Department. Settlement of legal costs against the State remains the responsibility of the State Attorneys who, in normal circumstances, are attorneys of record for the State.

As can be noted, legal costs occasioned by litigation arising out of asylum seekers and refugees is largely as a result of applications brought to compel the Department to issue refugee IDs and/or travel documents, or to make decisions on applications submitted in terms of section 27(c) of the Refugees Act.

 

14 June 2018 - NW1766

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)(a) What number of Refugee Status Determination Officers (RSDOs) were employed in the country (i) in each of the past 10 financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2018, (b) where were or are they stationed, (c) how many cases came before them in each specified year and (d) what is the number of decisions taken on applications before the RSDOs in each specified year; (2) (a) what is the number of the applications that were ruled as unfounded in each region in each specified year, (b) what number of the applications were ruled as manifestly unfounded in each region in each specified year and (c) what is the number of successful applications in each region in each specified year?

Reply:

(1)(a-b) Data files for 2008 to 2010 are not available and therefore information can only be provided as from April 2011.

Apr-11

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

21

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CROWN MINES

56

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

12

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MARABASTAD

31

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

9

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

6

Grand Total

135

   

Apr-12

 

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

19

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CROWN MINES

50

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

11

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MARABASTAD

30

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

8

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

6

Grand Total

124

   

Apr-13

 

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

4

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PRETORIA (MARABASTAD)

78

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

11

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

20

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

26

Grand Total

139

   

Apr-14

 

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

5

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PRETORIA (MARABASTAD)

79

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

14

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

20

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

25

Grand Total

143

   

Apr-15

 

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

2

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PRETORIA (MARABASTAD)

76

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

13

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

20

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

21

Grand Total

132

   

Apr-16

 

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

2

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PRETORIA (MARABASTAD)

75

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

12

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

18

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

17

Grand Total

124

   

Apr-17

 

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

15

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

12

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

18

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

2

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PRETORIA (MARABASTAD)

74

Grand Total

121

   

Apr-18

 

Office

Total

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE CAPE TOWN

15

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE DURBAN

12

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE MUSINA

18

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PORT ELIZABETH

2

REFUGEE RECEPTION CENTRE PRETORIA (MARABASTAD)

70

Grand Total

117

(1)(c-d)

Year

Applications received

Adjudications

2017

24174

27980

2016

35377

41241

2015

62159

60640

2014

71914

75733

2013

70010

68241

2012

85058

63226

2011

106904

43953

2010

124336

77071

2009

223324

157204

2008

207206

69114

2 (a) Unfounded as follows:

Year

Cape Town / PE

Port Elizabeth

Durban

Musina

Johannesburg

Desmond Tutu

2017

552

 75

3435

2138

 

619

2016

1801

 ***Refer to comment below

7009

4227

 

8656

2015

1240

 ***Refer to comment below

3347

1793

 

7713

2014

8517

 ***Refer to comment below

3478

2865

 

14685

2013

3105

 ***Refer to comment below

3101

3977

 

15370

2012

2782

225

3351

1929

 

16750

2011

952

1033

2988

6

3744

8152

2010

*24827 Refer to comment below

2009

5186

3178

9490

2972

26210

25561

2008

*Refer to comment below

2 (b) Manifestly Unfounded as follows:

Year

Cape Town / PE

Port Elizabeth

Durban

Musina

Johannesburg

Desmond Tutu

2017

326

24

1271

945

 

16328

2016

644

 ***Refer to comment below

1721

2990

 

11036

2015

773

 ***Refer to comment below

1117

8134

 

34024

2014

1997

 ***Refer to comment below

336

10326

 

24299

2013

2803

 ***Refer to comment below

808

8072

 

23719

2012

3898

32

518

3193

 

24322

2011

3428

624

278

0

1940

14005

2010

**42161 Refer to comment below

2009

6618

3501

7436

5641

10696

39745

2008

*Refer comment below

2 (c) Successful applications as follows:

Year

Cape Town

Port Elizabeth

Durban

Musina

Johannesburg

Desmond Tutu

2017

 105

231

307

14

 

1610

2016

1523

 ***Refer to comment below

414

1

 

1219

2015

328

 ***Refer to comment below

71

0

 

2100

2014

2965

 ***Refer to comment below

238

3

 

6024

2013

2593

 ***Refer to comment below

223

2

 

4468

2012

1806

441

287

8

 

3684

2011

633

765

520

78

2251

2556

2010

**10083 Refer to comment below

2009

2628

889

1310

65

4671

1407

2008

2973

862

746

53

2059

356

Comment:

* During 2008 the total rejections (unfounded and manifestly unfounded) were recorded as 62,065. However, they were not separated into the various categories.

** During 2010 successful applications and rejections were not recorded per office.

*** From 2013 to 2016 Port Elizabeth cases were processed under the Cape Town server.

14 June 2018 - NW1767

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

1)(a) What number of (i) Refugee Appeal Boards (RABs) were active in the country (aa) in each of the past 10 financial years and (bb) since 1 April 2018 and (b) persons served on each RAB, (c) what number of times had each RAB met annually and (d) what total number of cases were brought before each RAB annually; (2) what total number of (a) decisions were taken by each RAB annually and (b) the rulings of each RAB were (i) upheld and (ii) set aside in each case?

Reply:

(1)(a) There is only one Refugee Appeal Board. RAB was established in terms of Section 12 of the Refugees Act no 130 of 1998 (the Act).

(1)(b) Currently there is three persons serving on RAB, two members and a member who is also the Chairperson. The amount of members has fluctuated over the years since 2000. The most members at any one time were six in total.

(1)(c) RAB meets on average three times in formal meetings to discuss and decide on its Rules and Practice Note, Regulations and other administrative decisions about its hearings and decisions. RAB had three annual formal meetings during financial year 2017/2018. RAB meets informally before each hearing week. For financial year 2017/2018 RAB conducted six hearing cycles in all five regions.

(1)(d) The number of cases dealt with on an annual basis by the RAB since 2010 are listed in the table below.

(2)(a-b) Various categories and number of decisions taken by the RAB annually are tabulated hereunder:

RAB DECISIONS 2010-2017

 

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Hearings conducted

0

2266

1497

2543

2743

1020

124

399

Condonations Dismissed

109

166

85

302

65

22

518

268

Condonations Granted

71

56

119

232

145

247

2

7

Dismissed

900

3982

1461

1537

1580

1310

159

193

Upheld

84

110

48

66

70

118

56

21

No Show

 0

107

12

69

24

108

135

50

Cancelled

 0

46

109

23

 0

67

19

2196

Member

5

7

5

6

6

6

2

3

Quorum

Single member hearings

Single member hearing

Single member hearings

Single member hearings

Single/Three member hearings

Single/Three

member hearings

Not operating for most of 2016

Three member hearings

 

14 June 2018 - NW1652

Profile picture: Stubbe, Mr DJ

Stubbe, Mr DJ to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(a) What number of cases relating to the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, Act 12 of 2004, as amended, have been referred to the (i) SA Police Service (SAPS) and (ii) Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI) by (aa) his department and (bb) each entity reporting to him for further investigation since the Act was assented to and (b) what number of the specified cases have (i) been investigated by SAPS and DPCI, (ii) been followed up by the respective accounting officers and (iii) resulted in a conviction in each specified financial year since 2004?

Reply:

The Question was referred to the Department and entities which responded as follows:

(aa) Department of Home Affairs

(a) 286 cases were submitted to (i) SA Police Service (SAPS) and (ii) Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation DPCI)

(b)(i-ii) 286 cases of fraud and corruption were investigated and arrests were effected. The number of arrests are as follows:

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

40 arrests

No stats available

9 arrests

4 arrests

19 arrests

6 arrests

54 arrests

125 arrests

29 arrests

(b)(iii) The Department does not readily have the number of convictions.

(bb) Electoral Commission

(a) No cases were referred in terms of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, Act 12 of 2004, as amended to:

(i) The SAPS, and

(ii) Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI)

9b) (i-iii) Not applicable

(bb) Government Printing Works

(a) (i) Two were referred to the SAPS – Case numbers (CAS 1201/09/2011) and CAS 688/11/2016)

     (ii)0

(b) (i) Two

(ii) Two

 (iii) One

14 June 2018 - NW1425

Profile picture: Maynier, Mr D

Maynier, Mr D to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Whether, with reference to the Minister of Finance’s reply to question 43 on 2 May 2018, he intends to repay some and/or all of the expenses incurred by the National Treasury for a certain person’s (name furnished) official travel since 1 April 2017; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

Ministers’ spouses are allowed to travel with their partners abroad on official trips as per Ministerial Handbook. The policy applies to all executive members and there is no provision currently that talks of repayment.

08 June 2018 - NW1777

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)Whether (a) public servants and their families and (b) members of the SA National Defence Force living and/or working abroad have been able to cast their ballots for both the national and provincial elections since 1994; if not, (i) on what date did the issuing of the national and provincial ballots change, (ii) what was the reason for the change and (iii) what legal provisions informed such a decision; if so, what address was used to determine which provincial ballot was issued to each individual; (2) Whether he has found that the decision is constitutional and does not amount to disenfranchisement?

Reply:

1. (a) and (b) In 1994 all South Africans abroad were only issued a national ballot.

(i) In preparation for the National and Provincial Elections of 1999, the Electoral Act 73 of 1998 established limited categories of temporarily absent voters who could vote outside the Republic.

One such category was absence from the Republic on government service or membership of the household of the person so being absent. The head office of the government department or entity in the Republic of such a person or members of his household was regarded as the place of ordinary place of residence. This category of voters was issued both a national ballot as well as a provincial ballot.

A 2003 amendment to the Electoral Act extended voting abroad to those on temporary absence from the Republic for the purpose of a holiday, business trip, attendance of tertiary institution, educational visit or in an international sports event. In all cases it was required that voter inform the Chief Electoral Officer of their intention to vote abroad.

In 2013 the regulatory framework was again amended to extend voting outside the Republic to all eligible South Africans and an international segment of the voters’ roll was established. All voters outside of the Republic are now treated in the same manner in that only a national ballot is issued for voting outside of the Republic.

(ii) The initial limitation to the categorisation of voters who qualify to voting abroad was found to be unconstitutional in the Richter Judgment (Richter v The Minister for Home Affairs and Others 2009). For this reason, the legislation was amended to open voting outside of the Republic to all eligible citizens.

08 June 2018 - NW1768

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)(a) What number of (i) Standing Committees for Refugee Affairs (SCRAs) were active in the country (aa) in each of the past 10 financial years and (bb) since 1 April 2018 and (ii) persons served on each SCRA, (b) what number of times had each SCRA met annually and (c) what total number of cases were brought before each SCRA annually; (2) What total number of (a) decisions were taken by each SCRA annually and (b) the rulings of each SCRA were (i) upheld and (ii) set aside in each case?

Reply:

(1)(a)(i) (aa) and (bb). Since its inception there was always just one Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs active in the RSA.

(1)(a)(i) SCRA consists of one Chairperson and two members.

(1)(b) SCRA convenes on a daily basis.

(1)(c) Table 1 indicates the number of cases brought before SCRA annually from 2008 to2018.

(2)(a),(b)(i) and (ii) only one SCRA existed since its inception and the total number of decisions taken annually in terms of section 24(3)(b) of the Refugees Act 130 of 1998 can be viewed in Table 1.

Table 1: In terms of Section 24(3) (b) of the Refugees Act 130 of 1998 decisions reviewed by SCRA.

YEAR

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

UPHELD

4313

18239

30995

6680

38628

9404

22972

16884

24516

15534

8006

SET ASIDE

186

472

196

13

263

94

247

1777

1894

1843

1769

TOTAL

4499

18711

31191

6693

38891

9498

23219

18661

26410

17377

9775

08 June 2018 - NW1631

Profile picture: Dreyer, Ms AM

Dreyer, Ms AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)What additional steps are in place to accommodate disabled voters who want to vote and/or register when the voting station is not disabilities friendly? (2) Will kerbside assistance be given to disabled voters on registration and voting days?

Reply:

1. The Electoral Commission provides a wheel-chair friendly voting compartment for those voters who use wheel-chairs as well as the braille Universal Ballot Template for those voters who are braille literate.

Furthermore the Electoral Commission regularly conducts voting station facilities surveys to assess the availability of key facilities which include disability accessibility to its voting stations. In ensuring accessibility of the voting stations by disabled voters, the Electoral Commission shares the outcome of the voting stations facilities survey with state and other landlords so that the latter may improve the quality and extent of amenities at voting stations including access for disabled voters.

Additionally, voters who are physical infirm to the extent that they are unable to present themselves at voting stations for either registration or voting may apply for registration at home or place of confinement and/or a special vote at home or place of confinement.

2. Kerbside assistance to disabled voters is provided by voting station staff in terms of Section 39 of the Electoral Act (Act 27 of 1998).

06 June 2018 - NW1697

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)(a) What total amount of land owned by his department and the entities reporting to him in each province is (i) vacant and (ii) unused or has no purpose and (b) what is the (i) location and (ii) size of each specified plot of land; (2) (a) how much of the land owned by his department and the entities reporting to him has been leased out for private use and (b) what is the (i) Rand value of each lease and (ii)(aa) location and (bb) size of each piece of land?

Reply:

The department and entities responded as follows:

Department of Home Affairs

(1)(a) The Department of Home Affairs does not own any land.

(1)(a)(i) Not Applicable

(1)(a)(ii) Not Applicable

(1)(b) Not Applicable

(1)(b)(i) Not Applicable

(1)(b)(ii) Not Applicable

(2)(a) The Department of Home Affairs does not own nor lease out any land.

(2)(b)(i) Not Applicable

(2)(b)(ii)(aa)&(bb) Not Applicable

Government Printing Works (GPW)

(1)(a)(i) One

(a)(ii) It is unused but will be renovated as GPW Administration Office.

(b)(i) 389 Sophie De Bruyn Street, Pretoria

(b)(ii) 2552 square metres

(2)(a) Not Applicable

(2)(b)(i) Not applicable

(2)(b)(ii)((aa)&(bb) Not Applicable

Electoral Commission (IEC)

(1)(a) The Electoral Commission does not own any land.

(1)(a)(i) Not Applicable

(1)(a)(ii) Not Applicable

(1)(b) Not Applicable

(1)(b)(i) Not Applicable

(1)(b)(ii) Not Applicable;

(2)(a) The Electoral Commission does not own nor lease out any land.

(2)(b)(i) Not Applicable

(2)(b)(ii)(aa)&(bb) Not Applicable

06 June 2018 - NW1593

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What (a) number of applications for refugee status from Somali nationals have been (i) received, (ii) approved and (iii) rejected (aa) in each of the past three financial years and (bb) since 1 April 2018 and (b) are the main reasons for rejecting the specified applications?

Reply:

(a) Reporting of asylum statistics is in line with calendar years (January to December):

Year

(i) Received

(ii) Approved

(iii) Rejected

(aa) 2015

*2079

618

1112

(aa) 2016

1643

1169

904

(aa) 2017

1932

732

1500

(bb) 2018

208

93

137

* The number of applications approved and rejected may differ with the total received in the specific year as not all applications received are finalised within the same year and there also applications that are finalised from a carryover from previous years.

(b) Main reasons for the rejections are :

  • Applicants with claims that come from the peaceful parts of Somalia like Somaliland and Puntland.
  • Applicants that are in RSA for other reasons than those stipulated in Section 3 of the Refugees Act 130 of 1998.
  • Applicants who were granted refugee status before and withdrew their refugee status because they wanted to return to their country of origin and who failed to demonstrate changed circumstances that forced them to return to South Africa to re-apply for asylum.
  • Applicants who already enjoy protection in other countries that are signatory to the UN Convention and who failed to give compelling reasons as to why they left such protection.
  • Applicants who fall under the exclusion clause.
  • Applicants who re-availed themselves to their country of origin whilst applying for asylum in South Africa.

04 June 2018 - NW1427

Profile picture: Macpherson, Mr DW

Macpherson, Mr DW to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)With reference to the Minister of Trade and Industry’s reply to question 1137 on 25 April 2018, why are there instances of different identity numbers registered for one person on the National Population Register; (2) what number of instances of different identity numbers were found on his department’s databases against the name of one person; (3) by what date will his department’s databases be cleaned up?

Reply:

1. In terms of the Identification Act, 1997, (Act No.68 of 1997) all citizens and permanent residents shall have a unique identity number which shall not be shared with any other person. However the department has identified that there are persons who share identity numbers and those who have multiple identity numbers.

Duplicated identity numbers emanated from the amalgamation of homelands including Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda and Ciskei (TBVC) states. Prior to 1994, South Africa had different population registers with different enabling documents (e.g. birth certificates, reference books, book of life). The same applies to processes that were applied when taking fingerprints, coupling of identity numbers with reference number and safekeeping of records. After 1994, the department took a decision to centralize all fingerprints and other records from TBVC states in order to have one National Population Register and one Home Affairs National Identification System (HANIS).

With reference to this question, different identity numbers registered for one person falls within the category of one person having multiple identity numbers, and may possibly have been caused by one of the following:

  • Reference books cases where an applicant was automatically issued with an identity number without their knowledge.
  • Previously identity numbers were allocated or issued without taking fingerprints and/or verification thereof.
  • During birth registration period (The child may have been registered by a guardian or informant while the parents were not staying with the children).

Accordingly, all those identity numbers which are associated with duplicate identity numbers will be cancelled and removed from the National Population Register.

2. The total number of multiple identity numbers on the department’s database is 155 679.

3. Cleaning up the database is a continuous process as and when citizens present themselves. Meanwhile, to stop further occurrences of duplication, the Department:

  • During October 2013, in pursuance of its overall objective of helping address the challenges created by duplicate IDs, made an announcement of a process to invalidate duplicate IDs. The implication of invalidation is that such identity numbers will no longer be valid.
  • has embarked on enforcing legislation on parents to register children’s birth within 30 days of birth, hence DHA working close with hospitals by stationing DHA officials at connected hospitals to register newly born children before they leave the hospital.
  • tasked CSIR to research the possibility of taking fingerprints of newly born children to secure their identity from birth
  • recently launched the Automated Biometric Identification System that should assist with the elimination of duplicate identity numbers henceforth.

04 June 2018 - NW1417

Profile picture: Figlan, Mr AM

Figlan, Mr AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)(a) What number of offices has his department opened at public healthcare facilities to register births in the past three financial years and (b) where is each office located; (2) Whether a lack of funding is preventing the roll-out of these offices to all public healthcare facilities; if so, what are the relevant details? NW1519E

Reply:

(1)(a) No new offices were opened at public healthcare facilities to register birth since 2015/16 financial year.

(1)(b) The table below depicts the distribution of connected health facilities prior to the last three financial years. Annexure A attached provides the list of the location of each health public facility where birth is registered.

Table 1: Location of connected health facilities

Province

Health Facilities with Maternity Wards

Connected Health Facilities

Outstanding Health Facilities

Eastern Cape

116

55

61

Free State

51

32

19

Gauteng

125

70

55

KwaZulu Natal

103

52

51

Limpopo

84

47

37

Mpumalanga

75

31

44

Northern Cape

50

28

22

North West

106

35

71

Western Cape

128

41

87

Grand total

838

391

447

2. Yes, there are challenges and they include:

  • Lack of human resource capacity to place officials at health facilities due to a reduced budget for compensation of employees;
  • Lack of equipment ( IT related and furniture) and IT connectivity
  • Inadequate number of vehicles to transport officials from offices to health facilities due to reduction in fleet services which were used to transport officials to health facilities.

Cost required for connecting one health facility service point:

Requirement

Cost

Human Resource- Level 5 Hospital Clerk (annual)

R 152 862.00

Signage- Inside and outside directional signage

R 2 013.00

Proline desktop CPU and monitor (DHA Specs)

R 13 912.59

Oki printer      

R 7 629.31

Brother Multifunctional (MFC) printer   

R 8 186.88

Cogent CSD330 -Online Verification scanner

R 7 001.50

Furniture - desk

R 4 400.00

Steel lockable cabinet

R 2 750.00

High back Chair

R 2 200.00

Client seating ( Terminal seating unit)

R 5 000.00

Portable air-conditioning unit

R 6 000.00

Birth & death Registration poster with clip on frame

R 1 320.00

ADSL connectivity - Line installation

R 620.00

- DSL installation

R 792.00

- annual subscription

R 3 619.44

Total Cost

R 218 306.73

25 May 2018 - NW1416

Profile picture: Figlan, Mr AM

Figlan, Mr AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What are the details of all steps taken by his department to integrate his department’s information technology with those of other Government departments in pursuit of improving e-Government as per the targets set out in the National Development Plan?

Reply:

The Department is in process of modernising all core systems in order to enable efficient and secured service delivery to citizens. Development of systems is aligned to the Government Wide Enterprise Architecture (GWEA) as prescribed through Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA); a standard that enables ongoing and future integration of government systems.

To date the Department has enabled online verification of clients by Government Departments, Banks, Insurance institutions and other private companies that have opted to participate. Online verification is available through direct integration with the Department’s database, and also for the law enforcements agencies that access through the Integrated Justice System (IJS) hub. The Department is in process of upgrading the current host of online verification which is the Home Affairs National Identification System (HANIS) to an Automated Biometrics Identification System (ABIS). ABIS will provide more powerful search and retrieval capability and reduce the turnaround times of results as required by SA Police Service and other law enforcement agencies.

25 May 2018 - NW1415

Profile picture: Figlan, Mr AM

Figlan, Mr AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Whether he has found that his department will reach its target of implementing the Enhance Movement Control System at all 72 ports of entry in 2018; if not, (a) why not and (b) by what date will this roll-out be achieved; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

Yes.

(a) Not applicable.

(b) It is foreseen that roll out will be achieved by the end of the 2018/19 financial year in line with the Department’s Annual Performance Plan. The Department is working with the DPW on infrastructure readiness specifically at the Harbours. Six ports of entry to be upgraded to the EMCS:

Two landports:

Onseepkans and Ongeluksnek border posts

Four harbours

Mosselbay harbour

Saldana Bay

East London harbour

Ngqura harbour

25 May 2018 - NW1358

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

With regard to the presentation by the Electoral Commission (IEC) to the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs on 27 February 2017, where the IEC stated that 72% of voters waited less than 15 minutes to vote and that the average waiting time to vote was 17 minutes in the 2016 Local Government Election, (a) who conducted the survey, (b) which voting stations were included in the survey and (c) in which province is each specified voting station located; (2) what was the average waiting time at voting stations in each specified province?

Reply:

The Electoral Commission responded as follows:

(1)(a) Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC),

(1)(b-c) The list of voting stations and their location is attached as Annexure A.

- Eastern Cape – 15 minutes

  • Free State – 17 minutes
  • Gauteng – 22 minutes
  • KwaZulu Natal – 18 minutes
  • Limpopo – 13 minutes
  • Mpumalanga – 14 minutes
  • North West - 19 minutes
  • Northern Cape – 12 minutes
  • Western Cape – 13 minutes

Please also refer to the graph below for an illustration of average queuing times per province.

Source: HSRC Election Satisfaction Surveys (ESS) 2016.

22 May 2018 - NW1069

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)What are the details of the permits of employees of a certain company (name furnished) hired by SA Airways, (2) do the specified permits allow the employees of the company to work in the country; if not, what legal action will his department take against the employees?

Reply:

The Visa Adjudication System (VAS) is not designed to keep statistics according to company names. The system keeps records of applicants’ details in a unique identification code, commonly known as a reference number. Only through these details would the Department be in a position to retrieve the original application and explain each decision.

22 May 2018 - NW1361

Profile picture: Dreyer, Ms AM

Dreyer, Ms AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

With regard to the court order that has been issued regarding surrogacy, which ordered that the names of the parents of a child should be stated, what is the process for registering the parents as stipulated in the court order for (a) same gender parents and (b) heterosexual parents?

Reply:

(a) Same gender parents

The birth of the child from same gender parents shall be registered in terms of the Birth and Death Registration Act (1992). The same gender parents shall upon registration of their child provide proof of birth with details of the child and that of the same gender parents. Upon registering the child, a birth certificate shall be issued bearing details of the child, parent A and Parent B.

(b) Heterosexual parents

The birth of the child from heterosexual parents shall be registered in terms of the Birth and Death Registration Act (1992). The heterosexual parents shall upon registration of their child provide proof of birth with details of the child and that of the heterosexual parents. Upon registering the child, a birth certificate shall be issued bearing details of the child, parent A and Parent B.

22 May 2018 - NW1360

Profile picture: Dreyer, Ms AM

Dreyer, Ms AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What number of foreign nationals (a) entered South Africa in 2017 on (i) visitor visas and/or (ii) holiday visas, (b) departed on or before the date on which their visas expired and (c) of each nationality (i) did not depart and (ii) applied for asylum?

Reply:

(a)(i-ii) 15,083,238 total recorded movements for traveller arrivals in 2017 on visitor’s visas for holiday purposes.

(b) 16,181,312 total recorded movements for traveller departures in 2017. The difference between arrivals and departures could arise as a carryover of movements from 2016.

(c)(i) The top five nationalities whose movements indicate they have not yet departed the RSA are:

1. Zimbabwe: 227 365

2. Malawi: 66 742

3. Mozambique: 47 031

4. Lesotho: 38670

5. Swaziland: 4 549

(c)(ii) 24,174 applications for asylum were received in the 2017 calendar year.

22 May 2018 - NW1359

Profile picture: Dreyer, Ms AM

Dreyer, Ms AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)With reference to the reply to question 105 on 27 February 2018, what number of foreign nationals (a) whose visas had expired and (b) who had entered the country illegally were found by the Inspectorate Unit of the department in 2016; (2) what number of the 731 people working for the inspectorate are (a) desk bound and (b) actively looking for foreign nationals whose visas have expired?

Reply:

(1)(a-b) A total of 23004 foreign nationals were found by Inspectorate to be illegal in the country during financial year 2016/17and were deported to their country of origin. A more in depth analysis would need to be undertaken to determine how many of these deportees had expired visas and those who entered illegally.

(2)(a-b) All 731 Inspectorate officials in the country conduct duties that require them to actively detect foreign nationals who are in South Africa illegally as well as conduct investigation to any contraventions of departmental legislations. They are therefore not an office bound unit except for when they complete case files attached to their duties.

22 May 2018 - NW1357

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

With regard to the presentation by the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) to the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs on 27 February 2017, what (a) are the reasons that the Mpumalanga province number of special votes for the 2016 Local Government Election was considerably higher than that of the other eight provinces, (b) additional resources were allocated to Mpumalanga for the home visits for special votes and (c) number of home visits were not conducted due to lack of staff?

Reply:

The Electoral Commission responded as follows:

a) Section 55 of the Local Government: Municipal Electoral Act 27 of 2000 provides that a voter who is unable to cast his or her vote on voting day at the voting station in the voting district where he or she is registered may apply to cast a special vote within that voting district prior to voting day by applying for a special vote in the prescribed manner, which includes submitting a paper application form to the municipal office of the Electoral Commission, applying electronically via the on-line special vote system, or via SMS (for voting station special votes only, but not home visits).

Importantly, no reasons are required to be furnished by a special vote applicant when applying for a special vote at the voting station. In the case of home visits the applicant needs to be a voter who cannot travel to the voting station owing to physical infirmity or disability.

In the 2016 Local Government Elections (LGE 2016) in Mpumalanga, 86% (174 336) of the total of 202 646 approved special votes were voting station special votes; 14% (28 310) were home visits – compared with the national average of 44% being home visits and 56% being voting station special votes. Evidently, in Mpumalanga the vast majority of special vote applications were for voting station special votes, rather than home visits.

In accordance with the legislation, the Commission does not require special vote applicants to provide a reason when applying for a special vote. The Commission has thus not collected evidence with which to analyse the relatively high number of special votes in Mpumalanga in LGE 2016.

b) 2 409 additional voting officials were added to the initial allocation of 5 326 to cater for the approved special votes at voting stations and home visits in Mpumalanga in LGE 2016.

c) Adequate voting officials were allocated in Mpumalanga in LGE 2016 to ensure that all approved special votes were conducted within the timeframe specified in the election timetable.

22 May 2018 - NW1303

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(a) What is the total number of instances that his department issued a South African passport on the same day the application was made for a non-governmental official in the past five years and (b) what was the urgency for issuing the passport in each instance?

Reply:

a) 144

b) The department through its Front Offices receives passport applications and urgent issuance requests as citizens submit their applications. There are a number of reasons advanced by various citizens who seek urgent assistance by the department. However, there is no recording of these requests which details the reasons for these outcries. Generally, the following examples can be indicated as reasons for urgent requests:

  • While the citizen was processing his or her travel with the airline and Immigration Services at the airport he or she was told you need to have more than two pages left on the passport in order to travel with a passport.
  • A citizen only realised in the morning of travel that the passport was missing.
  • A citizen only realised in the morning of travel that the passport has been erroneously cancelled on the system while valid for another few years.
  • A citizen lost his or her passport a night before or on the day of travel. A citizen is a business person who is involved in international engagements and has a trip to undertake but cannot find or has misplaced the passport.
  • A citizen has just received an emergency that involves a relative who needs support or to be brought back from outside the borders of the Republic.

Amongst the greater concerns from citizens on issues raised as demand for immediate travel, is financial commitments as well as financial loss implications should they fail to travel under the circumstances.

22 May 2018 - NW1143

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)Have certain persons (names and details furnished) been granted citizenship by his department; if so (a) in which year were they granted citizenship, (b) what number of years have they been in the country before being granted citizenship and (c) what were the motivating reasons for the department to grant them citizenship; (2) were there any appeals which were escalated to the Ministry for approval; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(1) Imraan Butt:

Yes, under section 5(5)(a) of the South African Citizenship Act 88 of 1995.

Imaan Butt [maiden surname: Gqwetha]:

No, she is a South African citizen.

The rest of the responses relates to Imraan Butt:

a) 3 March 2005

b) He had been in the country for 3 years and 10 months. He has also been in possession of a Permanent Resident Permit for 1 year, 4 months and 13 days.

c) Mr Butt’s citizenship was granted prematurely through miscalculation by Ferreirasdorp Office in 2006. This resulted in the erroneous issuance of the naturalisation certificate. The Department noticed that various applications from Ferreirasdorp Office were not compliant with regulations and an investigation unfolded in this regard. The office manager resigned hereafter and the office was closed due to maladministration issues.

As a result of this situation, a legal opinion was sought. The legal opinion was that all applicants who had been granted citizenship without meeting the requirements but who then qualified, provided there was no fraud or other unlawful behavior on the part of the applicants in applying for naturalisation. No fraud could be proved, hence the naturalisation status quo should be maintained and deprivation should not be processed.

2. No, there was no appeal escalated to the Ministry.

22 May 2018 - NW1142

Profile picture: Hoosen, Mr MH

Hoosen, Mr MH to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Has the Independent Electoral Commission awarded any tenders or contracts to a certain company (details furnished) in the past five financial years; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

According to IEC:

The Electoral Commission has not awarded any tenders or contracts to Mchunu, Mashinini and Associates during the past five financial years.

16 May 2018 - NW1056

Profile picture: Mulder, Dr CP

Mulder, Dr CP to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1)What number of South Africans emigrated (a) in the financial year (i) 2013-14, (ii) 2014-15, (iii) 2015-16, (iv) 2016-17 and (v) 2017-18 and (b) since 1 April 2018 to (i) Australia and New Zealand, (ii) the United Kingdom and Europe, (iii) the Far East and (iv) North and South America; (2) Whether he will make a statement on the matter?

Reply:

1. South African citizens that leave the borders of the Republic do not register their purpose to emigrate hence there is no formal record by the department of South Africans emigrating to above countries.

There is no provision in legislation that compel the South African citizen to do so; Furthermore there is no reason to do so as South Africa permits dual citizenship. The only instance the department keeps these records, is when South African citizens are compelled by countries not permitting dual citizenship, to renounce their citizenship, moreover the information in this regard would not necessarily provide an adequate response to the question raised.

The Honourable Member may refer this question to Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) for information of South Africans residing in these countries as some foreign missions ordinarily keep such records.

2. No.

14 May 2018 - NW1145

Profile picture: Figlan, Mr AM

Figlan, Mr AM to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

(1) Has his department complied fully with the orders of the Supreme Court of Appeal in (a) Minister of Home Affairs and others v DGLR and another (Case number 1051/2015 SCA) and (b) Scalabrini Centre, Cape Town and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (Case number 1107/2016) [2017] ZASCA 126, [2017] 4 All SA 686 (SCA) (29 September 2017); if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) what are the details of the steps taken by his department to comply with these orders, specifically in relation to (a) the identity number and birth certificate of the child in case number 1051/2015, (b) the promulgation of the regulations to section 2(2) of the South African Citizenship Act, Act 88 of 1995, as amended, (c) the re-opening of the Cape Town Refugee Reception Office and (d) the reports to be submitted to the appellants by the Director-General on 31 October 2017 and monthly thereafter; (3) what is the current status of the child who is the subject of case number 1051/2015 if the order above has not fully been complied with? NW1239E

Reply:

1 (a) No

On 7 October 2016, the Department instituted a rescission application under Case No: 38429/13, as it contends that the court order herein was erroneously sought and erroneously granted. The Cuban parents’ contention that their child was denied Cuban citizenship is incorrect and the Department will show this, with the aid of the Cuban Embassy.

The State Attorney: Pretoria has been having difficulties in translating the Cuban Amended Immigration Laws and their Citizenship Rules, which are pivotal for the Department’s case. Once this is done, the Department will then file its Replying Affidavit (to the parents’ Answering Affidavit, which is in reply to the Department’s rescission application). Thereafter, the matter will be set down for hearing at court.

1(b) NO

The Department is working with the Department of Public Works to get the process of identifying a suitable place/office for the re-opening of the Cape Town Refugee Reception Office. The Department has engaged DPW Western Cape Regional Office mid December 2017 advising them of the judgment. Following internal processes, the Department wrote to DPW Director – General, on 22 January 2018 submitting the initial needs assessment for office accommodation.

Subsequently, the DPW responded asking for corrections and adjustments. The Department submitted the final needs assessment to the DPW during February 2018 and their Head Office has issued a procurement instruction to their Regional Office in Cape Town.

The Department of Public Works provided a project execution plan on 6 April 2018 whereby the estimated time of occupation is 1 October 2018, which will allow the Department to start operating as soon as possible after the handover.

Further to the above, the office continues to provide existing clients with services at the current office accommodation.

 

Operational Budget

 

The Department has determined that the centre will be able to function within the ambits of the current base line allocation.

 

Personnel

The Cape Town RRO is currently operating at 37.5% of the approved establishment. The funding and filing of key posts is being prioritized. Considering the reduction in volumes the Department is of the opinion that the funding and filling of posts should not delay the opening of the office once suitable accommodation has been secured.

IT Equipment

5 fully equipped RRO computers have been procured and installed at the current CTRRO to provide capacity for the capturing of newcomers. The replacement of other computer equipment will only be done once occupation of permanent accommodation has been taken.

2(a) and (b) The Institution of the Department’s rescission application has suspended the operation of the initial court order.

2 (c) The Department will re-open the Cape Town Refugee Reception Office as soon as DPW has finalised all the necessary in the allocation of suitable office accommodation.

2(d) The Constitutional Court Order was received by the Department on 14 December 2018. The Department wrote to Scalabrini in January 2018 requesting an extension to file its report and the Department has already submitted two reports to the Scalabrini Centre detailing the steps taken in compliance with Constitutional Court.

3 The Cuban child was granted a permanent residence permit on 22 April 2016.

14 May 2018 - NW1274

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Whether the Electoral Commission of South Africa paid any bonuses to any Commissioner in the (a) 2013-14, (b) 2014-15, (c) 2015-16 and (d) 2016-17 financial years; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (i) what amount was paid in each financial year, (ii) what is the name of each recipient of a bonus, (iii) who took the decision to pay such bonuses, provide minutes and (iv) what basis in law was this decision taken upon?

Reply:

(a) No

(b) No

(c) No

(d) No

There is no legal provision for bonuses as part of the conditions of service of Commissioners.

(i) Not applicable

(ii) Not applicable

(iii) Not applicable

(iv) Not applicable

14 May 2018 - NW1301

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

With reference to the reply to question 744 on 18 April 2018, on what basis does Atul Gupta have two active passports?

Reply:

Mr Atul Gupta approached a Department of Home Affairs Front Office and applied for passports. He was subsequently issued with two active passports as per his applications just like any other South African citizen on request and consideration in line with the legislative stipulation in Chapter 2, Section 2 (5) of the South African Passports Act Regulations 4 of 1994, which states that under certain circumstances a second South African passport may be issued, notwithstanding the fact that the holder thereof is in possession of another valid South African passport and regulation 3 shall apply mutatis mutandis thereto; wherein regulation 3 refers to a normal application for a South African passport.

14 May 2018 - NW1275

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

Whether, with regard to section 7 of the Electoral Commission Act, Act 51 of 1996 (Electoral Act), as amended and section 181 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, he has sought a legal opinion to ascertain whether section 7 of the Electoral Act is constitutional in that it gives the President powers over the terms and conditions of the Commissioner’s terms; if not, will he seek a legal opinion; if so, what were the findings of the legal opinion(s)?

Reply:

No. The Commission has not discussed the matter and therefore has no extent resolution to procure the referenced opinion.

14 May 2018 - NW1087

Profile picture: Mkhaliphi, Ms HO

Mkhaliphi, Ms HO to ask the Minister of Home Affairs

What (a) number of consulting firms or companies are currently contracted by (i) his department and (ii) the entities reporting to him and (b)(i) is the name of each consultant, (ii) are the relevant details of the service provided in each case and (iii) is the (aa) start date, (bb) time period, (cc) monetary value in Rands of each contract and (dd) name and position of each individual who signed off on each contract?

Reply:

The department and entities responded as follows:

(i0 Department of Home Affairs

(a) Three (3)

(b)(i) See schedule attached as Annexure A.

(b)(ii) – (iii) See schedule attached as Annexure A.

(ii) Government Printing Works

(a) Fifteen (15)

(b)(i) See schedule attached as Annexure B.

(b)(ii) – (iii) See schedule attached as Annexure B.

(b) Electoral Commission

(i) Eighty (80)

(i) See schedule attached as Annexure C.

(b)(ii) – (iii) See schedule attached as Annexure C.