ATC191017: Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Police on the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), dated 16 October 2019

Police

BUDGETARY REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON POLICE ON THE INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATIVE DIRECTORATE (IPID), DATED 16 OCTOBER 2019
 

The Portfolio Committee on Police, having considered the financial and service delivery performance of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) for the 2018/19 financial year, reports as follows:

 

  1. INTRODUCTION

 

The Money Bills Procedures and Related Matters Amendment Act, (Act 9 of 2009), sets out the process that allows Parliament to make recommendations to the Minister of Finance to amend the budget of a national department. As part of this process, Portfolio Committees must compile Budgetary Review and Recommendation Reports (BRRR) in October of each year, containing recommendations relating to funding allocations for departments and other institutions that account to them. The BRRRs are also source documents for the Standing Committee on Finance when it makes recommendations to the House of Parliament on the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement (MTBPS). The annual review and analysis of performance (entailing both financial and non-financial performance indicators) forms part of this process.

 

The Committee is guided by its interest to promote effectiveness, efficiency and professional policing in South Africa. It has a desire to see a reduction in crime. The mandate of the Committee is therefore to fulfil its constitutional function through the following means:

  • Pass legislation;
  • Scrutinise and oversee executive action and the organs of state including the South African Police Service (SAPS), the Civilian Secretariat for Police Service (CSPS), the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) and the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA);
  • Facilitate public participation and involvement in the legislative and other processes; and
  • Engage, participate and oversee international treaties and protocols.

 

The Committee has overseen the performance of the Department through regular oversight meetings during the 2018/19 financial year and has tracked progress during the current financial year (2019/20). The Committee has considered quarterly expenditure reports for 2018/19.

 

The Committee was briefed on the Department’s annual performance for 2018/19 on 10 October 2019. The Committee also met with the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) on the audit outcomes of the Department on 09 October 2019. Copies of the presentations are available from the committee secretary. The Committee has already considered and reported on the respective strategic plans and budget proposals of the Directorate for 2018/19.

 

This report is structured as follows:

 

  • Section 1: Introduction. This sections sets out the mandate of the Committee, the purpose of the BRRR and the process to develop this report.
  • Section 2: Internal and External Audit Reports. This section provides a summary of the 2017/18 AGSA and Audit Committee’s Reports.
  • Section 3: Expenditure and Performance. This section provides a summary of the expenditure and performance of the Directorate during the 2018/19 financial year.
  • Section 4: Committee Observations. This section provides a summary of the key observations made by the Committee during the 2018/19 Annual Report hearings.
  • Section 5: Recommendations. This section contains the recommendations of the Committee.
  • Section 6: Reporting Requirements. This section provides a summary of the reporting requirements of the Directorate together with timeframes.
  • Section 7: Conclusion.

 

  1. INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS 

 

  1. Report of the Auditor-General of South Africa (AGSA) for 2018/19

 

The IPID received an unqualified audit opinion with no material findings on performance. The AG made material findings on compliance with legislation.

The AG raised two emphases on matters in the 2018/19 financial year, these were:

  • Restatement of corresponding figures: There was a change in accounting estimates for contingent liabilities. The change resulted in the contingent liabilities balance for the current year decreasing significantly by R40 036 000 from the previous year.
  • Payables not recognised: Payables not recognised of R4 303 000 exceeded the payment terms of 30 days, as required in Treasury regulation 8.2.3. This amount, in turn, exceeded the R282 000 voted funds to be surrendered by R4 021 000 as per the statement of constituted unauthorised expenditure had the amounts been paid on time.

 

Performance on predetermined performance targets

The AG identified material misstatements in the annual performance report submitted for auditing (Programme 2), but the misstatements were subsequently corrected. Therefore, the AG did not make any material findings on the usefulness and reliability of the reported performance information.

 

Annual financial statements, performance and annual reports

The financial statements submitted for auditing were not fully prepared in accordance with the prescribed financial reporting framework as required by section 40(1)(b) of the PFMA. Material misstatements of expenditure and disclosure items identified by the auditors in the submitted financial statement were corrected and the supporting records were provided subsequently, resulting in the financial statements receiving an unqualified opinion.

 

Material findings on compliance with legislation

Annual financial statements

The financial statements submitted for auditing were not prepared in accordance with prescribed financial reporting framework and/or supported by full and proper records. Material misstatements on commitments identified by auditors in the submitted financial statements were corrected and the supporting records were provided subsequently, resulting in the financial statements receiving an unqualified opinion.

 

Expenditure Management

Effective and appropriate steps were not taken to prevent irregular expenditure amounting to R1 824 000 disclosed in note 23 to the annual financial statements. The majority of the irregular expenditure was caused by the appointment of officials without following the Department of Public Service and Administration regulations.

 

Internal control deficiencies

Management did not implement adequate controls over the preparation and review of the annual performance report to ensure that all reported performance indicators/ measures are free from material misstatements. Additionally, management did not implement adequate controls to review and monitor compliance with laws and regulations, which resulted in irregular expenditure.

 

  1. Report of the Audit Committee

The IPID Audit Committee consisted of the following members:

  • Mr. M.I. Motala (Chairperson) (External)
  • Ms. A. Badimo (External)
  • Ms. L. Mvuyana (External)
  • Mr. NS Nkonzo (External)
  • Mr. RJ McBride (Executive Director, Ex- Officio, until 28/02/2019) (Employment contract ended)
  • Mr. VO Senna (Chief Financial Officer, Ex Officio)
  • (Acting Executive Director from 01 March 2019) 00
  • Mr. PM Setshedi (Acting Chief Financial Officer from 01 March 2019 00 (Ex-Officio)

 

The Audit Committee recorded the following findings:

The IPID Audit Committee conducted Provincial Audit Reviews in the following provinces:

• Mpumalanga - Investigation Management

• Free State - Investigation Management

• KwaZulu Natal – Investigation Management

• North West - Investigation Management

• Limpopo - Investigation Management

Based on the approved 2018/2019 annual internal audit plan setting out the scope, control objectives and risks, for the period covered, various reports were submitted by the internal auditors. The management report of the Auditor General (SA) on the annual financial statements was also submitted to and discussed by the Committee.

 

  • Internal Audit did not manage to fully implement the IA Plan for the year under review, with one (01) planned project namely Review of 3rd Quarter Financial Statements not done. The assurance risk was however mitigated through the AGSA’s high level review of those statements. Issues were identified and corrected.
  • The Committee considered management’s responses to address the matters raised by Internal Audit and Auditor General (SA) and to facilitate corrective actions, improvements and monitoring the controls and procedures. The Committee, however, noted that not all the findings and recommendations of Internal Audit were implemented.
  • The Committee also noted that the audit action plan was not fully implemented. The Committee recommended that additional effort should be made to implement the recommendations which contribute significantly to an improved audit outcome.
  • The Audit Committee noted progress in the sourcing of an ICT audit assurance provider, who had been appointed in March 2019, to commence work in the new financial year. It would assist in addressing the concern of the Committee that no assurance could be provided with respect to the ICT environment because the internal audit function lacked capacity in this regard.

 

The Audit Committee was supplied with all quarterly financial reports prepared and issued by the Department during the year under review in compliance with the statutory reporting framework. With the exception of certain nominal deficiencies, the Committee was satisfied with the quality of these reports, even-though were not timeous.

 

The IPID Audit Committee noted that:

  • The Department has drafted its Risk Management Strategy, Fraud Prevention, and Compliance Implementation Plans for approval in an effort to strengthen its future identification and mitigation of risks and particularly improve its compliance with Treasury Regulation 3.2.1;
  • No fraud allegations were reported as at end of 2018/19 financial year; and
  • The MISS requirement for safe storage of classified documents could not be adhered to due to prevalent Departmental budgetary constraints which impeded the sourcing of sufficient storage.

 

 

  1. FINANCIAL EXPENDITURE AND PERFORMANCE
    1. Overall expenditure and performance

In the Annual Report’s foreword by the Minister of Police, he stated that to achieve the National Development Plan (NDP) vision 2030 relating to the professionalization of the SAPS and strengthening accountability, IPID should be supported and appropriately funded. Continuous efforts have been made to increase the budget allocation of the Department. At 0.35% of the budget of the SAPS, and a fraction of the personnel, the capacity (in terms of budget and personnel) of the Department should be increased to effectively oversee and investigate police conduct.

 

Overall, the performance of the Department improved during the 2018/19 financial year. The Department achieved 82.8% on predetermined targets compared to 64.7% in the previous financial year. The improvement was most noticeable in the Administration Programme and the Investigation and Information Management Programme. The performance of the Administration Programme increased from 80% in 2017/19 to 85.7% in 2018/19. The performance of the Investigation and Information Management Programme improved from 59% in 2017/18 to 76.1%. The performance of the Compliance and Stakeholder Management Programme remained at 100% in 2017/18 and 2018/19.

 

The Department had a Final Appropriation of R315.113 million in 2018/19, of which R314.831 million was spent at year-end. The Department underspent with R141 000 in the Administration Programme, thus at the end of the 2018/19 financial year, the Department had spent 99.9% of its budget.

 

Table 1: Appropriation statement 

IPID Programmes

R’000

Adjusted Appropriation

Virement

Final Appropriation

Actual Spent

Variance

% Spent

1. Administration

106 504

(273)

106 231

106 000

141

99.9%

2. Investigation and Information Management

192 215

-

196 215

196 215

-

100.9%

3. Compliance Monitoring and Stakeholder Management

12 394

273

12 667

12 526

141

98.9%

Total

315 113

-

315 113

314 831

282

99.9%

Source: IPID 2018/19 Annual Report

 

In terms of economic classification, the following should be noted –

  • Goods and services had an Adjusted Appropriation of R109.374 million, of which R14.768 million was shifted away from the item and a further R273 000 was moved through a virement. This left Goods and services with a Final Appropriation of R94.333 million, of which R102.134 was spent at year-end, thus resulting in an overspending of R7.8 million (108% expenditure of the allocation).
  • Operating leases had an Adjusted Appropriation of R29.3 million, of which R5.025 million was shifted from the item, leaving a Final Appropriation of R24.345 million, of which R30.747 million was spent, thus realising an overspending of R6.402 million at year-end (126% expenditure against allocation).
  • Travel and subsistence had an Adjusted Appropriation of R16.406 million, of which R3.715 million was shifted from the item, which left a Final Appropriation of R12.691 million, of which R14.159 million was spent, resulting in an over expenditure of R1.468 million (111.6% expenditure against the allocation).

 

Machinery and equipment had an Adjusted Appropriation of R7.535 million, of which R13.908 million was added to the item (through shifts) and led to a Final appropriation of R21.493 million. At year-end, expenditure was higher that the allocation overspent with R1.711 million (108% of the allocation).

 

Ideally, the percentage of targets achieved should be in-line with the percentage of departmental expenditure. The table below shows that there is a misalignment between achievement of targets and expenditure of the Department. The table shows that between 2013/14 and 2015/16, there was a large misalignment with the Department achieving less than 50% of performance targets, while spending close to the full budget allocation. The alignment improved in 2015/16, but then regressed again between 2016/17 and 2017/18. The 2018/19 financial year shows a closer alignment between expenditure and achievement. It is the closest alignment since the establishment of the IPID.

Table 2: IPID Expenditure and performance between 2014 and 2019

Financial year

% Targets achieved

% Budget Spent

2013/14

27%

89%

2014/15

42.2%

99%

2015/16

74.5%

99.7%

2016/17

35.1%

99.8%

2017/18

64.7%

99.8%

2918/19

82.8%

99.9%

                                                                                     Source: IPID 2018/19 Annual Report

 

Irregular expenditure

The Department has registered irregular expenditure amounting to R1, 824, 000 in the 2018/19 financial year, which is made up as follows:

  1. Irregular appointment of Fidelity Security without following proper Supply Chain Management Processes - R615 000 (Amount can only be condoned by the National Treasury after IPID has implemented consequence management against affected officials)
  2. Irregular Appointment of Ms Theresa Botha – R1, 143, 000 (This amount is increasing monthly for as long as Ms Botha is employed by the IPID until such time that the appointment is either set aside or regularised by the Labour Court)

The closing balance for irregular expenditure was R30.026 million at the end of 2018/19.

 

Unauthorised expenditure

The Department did not incur any unauthorised expenditure in the 2018/19 financial year. The reported amount in the 2018/19 financial statements consists of prior over-expenditure by the then Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) in Programme 3 and 2 for the financial year 2005/06 and 2008/09 respectively. The Department made a submission with the supporting documents requesting the authorisation of the disclosed amount since been submitted to SCOPA through National Treasury.

 

Fruitless and wasteful expenditure

The Department has historic fruitless and wasteful expenditure of R2.236 million. In 2018/19, fruitless and wasteful expenditure of R8 000 was recorded, of which R7 000 was resolved.

 

 

Claims against the Department

In 2017/18, the Department had a contingent liability of R87.9 million allowed for civil claims against the Department. During the 2018/19 financial year, the Department incurred liabilities of R9.250 million and paid R41.018 million in liabilities. This resulted in a reduction in the contingent liability to R56.200 million at year-end.

 

Programme Performance

 

  1. Administration Programme

The Administration Programme achieved six from seven performance indicator targets, which represents 85.7% of targets achieved, which is an improvement on the previous year in which 80% of targets were achieved.

 

The performance indicator that was not achieved was to maintain a vacancy rate less than 10%, as the Department had a vacancy rate of 13.49% at year-end.

The Administration Programme had an adjusted Appropriation of R106. 504 million in 2018/19. An in-year virement of R273 000 from the Corporate Service sub-programme brought the Final Appropriation to R106.231 million, of which R106.090 million was spent at year-end, leaving R141 000 unspent.

 

Funds totalling R6.4 million were shifted from the Departmental Management, Internal Audit and Finance Services sub-programmes to the Corporate Services sub-programme.

 

Table 3: Financial performance of the Administration Programme 2018/19

Administration subprogrammes

R’000

Adjusted Appropriation

Shifts

Virement

Final Appropriation

Actual Spent

Variance

% Spent

Departmental Management

18 261

(3 523)

-

14 738

14 644

94

99.4%

Corporate Services

48 150

6 408

((273)

54 280

54 280

5

100%

Office Accommodation

12 450

-

-

12 450

12 450

-

100%

Internal Audit

4 779

(456)

-

4 309

4 309

13

100%

Finance Services

22 864

(2 429)

-

20 407

20 407

28

99.7%

Total

106 504

-

(273)

106 231

106 090

141

99.9%

                                                                                          Source: IPID 2018/19 Annual Report

 

  1. Human Resource Management

 

The Department had an approved establishment of 415 posts, of which 359 posts were filled at the end of March 2019. This means that the Department had 56 vacancies and a vacancy rate of 13.4%. The vacancy rate is above the 10% vacancy rate recommended by government. The highest number of vacancies was in the Compliance Monitoring and Stakeholder Management sub-programme (31.8%), followed by the Administration Programme (16.8%) and the Investigation and Information Management Programme (10.4%). There are 185 males and 174 females’ employees at all levels.

 

In the Senior Management Structure (SMS), there were 11 vacancies, which was most pronounced in the salary level 13 (10 vacancies). At year-end, 77.5% of SMS posts were filled

 

During 2018/19, the Department awarded 90 performance rewards to the total value of R1.7 million. Of the 90 recipients, 21 were in skilled salary band, 35 in the highly skilled production band and 32 in the highly skilled salary band.

The Department had four disciplinary hearings during the 2018/19 financial year, of which two led to a dismissal. The cases related to dishonesty, contravention of policy, negligence and leaking of information.

During the 2018/19 financial year, 13 grievances were lodged, of which nine were resolved and four were not resolved.

During 2018/19, the Department appointed three consultants to a total contract value of R613 482.66.

In terms of the Public Service Regulations “consultant’ means a natural or juristic person or a partnership who or which provides in terms of a specific contract on an ad hoc basis any of the following professional services to a department against remuneration received from any source:

  1. The rendering of expert advice;
  2. The drafting of proposals for the execution of specific tasks; and
  3. The execution of a specific task, which is of a technical or intellectual nature but excludes an employee of a department.

 

Table 4: Consultants appointed using appropriated funds

Project title

Number of consultants that worked in the project

Duration

Contract value

Alexander Forbes

1

On-going

R53 720.30

ICAS Wellness

1

On-going

R217 762.36

Fidelity – Cell Phone Analysis Service

1

Six months

R342 000.00

 

  1. Programme 2: Investigation and Information Management

The Programme achieved 16 from 21 performance targets in the 2018/19 financial year, which represents an achievement rate of 76.1%, which is an improvement from the 58.8% achievement rate of the previous financial year. The achievement is further significant as the Department achieved only 17.6% of identified targets in the 2016/17 financial year.

In terms of Section 28(1) of the IPID Act, Act 1 of 2011, the IPID is obligated to investigate the following matters:

1) Any deaths in police custody;

2) Deaths as a result of police actions;

3) Any complaint relating to the discharge of an official firearm by any police officer;

4) Rape by a police officer, whether the police officer is on or off duty;

5) Rape of any person while that person is in police custody;

6) Any complaint of torture or assault3 against a police officer in the execution of his or her duties;

7) Corruption matters within the police initiated by the Executive Director on his or her own, or after the receipt of a complaint from a member of the public, or referred to the Directorate by the Minister, an MEC or the Secretary, as the case may be; and

8) Any other matter referred to it as a result of a decision by the Executive Director, or if so requested by the Minister, an MEC or the Secretary as the case may be, in the prescribed manner.

In terms of Section 28(2) of the IPID Act 1 of 2011, the IPID may investigate matters relating to systemic corruption involving the police. In addition, section 29 of the Act places an obligation on members of the South African Police Service (SAPS) and Municipal Police Service (MPS), to report all matters referred to in Section 28(1) (a) to (f) to the IPID immediately upon becoming aware of such a matter. These must be reported in writing within 24 hours.

 

During 2018/19, 5 829 cases were reported to the IPID, which is a 3% increase compared to the previous financial year. The majority of the cases reported were within Section 28(1) (a) to (h). Of these, 3 835 were assault cases, 770 were cases of complaints of discharge of an official firearm, 393 were cases of deaths as a result of police action followed by 214 cases of deaths in police custody. Of the total 5 829 cases, 5 691 cases involved the SAPS members and 126 cases involving the MPS on various criminal offences. The remaining 13 cases involved the civilians.

 

During 2018/19, 2 044 criminal cases were referred to the NPA, of which 55 cases were prosecuted. During 2018/19, the Department referred 2 337 recommendations to the SAPS, of which 1 464 recommended no disciplinary action (positive recommendations) and 873 were negative recommendations in which disciplinary action was recommended.

As the offences listed above must be investigated by the Department, performance indicators and targets have been developed to measure performance on this statutory obligation. The table below provides achievement of selected targets in comparison to the actual achievement thereof.

 

However, there is a major problem with the reported achievement on predetermined targets for 2018/19. The targets are set as absolute numbers and not percentages of the case intake, which does not provide an accurate assessment of the IPID’s performance. In addition, IPID does not identify whether the number of cases achieved related to cases reported in the 20018/19 financial year (or including backlogs cases).

 

For instance, the Department ‘exceeded’ the target for the number of rapes in police custody cases that are decision ready. In 2018/19, 12 cases from a target of 10 cases were finalised, which is two more that targeted. Yet, 13 case of rape in police custody was reported in 2018/19.4 This clearly shows that backlog cases are included in reporting on targets and not only an assessment of the financial year under review.

 

Additionally, the target to finalise 80 cases of other criminal matters and misconduct was not achieved, as only 57 cases were decision-ready. However, 35 cases were reported in 2018/19.

Ideally, the Department should report achievements on targets for the year under review against the case intake within that period and report separately on closing of backlog cases in the same category of offences.

The table below shows performance on the mandatory cases for investigation that are decision-ready (finalised) against predetermined cases, but also the number of case intake for the 2018/19 financial year.

Table 5: Performance on selected performance indicators

Section of IPID Act

Investigated

2018/19 Target

2018/19

Achieved

% deviation

2018/19 Comments on reported achievements

28(1)(a)

Number of deaths in police custody cases that are decision-ready

150

154

4

Target exceeded

2018/19 case intake: 214

28(1)(b)

Number of deaths as a result of police action cases that are decision-ready

130

175

27

Target exceeded

2018/19 case intake: 393

28(1)(c)

Number of complaint of the discharge of official firearms(s) cases that are decision-ready

500

337

-163

Target not achieved.

2018/19 case intake: 770

28(1)(d)

Number of rape by police officer (on or off duty) cases that are decision-ready

65

100

35

Target exceeded

2018/19 case intake: 124

28(1)(e)

Number of rape in police custody cases that are decision-ready

10

12

2

Target exceeded

2018/19 case intake: 13

28(1)(f)

Number of torture cases that are decision-ready

60

81

21

Target exceeded

2018/19 case intake: 270

28(1)(f)

Number of assault cases that are decision-ready

2000

1 794

-206

Target not achieved

2018/19 case intake: 3 835

28(1)(g)

Number of corruption cases that are decision-ready

60

60

-

Target achieved

2018/19 case intake: 108

28(1)(h)

Number of other criminal matter(s) and misconduct cases that are decision-ready

80

57

-23

Target not achieved

2018/19 case intake: 35

28(2)

Number of systemic corruption cases that are decision-ready

2

4

2

Target exceeded

2018/19 case intake: 1

Source: IPID 2018/19 Annual Report

 

The Investigation and Information Management programme received an Adjusted Appropriation of R196.2 million in 2018/19. No virements were made, which maintained the Final Appropriation at R196.2 million, of which 100% was spent at year-end. Funds were shifted from the Information Management sub-programme to the Investigation Management and Investigation Services sub-programmes. These shifts increased the budget of the Investigation Management sub-programme from R18.06 million to R18.4 million and the Investigation Services from R173.5 million to R174.4 million. The Information Management sub-programme’s budget decreased with R1.3 million to a Final Appropriation of R3.2 million.

Table 6: Investigation and Information Management Programme

Sub-programmes

R’000

Adjusted Appropriation

Shifts

Virement

Final Appropriation

Actual Spent

Variance

% Spent

Investigation Management

18 066

406

-

18 472

18 472

-

100%

Investigation Services

173 504

980

-

174 484

174 484

-

100%

Information Management

4 645

(1 386)

-

3 259

3 259

-

100%

Total

196 215

-

-

196 215

196 215

-

100%

  Source: IPID 2018/19 Annual Report

 

In terms of economic classification within the Investigation and Information Programme, the following should be noted:

  • Contractors: An in-programme shift was made from this item, leaving R49 000.00 as the Final Appropriation. At year-end, R152 000.00 was spent, thus overspending by R103 000.00 (310.2%)
  • Consultants: The Department spent 155.6% of the Final Appropriation of the item.

 

 

 

  1. Programme 3: Compliance Monitoring and Stakeholder Management

The Programme achieved a second consecutive achievement rate of 100% on performance targets. In 2018/19, the Programme achieved seven from seven performance targets. Furthermore, all the predetermined performance indicator targets were exceeded by a wide margin during the 2018/19 financial year (same as previous financial year).

  1. 26 more community outreach events were held (106)
  2. 10 more formal engagements with key stakeholders were held (138)
  3. 1 366 more disciplinary recommendations were referred to the SAPS and MPS (2 366)
  4. 1 020 more criminal referrals were forwarded to the NPA (1 950)
  5. 13% more responses from the SAPS and MPS were analysed (target was 50% and 63% was achieved 386 of 608)
  6. 9% more responses from the NPA were analysed (target was 50% and 59% were achieved at 326 of 554)

 

The Compliance Monitoring and Stakeholder Management Programme had an Adjusted Appropriation of R12.3 million in 2018/19, which increased the Final Appropriation slightly with R273 000 to R12.6 million at year-end. The Programme recorded an underspending of R141 000, which means that 98.9% of the budget was spent at the end of the 2018/19 financial year.

Table 7: Compliance Monitoring and Stakeholder Management Programme

Sub-programmes

R’000

Adjusted Appropriation

Shifts

Virement

Final Appropriation

Actual Spent

Variance

% Spent

Compliance Monitoring

7 366

(1 406)

-

5 960

5 819

141

97.6%

Stakeholder Management

5 028

1 406

273

6 707

6 707

-

100%

Total

12 394

-

273

12 667

12 526

141

98.9%

  Source: IPID 2018/19 Annual Report

 

  1. PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE OBSERVATIONS

 

The Committee made the following observations:

 

Manipulation of IPID Statistics: The Committee noted the various media reports around the manipulation of statistics and asked the Acting Executive Director to explain. The IPID noted that they have started a disciplinary process to deal with the accusations of premature closure of cases and performance statistics. The allegations started in 2012 and a complaint was first registered in 2012. The Public Protector found that there was no merit in the allegations.  It came back in 2014 and in 2016, the same complaints were made by the Ethics Officer. The Gauteng Office was involved and two officials were involved. One resigned and the other faced a case of defeating the ends of justice. The then ED then extended the investigation to all provinces. A report has been drafted and will be released to the Minister and the Committee on 18 October 2019.

 

The Committee noted that it will not allow for the manipulation of the IPID statistics and looked forward to the report being issued. The Chairperson of the Committee noted that the Committee would be averse to making any judgement and wait for the report. A reputation risk and confidence deficit has developed together with a trust deficit that should be restored. The Committee views the reports in a serious light and IPID must create the opportunity for the public to restore its confidence in the Department.

 

AGSA Audit Opinion: The Committee welcomed the maintenance of the AGSA Audit Opinion of an unqualified audit with material findings. The IPID reported that there were 51 findings in the Audit outcome to which they have already developed an action plan for implementation.

 

Irregular Expenditure: The Committee noted that the IPID must investigate the Irregular Expenditure to the tune of R1.824 million which was incurred in 2017 and only audited in 2019. It involved the irregular appointment of Fidelity Security (R615 000) and the appointment a cell-phone analyst (R1.143 million). The Committee supported IPID to implement consequence management and recovery of the amounts. The IPID has indicated that it has finalised an internal disciplinary case.    

 

Ministry of Police support: The Committee noted that the Ministry of Police has pledged to support the IPID in attainment of their Audit outcome planning. The Deputy Minister of Police assured the Committee that IPID is doing good work and that they require support.

 

Under-funded Mandate: The Committee noted that the IPID is seriously under-funded in order to execute its mandate and implement Section 23 of the IPID Act. The Committee noted that the Minister should make sure that the IPID is sufficiently funded so that all vacancies of its establishment is filled. Given the work of IPID to investigate corruption, the mandate of the IPID must be taken seriously and it should not intentionally be under-funded.

 

Permanent Executive Director of IPID: The Committee raised serious questions as to when the Committee can expect the nomination of the candidate for the position of the Executive Director of IPID. The post was advertised and the shortlisting process has started.

 

Low conviction rates: The Committee noted that it was concerned about the low conviction rates and wanted to know why the National Prosecution Authority (NPA) always declines to prosecute cases referred by the IPID. The quality of the IPID investigations should be beyond reproach. The IPID responded by saying that there is a huge backlog of cases at the NPA in that it referred a total of 2044 cases to the NPA and secured 91 convictions. There were 2073 recommendations to the SAPS of which 1464 were “positive” recommendations and 873 were “negative”. The IPID was engaging with the NPA on the case backlogs.

 

Performance Targets: The Committee expressed concerns that despite the lack of budget and under-resourcing of the Department, the IPID has achieved a remarkable improvement with respect to reaching their targets. Members were surprised with the remarkable improvement in performance. The IPID responded by indicating that the staff morale was quite low as five satellite offices were closed; workloads for staff had increased considerably and the ratio of the IPID investigator to police was 1:1130. While there was stability in the senior management service, at lower level of the department, there was a high turnover. Despite this, the department has improved from 65% to 83% on its set performance targets.

 

Irregular appointment of staff member: The Committee expressed its concern on whether the appointment of the telephone call analyst was done in line with Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) guidelines. The Committee called for corrective action. The IPID indicated that it approached the Labour Court for a decision.

 

Investigation of rape by police officers: The Committee noted that it was concerned about the investigations of rape by police officers and whether the perpetrators were successfully prosecuted. It was concerned about the quality of such investigations as such police officers understood the investigation procedures and could sabotage it. The Department indicated that once an investigation is completed, the criminal case is referred to the NPA, while the departmental misconduct case is referred to the SAPS. The IPID indicated that it was unlikely that other police officers will report their colleagues and cases are declined because the victims are in contact with the police. Cases where the victim /survivor cannot identify the police officer are not referred to the NPA.

 

Backlog of cases: The Committee notes the high backlog of cases at the NPA and calls on the NPA to speed up the process of reducing the case backlog. The IPIDs own investigators should clear up the backlog in the process.

 

Implementation of Section 23 of the IPID Act: The Committed questioned whether the IPID was implementing Section 23 of the IPID Act. The Department indicated that the last Court Order on the implementation of section 23 was on 20 August 2019. The Department was given a certain period for the implementation of section 23 and every implementation of a section 23 instruction an explanation has to be provided. The labour unions have been approached to form part of the task team as the IPID was given three months to implement Section 23.

 

 

  1. RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON POLICE

 

The Portfolio Committee on Police recommends the following:

 

  1. The Audit Action Plan must be strengthened and implemented as a matter of priority in order to ensure that the Department improve on its audit outcomes in the 2019/20 financial year. It is recommended that the Department provide quarterly reports to the Committee on the implementation all 51 findings of the Auditor General in the Audit Action Plan.
  2. The Directorate must make the report of its investigation into the manipulation of the IPID crime statistics, available to the Committee at the end of October 2019.
  3. The Directorate must review its annual performance indicators and targets to ensure they reflect performance and encourage service delivery.    
  4. The Directorate must implement consequence management against officials who make or permit irregular or fruitless and wasteful expenditure.   
  5. The Committee welcomes the support of pledged by the Ministry of Police to ensure IPIDs succeeds with the implementation of the Audit Action Plan.
  6. The Directorate must finalise the shortlisting of the candidates for the appointment of a permanent Executive Director for the IPID.
  7. The Department address the low conviction rates of IPID cases and meet with the NPA to consider strategies to increase the conviction rates.
  8. The Department should review its performance targets and should aim to improve on its performance of 83% for the 2019/20 financial year.
  9. The Department should hold officials responsible for irregular, wasteful and fruitless expenditure to account by recovering funds.
  10.  The Department should address the backlog of cases together with the NPA and develop strategies for speeding up the trials of accused.
  11. The Department should develop strategies for dealing with investigations that centre on rape by a police officer with a view to building water-tight cases against such officers. 
  12. The Department should fast-track the implementation of Section 23 of the IPID Act and make sure that trade unions support the implementation as a matter of urgency.

 

  1. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

 

The Department should submit quarterly reports on the implementation of the Audit Action Plan to address the adverse findings of the AGSA.

 

  1. CONCLUSION

 

The IPID as an independent police oversight body requires stability in its leadership and investigations. It is a critical part of the quality assurance that is needed to ensure public trust in police officials and if it is to succeed, requires the support of all partners given the huge task it faces. The Portfolio Committee is certain that it will continue to support the IOPD as an independent oversight agency of democratic policing to ensure police accountability.  

 

Report to be considered.

 

Documents

No related documents