ATC210521: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services on theAnnual Performance Plans 2021/22 of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, National Prosecuting Authority, Legal Aid South Africa, Special Investigating Unit, Public Protector South Africa, South African Human Rights Commission and Information Regulator; and Budget Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development for the 2021 MTEF, dated 21 May 2021

Justice and Correctional Services

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services on theAnnual Performance Plans 2021/22 of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, National Prosecuting Authority, Legal Aid South Africa, Special Investigating Unit, Public Protector South Africa, South African Human Rights Commission and Information Regulator; and Budget Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development for the 2021 MTEF, dated 21 May 2021

 

The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, having considered the Annual Performance Plans 2021/22 of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, National Prosecuting Authority, Legal Aid South Africa, Special Investigating Unit, Public Protector South Africa, South African Human Rights Commission and Information Regulator; and Budget Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development, referred to it, reports as follows:

 

1. Introduction

 

1. The Budget Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development continues to consist offive programmes, as well as a direct charge for Magistrates’ salaries:

• The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (the Department) is responsible for the Administration, Court Services, State Legal Services and National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) programmes, as well as for the Justice Modernisation sub-programme under Programme 5: Auxiliary and Associated Services, which funds the implementation of Information Technology (IT) infrastructure for the Department and distributes earmarked funds for JCPS Cluster projects as part of the Integrated Justice System (IJS).

 

• Section 39 of the Protection of Personal Information Act, 2013, (POPIA) establishes an Information Regulator as an independent juristic person that is accountable to the National Assembly. At present, until fully operational, the Regulator receives its allocation under the State Legal Services programme.

 

• Programme 5 Auxiliary and Associated Servicesalso contains allocations to various auxiliary services, including transfer payments to Legal Aid South Africa and the Special Investigating Unit (SIU). The Programme also contains transfer payments for the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and the Public Protector South Africa (PPSA).

 

 

1. Context

 

1. The Committee’s consideration of the Budget Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development takes place in the context of the declaration of a state of national disaster on 15 March 2020,followed by the announcement of a hard lockdown from 26 March 2020,in response to the potential magnitude and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. From 1 May 2020, Government cautiously began to ease restrictions, adopting a risk-adjusted strategy. Although the courts and justice-service points have remained open, access has at times been restricted to essential matters. This has significantly affected operations and there has been a marked increase in backlogs.

 

1. Further consideration must be given to the weak state of our economy. Fiscal policy focuses on short-term economic support, pro-growth fiscal consolidation and debt stabilisation. Notably, narrowing the budget deficit and stabilising the debt-to-GDP ratio requires curbing expenditure growth. The 2021 Budget, therefore, proposes to reduce expenditure over the MTEF period by R264.9 billion, or 4.6% of GDP. Most of the proposed adjustments are to the public sector wage bill.

 

 

1. Method

 

1. On 5 May 2021, the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services addressed the Committee on the relevant political priorities.

 

1. The Department, NPA, Information Regulator, Legal Aid South Africa, the SIU, the SAHRC and the PPSAeach presented their annual performance plans for 2021/22 and budgets for the 2021 MTEF.

 

1. The briefings took place as follows:

• Information Regulator –11 May 2021.
• South African Human Rights Commission – 14 May 2021.
• Special Investigating Unit –11 May 2020.
• Public Protector –6 May 2020.
• Legal Aid South Africa –6 May 2020.
• The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development –7 May 2020.
• National Prosecuting Authority –7 May 2020.

 

1. All presentations are available from the Committee Secretariat.

 

 

1. Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report (BRRR) October 2019and Minister of Finance’s response to Parliament

 

1. In the Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report (October 2020), the Committee did not support budget reductions in the case of the NPA, Legal Aid SA, and the SIU. The Committee was especially concerned that a reduced budget could undermine the contributions of each of these to the Rule of Law.

 

1. Inthe case of the Department, the Committee recommended that the Public Service Commission be approached with the request that it evaluate the Department with a view to identifying the reasons for the Department’s non-performance and any systemic challenges, and report to Parliament on its findings and recommendations.

 

1. The Committee recommended that additional funding be allocated to the Information Regulator to allow it to recruit staff as planned.

 

1. The Committee did not support the proposed application of budget reductions in the case of the SAHRC to prevent any further loss of human resource capacity and to enable it to maintain its existing activities. The Committee also supportedthe additional forward funding needs presented to it by the SAHRC.

 

1. The Committee did not support the application of budget reductions at the PPSA.The Committee also recommended that special consideration be given to allocating additional funds to allow the PPSA to address the absence of security at its offices.

 

 

1. Medium Term Strategic Framework 2019 -2024

 

1. The National Development Plan (NDP) requires, among others, that we build safer communities; promote accountability and fight corruption; and strengthen judicial governance and the rule of law.

 

1. The MTSF identifies seven priorities and related interventions of the Sixth Administration. Justice has responsibilities in respect of two priorities: namely Priority 1 ‘A capable, ethical and developmental state’ and Priority 6 ‘Social cohesion and safe communities’.

 

1. In addition, the lack of access to resources and lack of opportunity for Women, Youth and People with Disabilities are identified as cross-cutting, requiring a variety of interventions, including legislative amendments.

 

1. Key interventions for which the Justice Department is allocated responsibility include:

• Instituting a programme to prevent and fight corruption in government in partnership with anti-corruption agencies and non-state actors to resolve reported incidents of corruption in the Government through disciplinary measures and criminal interventions.
• Coordinating engagements between the leadership of the executive, legislature and judiciary in order to develop a social compact by 2021 and implement the compact by 2024. The President and his Cabinet; Chief Justice and Presidents of the Court of Appeal and High Courts; Speakers of the legislatures and Heads of Chapter 9 institutions are identified as core partners.
• Developing a system to ensure consistent barrier-free access to justice for persons with disabilities across the justice value chain.
• Coordinating the Implementation of the National Action Plan (NAP) to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
• Establishing Specialised Commercial Crime Courts (SCCC’s) in five (5) provinces (Limpopo, North West, Mpumalanga, Eastern Cape and the Free State).
• Ensuring an efficient, modernised and co-ordinated criminal justice system through integrated digital information systems.

 

Table 1: Key Justice MTSF targets 2021/22

MTSF Indicators	Justice MTSF Targets 2021/22
Co-ordinating engagements between the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary to develop a social compact by 2021 to be implemented by 2024	Discussion document submitted to Cabinet by 31 December 2021
Developing a system to ensure consistent barrier-free access to justice for persons with disabilities across the justice value chain.	75 courts compliant with the strategy on universal access for persons with disabilities in 2021/22
Co-ordinating the implementation of national Action Plan to Combat racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance	NAP funding model approved by Executive Authority by 31 March 2022.
Establishing Specialised Commercial Crime Courts in five (5) provinces (Limpopo, North West, Mpumalanga, Eastern Cape and the Free State by 2024	Six courts were established in 2020/21 and so for 2021/22 and 2022/23, the focus will be on ensuring that the SCCC’s capacity and efficacy is enhanced and optimised.

 

 

1. National Strategic Plan on Gender-Based Violence and Femicide (NSP-GBVF) 2020-2030

 

1. Pillar 3 of the NSP-GBVF addresses Justice, Safety and Protection. The intention is to tackle the systemic challenges that result in the inadequate response to and management of GBVF cases.

 

1. Over five years, key interventions concerning Justice include:

• Making alterations to the infrastructure of court building to ensure that they are victim, disability and child friendly.
• Making court-based victim support services and witness protection available, particularly in rural areas.
• Ensuring that legal aid support is readily accessible for women and LGBTIQA+ persons who cannot afford litigation.
• Making e-services available to survivors to ensure quick access to justice.
• Ensuring information on cases is readily available for victims to access and track.
• Implementing GBV legislation effectively with adequate resourcing and budget.
• Ensuring the ongoing vetting of officials providing services to children and persons with mental disabilities.

 

1. Political overview

 

1. On 5 May 2021, the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services provided a political overview, introducing the budget and plans for 2020/21 for the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. The Minister’s address is available from the Committee Secretariat but the following is highlighted:

• This year marks the 25th anniversary of the Constitution. Aseries of programmes will take place to mark this milestone.
• The Department’s renewal has begun with the filling of critical vacancies at the very highest level, with more to follow.
• The turnaround of Justice College will allow for better capacitated justice officials through training and, in addition, position Justice College as a service provider to other departments and the continent.
• The Department is investing in integration and modernisation programmes through the use of technology. Also, more effort is being directed towards the Integrated Justice System (IJS), as part of accelerating the digitisation and modernisation of the justice system. This will take place through a variety of ICT projects implemented across the security cluster.
• The process to operationalise the State Attorney Amendment Act continues with the appointment of regional heads to the Office of the State Attorney at all High Courts to ensure better management of state litigation.
• Publication of a legal sector code for comment will take place in the near future as part of transformation efforts.
• The fight against fraud and corruption continues.
• The NPA continues with its Aspirant Prosecutors’ programme in which young graduates are recruited to the NPA.
• The NPA will also establish an office of complaints in line with international best practice and to institutionalise the NPA’s commitment to ethics and accountability.
• The State Capture Commission will be assisted to compete its work.
• Land Justice. With effect from 1 April 2021, theprocess to transfer the legal representation function and related budget from the Land Rights Management Facility in the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development to Legal Aid SA has begun.

 

 

1. Fiscal environment

 

1. Overview

 

1. Even before the declaration of the national state of disaster, economic growth was weaker than forecast. Fiscal policy, therefore, seeks to focus on short-term economic support, pro-growth fiscal consolidation and debt stabilisation. Notably, narrowing the budget deficit and stabilising the debt-to-GDP ratio requires that expenditure growth is curbed. The 2021 Budget, therefore, proposes to reduce expenditure over the MTEF period by R264.9 billion, or 4.6% of GDP. Most of the proposed adjustments are to the public sector wage.

 

 

1. Peace and Security function

 

• The Peace and Security function prioritises the implementation of an integrated strategy to fight crime and ensure national security over the medium term.
• The consolidated budget for the peace and security function is R2.08 billion in 2021/22 (compared with R218.6 billion in 2020/21), R212.9 in 2022/23 and R213.4 billion in 2023/24.
• Over the MTEF, the baseline allocation to the function is reduced by R79.8 billion, from R709 billion to R629.2 billion, largely from the Compensation of Employees and Goods and Services’ budgets.
• The allocation for Compensation of Employees will decline by R64 billion over the MTEF, implying a reduction in personnel. As most of the departments for this function are labour intensive, organisational structures will need to be rationalised to avoid compromising frontline services and operations.
• The Department is allocated an additional R1.8 billion over the MTEF to improve business processes through the Justice Modernisation programme.
• The Information Regulator is allocated an additional R105 billion over the MTEF for additional personnel (54 new posts).

 

Table 2: Peace and Security function budget allocation 2021 MTEF

Function	R ’billion
	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Defence and State Security	54	46.7	47.8	48.1
Police Services	106.6	104.6	1045.9	106.0
Law Courts and Prisons	48.3	48.5	49.6	49.9
Home Affairs	9.8	8.9	9.5	9.4
Total	218.6	208.6	212.9	213.4

 

1. Approximately 23.3% of the overall allocation for Peace and Security goes to ‘Law courts and prisons’. Specifically, the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote receives 10.3% (including magistrates’ salaries) of this, compared with 10.3% in 2020/21.

 

 

1. Overview of Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development

 

1. The overall allocation to the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote (Vote 25) for 2021/22 is R21.5 billion (compared with R21.1 billion in 2020/21), which includes magistrates’ salaries of R2.4 billion.

 

1. In 2021/22, the total for programmes - excluding the direct charge for magistrates’ salaries - is R19.12 billion (compared with R18.7 billion in 2020/21).

 

1. Over the MTEF, the Vote allocation is reduced by –R7.8 billion. In 2021/22, the allocation to the Vote decreases by -R2.3 billion, a reduction in real terms of -2.04%.

 

Table 3: Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development – MTEF Baseline reductions

 

Baseline reductions R’million)				MTEF Total
Building and other fixed structures
Goods and services
Compensation of employees

 

Table 4: Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development – MTEF Baseline reductions per Branch

 

	(3 710)
Office of the DG
Corporate Services
Information Management System (ISM)		105 301	118 916
Court Services
Legislative Development	(12 058)
Information Regulator	30 000	35 000	40 000
SLA – State Law Advisors
CLO Chief Litigation Officer
Constitutional Development
Justice Modernisation
	(100 000)
Direct Charges

 

1. The three Justice programmes (Administration, Court Services and State Legal Services) and the Justice Modernisation sub-programme are allocated R11.7 billion for 2021/22, a real decrease of -2.5% compared to 2020/21. The reduction affects the salaries budget (-R1.6 billion); goods and services (-R269 million) and infrastructure (-R220 million) in particular.

 

1. The Vote, however, receives an additional R1.8 billion over the medium term to improve business processes. This is to create online access to various justice services such as maintenance applications, deceased estates and trusts, protection order applications and service of court processes.

 

Table 5: Vote 25 - Justice and Constitutional Development –Allocation for the 2021 MTEF per programme

Programme (R ‘million)	Budget 2021 MTEF
	2020/21 Adjusted Appropriation	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Administration	2 626.6	2 532.0	2 621.8	2 698.1
Court Services	6 511.0	6 637.7	6 639.0	6 518.4
State Legal Services	1330.6	1 369.3	1 376.5	1 410.0
NPA	4 266.9	4 446.2	4 487.6	4 543.6
Auxiliary and Associated Services	3 931.2	4 134.6	4 258.7	4 341.1
TOTAL	18 666.3	19 119.8	19 383.5	19 511.2
Magistrates’ Salaries	2 442.5	2 426.5	2 429.5	2 439.9
Total	21 108.7	21 546.3	21 813.0	21 951.1
Change to 2020 Budget estimate	(1 302.1)	(2 338.1)	(3 087.0)	(2 325.2)

 

1. Compensation of employees is the largest cost driver, accounting to approximately 56.6% of expenditure over the medium term. Although the allocation to compensation of employees is reduced by -R5.1 billion over the medium term, the Department intends to accommodate the reduction by filling only critical vacant postsand sharing services, where possible. Through natural attrition, retirements and contract terminations, the number of personnel is expected to decrease by 815 posts from 22 479 in 2021/22 to 21 664 in 2023/24.

 

 

1. Department of Justice and Constitutional Development

 

1. The key outcomes and interventions in terms of the MTSF for which the Department is responsible are captured at paragraph 5.4 (Table 1).

 

1. The Department will focus on the following over the strategic plan cycle:

• Modernising and increasing access to justice services.
• The commitment to build and deepen constitutionalism, respect for human rights and the rule of law.
• The review of justice-related colonial and apartheid-era legislation with the aim of aligning these with the Constitution.
• The implementation of the National Action Plan to Combat racism, racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance to advance constitutionalism, human rights and the rule of law.
• Addressing Gender-Based Violence and Femicide (GBVF).
• Transformation of State Legal Services to improve effectiveness and efficiency through the implementation of the State Attorney Amendment Act, 2014.
• Transformation of the legal profession and fighting fraud and corruption.
• Providing facilities at courts and justice service points that are accessible to persons with disabilities, as required by building regulations.
• Implementing an educational campaign to profile justice services to improve citizens’ experiences of justice services.
• Improving audit outcomes of the Vote account and predetermined objectives.
• Improving departmental performance.
• Combatting fraud and corruption by ensuring that the Special Commercial Crime Courts (SCCCs) are extended to every province.
• Reducing the case backlogs in the criminal justice system by developing solutions to allow for effective and optimal operation of the courts.

 

1. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is striving towards making the following impact ‘Improved public perception, confidence in the justice system and respect for the rule of law’and hasdeveloped ten outcomes:

• Modernised and digitised justice service platforms.
• Improved organizational capability and good governance.
• Improved awareness of justice services and constitutionalism.
• Increased access to justice services.
• Improved Masters services.
• Colonial/Apartheid era justice-related legislation reviewed and replaced.
• Transformed state legal services.
• Transformed legal profession.
• Advancement of constitutionalism, human rights and the rule of law.
• Crime and corruption reduced through effective prosecution.

 

1. The Department has identified the following as key risks to its plans:

• Ageing and unstable ICT infrastructure causing disruption of systems.
• Poor contract management leading to irregular expenditure.
• Non-compliance with departmental SCM policies and procedures concerning the procurement of legal services.
• Inadequate management of people.
• Compromised physical and information security.
• Delays in delivering infrastructure projects.
• Inadequate disclosure process of contingent liabilities in state attorneys.
• Inability to implement Covid-19 Risk Adjusted Plan for the effective management of Covid-19 resurgence.
• Vacancies in key positions and inadequate organisational structure resulting in instability across the Department.

 

 

1. Department of Justice and Constitutional Development: Programmes

 

1. Programme 1: Administration

 

1. The purpose of this programme is to provide strategic leadership, management and support services to the Department.

 

1. Modernising justice services to increase access to justice is a key programme priority. The Department plans to rollout solutions for key services to be available online and this should assist to improve the quality and speed of services. Further priorities for this programme include improving the audit outcome; addressing the skills gap; improving performance; and empowering women and SMMEs.

 

1. A new priority is the introduction of a communication strategy for the Department in which all awareness and campaign indicators were consolidated and will be monitored.

 

1. The following indicators have been added:

• Number of justice services available on the Internet portal (online).
• Number of sites rolled out with courts audio-visual solution (CAVS) (Target 2021/22: 45 sites).
• Number of expungements finalised within three (3) months of receipt of application (Target 2021/22: 80%).
• Vacancy rate at SMS level (10% in 2021/22).
• 100% reduction of wasteful and fruitless expenditure in public sector institutions from baseline 2019-2024 (70% reduction in 2021/22).
• 100% reduction of irregular expenditure in public sector institutions from baseline 2019-2024 (55% reduction in 2021/22).
• Percentagedisciplinary hearings resolved within 90 days (Target 2021/22: 60% resolved).
• Percentage of grievances resolved within 90 days (Target 2021/22: 60% resolved).
• Number of disciplinary hearings for misconduct backlogs finalised (Target 2021/22: 45 disciplinary hearings).
• Number of public education activities conducted on the 25th anniversary of the Constitution (Target 2021/22: 145 public education activities)
• Number of public education activities conducted on justice services (Target 2021/22: 200 public education activities).
• Programmes to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Constitution implemented (Target 2021/22: Report submitted to Minister for approval).

 

1. The Administration programme is allocated R2.53 billion for 2021/22, decreasing in real terms by -7.55 compared to 2020/21 (for the Ministry, Management, Corporate Services, Financial Administration, Internal Audit and Office Accommodation sub-programmes).

 

1. The most significant reduction is to the Corporate Services sub-programme,whose budget decreases in real terms by -28.65% from R796.7 million to R593.1 million.

 

1. The spending focus for this programme remains mainly on personnel, audit fees, operating leases, property payments, and travel and subsistence.

 

1. Programme 2: Court Services

 

1. The Court Services programme facilitates the resolution of criminal and civil cases, and family law disputes, by providing accessible, efficient and quality administrative support to the courts and to manage court facilities.

 

1. Key priorities for this programme include the fight against GBVF; protecting women and children; increasing access to physical infrastructure and justice services; enhancing the fight against crime and corruption through the establishment of the SCCCs and the development of a paper on existing anti-corruption legislation and institutional arrangements.

 

1. The Department has added the following new indicators:

• Number of courts compliant with the strategy on universal access for persons with disabilities (Target 2021/22: 75 courts).
• Social compact implemented (Discussion document submitted to Cabinet by 31 December 2021).
• Number of branch courts converted to full service courts (Target 2021/22: 6 courts).
• Case Backlogs Reduction Framework adopted (Target 2021/22: Framework adopted by 31 March 2022).
• Maintenance Improvement Framework developed and submitted to the Minister by 31 March 2022.
• Anti-corruption architecture reviewed (Target 2021/22: Position paper submitted to Minister by 31 March 2022).

 

1. Court Services is allocated R6.64 billion for 2021/22, compared with R6.5 billion in 2020/21 (for the Lower Courts, Family Advocate, Magistrates Commission, Facilities Management and Administration of Lower Courts sub-programmes). Overall, the allocation to this programme decreases by -2.2% in real terms from 2019/20. The allocation to compensation of employees decreases from R4.3 billion in 2020/21 to R4.25 billion in 2021/22. Personnel is to decrease from 12 719 in 2020/21 to 12 547 in 2021/22.

 

1. The most significant reduction is to the allocation to the Administration of Lower Courts sub-programme, which decreases in real terms by -21.1% and the Lower Courts sub-programme, which decreases in real terms by -3.4%.

 

1. The spending focus for this programme remains mainly on personnel, agency services, operating leases, property payments, travel and subsistence; and building and other fixed structures.

 

1. Programme 3: State Legal Services

 

1. The programme provides legal and legislative services to government; supervises the administration of deceased and insolvent estates and estates undergoing liquidation; manages the Guardian’s Fund; facilitates constitutional development; and undertakes research.

 

1. New indicators for the Programme include:

• Policy on the management of state litigation contingent liabilities (Developed and submitted to Minister for approval by 31 March 2022).
• Rapid Response Mechanism to respond to incidents of racist and xenophobic offences/hate crimes (Mechanism established by 31 March 2022).
• Data collection of disaggregated data for measurement of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance developed (Datasets identified for development of virtual repository by 31 March 2022).
• Framework on extradition and mutual legal assistance submitted to the Minister for approval by 31 December 2021.
• Framework to guide development of treaty reports (Draft framework on treaty obligations developed and submitted to Minister for approval by 31 March 2022).
• Framework to monitor the implementation of constitutional court judgements developed (Draft framework developed and submitted to Minister for approval by 31 March 2022).

 

1. The State Legal Services programme is allocated R1.37 billion for 2021/22, compared with R1.33 billion in 2020/21 (for the State Law Advisers, Litigation and Legal Services, Legislative Development and Law Reform, Master of the High Court and Constitutional Development sub-programmes). The allocation to the programme decreases in real terms by -1.24% compared with 2020/21. Personnel is to decrease to 2 176 in 2023/24.

 

1. The spending focus for this programme is mainly on personnel, legal costs and claims against the State; and travel and subsistence. Additional funds, amounting to R105 million, are allocated to the Information Regulator over the medium term for its capacitation.

 

1. Programme 4: National Prosecuting Authority

 

1. The NPA provides a co-ordinated prosecuting service that ensures that justice is delivered to the victims of crime through general and specialized prosecutions; removes the profit from crime; and protects certain witnesses. The NPA also forms part of the Anti-Corruption TaskTeam (ACTT).

 

1. The programme consists of the following sub-programmes:

• National Prosecutions Service: Primarily responsible for general and specialised prosecutions and the appeals that might follow, which include resolving criminal matters outside of the formal trial process through alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, settling admissions of guilt for minor offences and considering dockets brought by the police where persons have not been charged. This sub-programme further deals with priority crimes litigation, sexual offences, and community affairs and specialised commercial crimes.

• Asset Forfeiture Unit: Seizes assets that are the proceeds of crime or have been part of the offence through a criminal or civil process.
• Office of Witness Protection: Provides for protection, support and related services to vulnerable, intimidated witnesses and related persons in judicial proceedings in terms of the Witness Protection Act (1998).
• Strategy, Operations and Compliance/Support services: Provides corporate support services in terms of finance, human resources, ICT, strategy support, ethics, security, communication and risk management.
• Investigating Directorate: As a dedicated project, will investigate and prosecute identified serious, complex and high profile corruption cases falling within its mandate and will recover assets identified to be the proceeds of corruption.

 

1. The NPA has aligned its strategy with the Department’s impact statement of ‘Improved public perception, confidence in the justice system and respect for the rule of law’ and to the Department’s outcomes, particularly, ‘Crime and corruption significantly reduced through effective prosecution’.

 

1. The NPA has committed to making the following impact:‘A South Africa in which crime is significantly reduced and everyone feels safe and abides by the law’. The related outcome and sub-outcomes are:

 

Table 6: NPA - Sub-outcomes, outcome indicators, baselines and targets for MTSF

OUTCOME: Crime and Corruption significantly reduced through effective prosecution
SUB-OUTCOME	OUTCOME INDICATOR	BASELINE	TARGET
Increased feelings of safety and security	Level of satisfaction with the prosecution of identified crime types	N/A	Baseline + 30%
Improved investor confidence in South Africa through high impact prosecution	% of identified high impact corruption prosecutions instituted	N/A	Baseline + 25%
Improved access to NPA services to all	Level of customer satisfaction with NPA services	81.5%	92%

 

1. Priorities for 2021/22 are:

• Expediting high-profile corruption cases.
• Focusing on serious violent and organised crime, as well as crime that disproportionately undermines public safety.
• Capacitating the organization through the recruitment of additional critical skills and expertise to respond to existing and emerging priorities.
• Promoting sound workplace relations and employee wellbeing (staff morale).

 

1. NPA - Outputs, output indicators and targets:

 

Table 7: NPA Outputs, output indicators and targets

Output	Output Indicators	Performance		Target
		2019/20 Audited	2020/21 Estimated	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Effective prosecutions conducted	Conviction rate in High Court	90.9%	87%	87%	87%	87%
	Conviction rate in Regional Court	82.5%	74%	74%	74%	74%
	Conviction rate in District Court	95.3%	88%	88%	88%	88%
	Conviction rate in cable theft	NA	NA	74%	74%	74%
	Number of witnesses and related persons threatened, harmed or killed while on the witness protection programme	0	0	0	0	0
Fraud and corruption dealt with	Conviction rate in complex commercial crime	92.3%	93%	93%	93%	93%
	Number of persons convicted of private sector corruption	233	150	158	166	174
	Number of government officials convicted of corruption and/or offences related to corruption	183	220	232	243	254
	Number of cases involving money laundering	NA	90	100	110	120
Freezing of money and assets that are the proceeds of crime	Value of freezing orders obtained for corruption or offences relating to corruption	R1.95bn	R2.4bn	R2.4bn	R2.4bn	2.4bn
Recovery of money and assets that are the proceeds of crime	Value of recoveries relating to corruption or related offences	R3.05bn	R1.4bn	R1.4bn	R1.4bn	1.4bn
Victim-centric services enhanced	Number of operational TCCs in place	55	58	59	60	61
	Conviction rate in sexual offences	75.2%	70%	70%	70%	70%
	Number of public awareness sessions conducted	NA	140	150	160	170

 

1. The NPA is allocated R4.44 billion for 2021/22, compared with R4.3 billion in 2020/21; R4.49 billion in 2022/23; and R4.54 billion in 2023/24.

 

1. The spending focus is on personnel, computer services, consultants, legal services, property payments and travel and subsistence.

 

1. Programme 5: Auxiliary and Associated Services

 

1. The programme provides a variety of auxiliary services associated with the Department’s aims and also funds transfer payment to the South Africa Human Rights Commission, the Public Protector SA, Legal Aid South Africa, the Special Investigation Unit and the President’s Fund.

 

1. The spending focus for the programme is the modernisation of the justice system and transfers to public entities and constitutional institutions.

 

1. The programme contains the Justice Modernisation sub-programme. This sub-programme contains funds for the modernisation of IT systems and for the Integrated Justice System (IJS) project on behalf of Justice Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS) Cluster departments and entities.

 

1. The Justice Modernisation sub-programme has the following output indicators:

• Number of sites of government departments and entities where Person Verification Services are deployed.
• Revised IJS programme governance structure implemented.
• Number of government departments and entities connected to transversal platform and exchanging information electronically.
• IJS Assessment report finalised by target date.

 

1. An amount of R1.2 billion is allocated to the Justice Modernisation sub-programme for 2021/22, compared with R1.04 billion in 2020/21. This is a real increase of 6.6% from 2020/21.

 

 

1. Legal Aid South Africa

 

1. The main objective of Legal Aid SA is to render or make available legal representation to indigent persons at state expense as contemplated in the Constitution, ensuring the rights of citizens to access to justice.

 

1. The Strategic Plan 2020-2025 sets out the policy priorities, programmes and project plans for that period, as well as the related outcomes, outcome indicators and five-year targets. Legal Aid SA’s plans are aligned with the MTSF priority ‘Social cohesion and safer communities’:

 

1. Legal Aid SA’s strategic outcomes for 2020-2025 are to provide quality justice for all, especially, the poor and vulnerable, and to be a respected, high performance, sustainable and accessible public entity that will have a positive impact on society, the economy and the environment.

 

1. The overall strategic shift for the 2020-2025 period that Legal Aid SA is seeking to achieve is‘Ensure equal access to justice for all to build a just society’.

 

1. In carrying out its mandate, Legal Aid SA continues to identify the following priority groups: children; every detained person, including sentenced prisoners; every accused person who wishes to appeal or review a court decision in a higher court; women, particularly in divorces, maintenance and domestic violence cases; and the landless, especially in eviction cases.

 

1. Legal Aid SA receives a total allocation of R2.04 billion for the 2020/21 financial year, compared with R1.98 billion in 2020/21. Over the 2021 MTEF, it is allocated R2.1 billion in 2022/23 and R2.12 billion in 2022/23).

 

Table 8: Legal Aid SA programme budget for the 2021 MTEF

Programme (R’million)	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Legal Aid Services	390.5	402.1	427.4	446.6
Administration	1 528.9	1 576.8	1 608.9	1 604.5
Special projects	59.5	63.3	66.7	69.7
TOTAL	1 978.9	2 042.2	2 103.0	2 120.8

 

1. Legal Aid SA has experienced budget cuts over previous MTEF periods: since 2015/16, a total of R449 million has been cut from its budget. As 80% of the budget is spent on employee costs, and legal practitioners make up 79% of the total staff component, the budget cuts have a negative impact on service delivery.The decline in funding continues over the MTEF: The 2021/22 budget allocation is cut by -8.26% and it is expected that further cuts of -9.98% and -5.48% will be effected in 2022/23 and 2023/24 respectively, amounting to -R534.7 million in total.

 

Table 9: Legal Aid SA Budget reductions 2021 MTEF

R’million	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Original baseline	2 204.2	2 313.8	2 222.6
Actual and projected baseline reductions %	8.26%	9.98%	5.48%
Actual and projected baseline reductions	(182.0)	(230.8)	(121.8)

 

1. Impact of the budget reductions:
2. The allocation to Judicare is cut by R32.9 million, which adversely affects service delivery.
3. There is a reduction of 88 legal practitioners and 22 support staff members in 2021/22.
4. The accompanying reduction in court coverage will result in various challenges. Further, there is no additional staff available to provide relief capacity should a legal aid practitioner become unavailable for any reason.
5. At the end 2019/2020, Legal Aid SA dealt with 51 177 new civil matters and carried a pending workload of 57 392, both of which exceeded the capacity target of 45 173.A total number of 2732 clients were given a waiting period in 2019/20 as Local Offices had reached their capacity which represented a 12% increase from the previous financial year. This indicates that the demand for civil assistance increases despite Legal Aid SA already operating at capacity. With the budget reductions, there is a further reduction in capacity of 2 750 matters in 2021/22 to 42 423 matters.

 

Table 10: Legal Aid SA Impact of budget reductions for posts, matters and coverage

	Posts			Matters
	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23
Criminal DC	61	40	24	16 775	11 000	16 600
Criminal RC	23	15	9	3 450	2 250	1 350
Criminal HC	19	12	7	950	600	350
Criminal Management	8	5	3	600	375	225
Civil	18	12	7	4500	3 000	1750
Paralegals	5	3	2	17 075	11 194	6 598
Support	33	22	13	-	-	-
Total	167	110	65	26 275	17 225	10 275
Court Coverage- DC	-	-	-	(5.6%)	(3.7%)	(2.2%)
Court Coverage-RC	-	-	-	(4.6%)	(2.9%)	(1.8%)

 

 

1. Special Investigating Unit

 

1. The SIU’s principal function is to investigate serious malpractices, maladministration and corruption in connection with the administration of state institutions, state assets and public money, as well as any conduct that may seriously harm the interests of the public. The SIU also:

• Institutes and conducts civil proceedings in any court of law or special tribunal, in its own name or on behalf of state institutions.
• Brings potential disciplinary matters to the attention of state institutions.

 

1. Although the SIU does not have the power to arrest or prosecute offenders for criminal conduct, it reports matters to the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI/the Hawks), the South African Police Service (SAPS) and the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). The SIU works closely with the Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU) in the NPA, where its powers are more appropriate or effective in recovering the proceeds of crime. The MTSF also identifies the investigative reports of the Financial Intelligence Centre as key in the identification of high priority cases. The SIU is part of the Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT), which was established to fast–track investigations and prosecutions of serious corruption cases, and more recently the Fusion Centre, which was established in August 2020 to provide a co-ordinated response by law-enforcement and corruption-fighting agencies to incidences of alleged corruption, fraud, abuse or maladministration related to Covid-19 procurement irregularities.

 

1. The SIU locates its role under the MTSF priorities: ‘Social Cohesion and Safe Communities’ and ‘A capable, ethical and developmental state’. The MTSF envisages an improvement in corruption perception by the end of the five-year period. The SIU is to contribute by reducing levels of fraud and corruption in the private and public sectors; freezing money and assets; establishing and strengthening the capacity of the Special Tribunal for civil recoveries; and increasing the use of Financial Intelligence Reports in identifying high priority cases.

 

1. The SIU’s Strategic Plan identifies certain high impact initiatives and interventions for the MTSF period:

• Pursuing Priority High-Impact Targets to optimise the deployment of its resources.
• Rejuvenating the organisationby investing in critical parts of the business.
• Differentiating the SIU through its ‘uniqueofferings’.
• Enforcing consequence management measures through a monitoring and evaluation competency (with the Auditor-General).
• Pursuing civil litigation.
• Applying cutting-edge data analytics and technology.
• Optimising the uniqueness of the Special Tribunal.

 

1. The SIU has identified the following impact statement ‘Ridding society of fraud and corruption in state institutions’ and has the following organisational outcomes:

• A compliant, high performance SIU that is well capacitated to rid society of corruption, maladministration and fraud in State institutions.
• State assets and cash resources are protected from maladministration, fraud and corruption for the realisation of full value for money for state programmes.
• Confidence in the governance systems, structures and policies of the State is restored and maintained.
• Corruption, maladministration and fraud deterred through proactive preventative mechanisms and effectiveenforcement of consequence management measures.

 

1. The SIU continues to have three programmes:

• Administration, which is responsible for the provision of business oversight and enablement services to the core business units of the SIU.
• Investigations and Legal Counsel Programme, which is responsible for ensuring the adequate execution of the mandated service delivery of the SIU.
• Market Data Analytics and Prevention, which is responsible for the implementation of relevant and proactive initiatives to prevent the reoccurrence of fraud and corruption cases as a result of systemic weaknesses in the public sector and to positively influence the behaviour of South African citizens

 

1. The Administration Programme is allocated R251. 6 million or 25.3% of the SIU’s total budget. Under this programme, the SIU reports that it will review its Remuneration Strategy, Data Analytics Strategy and Performance Management Strategy during 2021/22 and over the medium term. In addition, it will focus on determining its ability to retain key and skilled employees.The SIU has introduced a number of new performance indicators to the Administration programme:

• Implementation of an approved ICT project plan for data analytics capability(Target: Phase 1 implemented).
• Employee turnover rate (Target 5%).
• Number of stakeholder engagements and awareness campaigns initiatives conducted (Target: 3 stakeholder engagements).

 

1. The Investigations and Legal Counsel programme is allocated R627.47 million in 2021/22 or 71.5% of the total budget allocation.Personnel expenditure in this programme is expected to increase from R516.62 million in 2020/2021 to R845.9 million in 2023/2024. This is mainly driven by the anticipated influx in proclamations over the MTEF, for which additional resources will be required to ensure delivery.A number of targets under this programme have been reduced and other were increased.

 

1. The Market Data Analytics and Prevention Programme is allocated R28.8 million for 2021/22.

 

1. The SIU has identified the following as key risks:

• Insufficient preparedness to respond to physical threats to investigators and security breaches.
• Inadequate human resources capacity to execute and meet the growing demand of SIU forensic and litigation services.
• Inability to financially sustain SIU operations in the short-medium term due to shortcoming in funding model.
• Inadequate management of employees performance through an output based system.
• Inability to provide appropriate ICT services across SIU business.
• Ineffective collaboration with internal and external stakeholders.
• Failure to provide appropriate monitoring and evaluation services on organizational performance.
• Failure to ensure compliance with all regulatory requirements applicable to SIU.
• Inability to incorporate risk management in all business decision-making and planning processes.
• Inability to render effective internal audit services to enhance control environment in the organization.
• Inability to expedite and timeously conclude civil matters and other legal proceedings enrolled at the Special Tribunal.
• Inability to conduct forensic investigations according to predetermined standards.
• Failure by State institutions to implement SIU legal recommendations.
• Inability to proactively assist public institutions to prevent corruption and maladministration.
• Failure to properly register and track all allegations reported to the SIU.
• Failure to properly assess reported cases or allegations of corruption and maladministration.

 

1. The SIU reports that, as at January 2021, 50 civil matters were enrolled at the Special Tribunal to the value of R6.9 billion. This included 11 civil matters to the value of R259 million, which are related to the supply and delivery of PPE as part of Government’s response to Covid-19.

 

1. The SIU has a mixed funding model that derives income from a National Treasury grant (46%) andfrom work done for state departments (54%). The SIU’s approved budget is R702.0 million with projected total revenue for 2021/22of R944.4 million.The grant allocation is R436.8 million.

 

1. The SIU highlights that the current funding model has over the last few years consistently proven that it is not sustainable. Many state institutions do not pay the SIU for the investigation services rendered. The SIU has, together with the Department, engaged with National Treasury during the third quarter of 2020/21, and will further engage in the 2021/22 financial year, with a view of amending the SIU’s enabling legislation to address the challenge. The total outstanding debt is R630.8 million.

 

1. Although the SIU’s budget is reduced by R41 million in 2021/22, it reports that it is in a strong financial position as it had managed to build up some cash resources over the last few years. However, this could change as it is planning to grow its headcount over the next few years to meet the high demand of incoming work.

 

1. Spending on Compensation of Employees is the SIU’s main expenditure item, increasing from R521.2 million in 2020/21 to R1.09 billion in 2023/24. Posts are expected to increase from 554 in 2020/21 to 860 in 2023/24. In 2021/22, the SIU will spend R784.8 million on compensation of employees, which exceeds the grant allocation for 2020/21. The difference will be funded from cash reserves.

 

 

1. Public Protector SA

 

1. The Public Protector SA (PPSA) is an independent constitutional institution whose mandate, broadly,is to support and strengthen constitutional democracy by investigating maladministration or improper conduct in state affairs or the public administration in any sphere of government and to take appropriate remedial action. The Constitution also states that the Public Protector must be accessible to all persons and communities.

 

1. The PPSA’s Vision 2023 is underpinned by the following pillars:

• Enhancing access to (PPSA) services.
• Engaging targeted communities in their mother tongue.
• Expanding the (PPSA’s) footprint.
• Leveraging stakeholder relations and formalising those relationships in Memoranda of Understanding.
• Projecting the image (of the PPSA) as being a safe haven for the downtrodden.
• Empowering people to understand their rights.
• Encouraging organs of state to establish effective internal complaints resolution units.
• Turning communities into their own liberators.

 

1. The PPSA has adopted a Strategic Plan 2020-2025 in terms of which the PPSA seeks to have the following impact: ‘Empower everyone at all levels of society to effectively engage organs of state about any injustice, service delivery failure or improper conduct and assist organs of state to establish and maintain efficient and effective governance and administration’.

 

1. The PPSA has identified the following outcomes:

• Accessible PPSA services.
• Investigations finalised within turnaround times.
• Clean audit achieved and maintained.
• Implementation of ICT systems to optimally support business objectives.
• Functional Case Management Application.
• Ongoing engagements with ombudsman and organs of state.

 

1. In response to the impact of Covid-19 on its operations and to the budget reductions, the PPSA has revised the performance targets for 2021/22 and has removed the following indicators from the Strategic Plan:

• Number of new service points established (The institution had planned to establish 3 service points by 2025).
• Ongoing engagements with ombudsman and organs of state (Four institutions to be identified by 2025).

 

1. The PPSA continues to deliver through its three programmes:

 

1. Administration: The programme has two indicators: ‘Achieving a clean audit’; and ‘Implementing ICT systems’. However, while the PPSA had projected that there would be 100% implementation of a Case Management Application by 31 March 2022, this target has been removed from the 2021/22 APP. Instead, it is projected that the implementation of the case management strategy will only occur in 2022/23. In the meantime, a Mobile Referral Application will be implemented to assist complainants on available appropriate complaints handling mechanisms prior to approaching the PPSA.

 

1. Investigations: The programme continues to have the following five indicators: ‘Number of Investigation reports finalised’; ‘Percentage of adherence to turnaround times in finalisation of cases’; ‘Percentage of 2 years and older cases finalised’; ‘Investigation and finalisation of systemic investigations/interventions’; and ‘Number of dialogues with organs of state on systemic challenges’. However, the target for the indicator, ‘Percentage of adherence to turnaround times in finalisation of cases’, is reduced from 90% of cases within the turnaround time to 80% of cases finalised.

 

1. Stakeholder Engagement. In response to the decrease in its budget, the PPSA reports that it will not dispatch personnel into communities. Instead, the institution will rely heavily on community radio to reach the outlying areas where grassroots communities reside and will also use stakeholder platforms. The following indicators have been removed: ‘Number of outreach clinics conducted’; ‘Number of Public Protector roadshows conducted’; ‘Number of radio interviews conducted’; ‘Number of bilateral agreements entered into annually’; ‘Percentage of AORC board meetings chaired by the Public Protector’; and ‘Percentage of AOMA meetings chaired by the Public Protector’. These have been replaced with the following indicator: ‘Number of activities executed in the implementation of an Integrated Access and Stakeholder Management Strategy’. The implementation of the PPSA Integrated Stakeholder Management Strategy has two key aspects: radio interviews and memorandum of understanding which involve partnership agreements entered into with stakeholders for mutual benefit as well as to assist organs of state to establish complaints handing mechanisms.

 

1. In 2021/22, the PPSA is allocated R329 million, compared to R325.7 million in 2020/21, a real decrease -2.25% when compared to 2020/21. Compensation of employees is the institution’s main cost driver at 76% of the budget. The number of funded posts (346) is expected to remain unchanged over the medium term.

 

Table 11: PPSA Budget 2021 MTEF

Programme (R’million)	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Administration	131.0	135.3	139.4	147.2
Investigations	180.9	182.1	186.2	182.0
Stakeholder engagement	13.8	14.5	15.3	16.0
Total	325.7	331.9	340.9	345.2

 

1. In addition to a budget cut in 2020/21 of R16.1 million, further reductions to the PPSA’s baseline are as follows: -R28 million in 2021/22; -R37 million in 2022/23 and –R19.3 million, in total R85.1 million over the MTEF. These reductions will affect various projects, including implementation of the Disaster Recovery System, deployment of an integrated security system and expansion of the service delivery footprint.

 

 

1. South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC)

 

1. The SAHRC’s constitutional mandate is extremely wide, encompassing almost every aspect of civil, political and economic rights. It must promote respect for human rights; promote the protection, development and attainment of human rights; and monitor how well human rights are observed. The Constitution also provides that each year the Commission must require relevant organs of state to provide it with information on measures taken towards the realisation of the socio-economic rights contained in the Constitution.

 

1. The Commission has specific obligations in terms of legislation, including:

• The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, 2000 (PEPUDA).
• The Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000 (PAIA). However, once the Information Regulator becomes fully operational, the SAHRC’s obligations relating to PAIA, excluding the Commission’s protection mandate, will be transferred to the Information Regulator.

 

1. On 28 March 2019, Parliament ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT). The OPCAT requires States to establish a National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) to prevent torture, other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment. South Africa has adopted a multiple body NPM with the SAHRC in a lead and coordinating role.

 

1. The MTSF focuses strongly on mainstreaming crosscutting focus areas, specifically the empowerment and access to resources and opportunities women, the youth and people with disabilities. Notably, the SAHRC has been accredited as an Independent Monitoring Mechanism (IMM) under the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD). This obligates the Commission to fully establish and ensure the functionality of the IMM, monitor and report on compliance with the requirements of the CRPD to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

 

1. The MTSF also highlights the need for social cohesion and a key outcome under the priority ‘Social Cohesion and Safe Communities’is the implementation of the National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.

 

1. In addition, the MTSF identifies the Commission as contributing to:

• The promotion of the Constitution and its values in schools, awareness campaigns, public engagements and dialogues.
• The development of a system to ensure consistent barrier free access for persons with disabilities to justice across the justice value chain.
• Strengthening and expanding protection measures for children and for adults with disabilities in institutionalised settings, such as special school boarding facilities, mental health care facilities and residential facilities.

 

1. The Commission has the following as its impact statement: ‘Human rights culture is entrenched in South Africa’.

 

1. The Commission has four programmes: Administration; Promotion of human rights; Protection of human rights; and Monitoring observance of human rights.

 

1. The Commission is allocated R195.6 million 2021/22. The budget has decreased in real terms by -5% compared to 2020/21.The compensation of employees’ budget is the Commission’s greatest cost driver taking up 66% of the overall budget. The Commission reports that it has recently moved to a new national office and, as part of cost-cutting measures, continues to share office space with the Information Regulator.

 

Table 12: SAHRC Budget 2021 MTEF

Programme (R’million)	2020/21	2021/22	2022/23	2023/24
Administration	77.9	72.5	75.1	77.8
Promotion of human rights	99.5	100.5	103	105.8
Protection of human rights	10.4	12.7	12.8	11.0
Monitoring	9.7	9.8	10.1	10.3
Total	197.6	195.6	201.0	204.9

 

1. Although the Commission did not experience a budget cut in the Special Adjusted Budget in July 2020, the Commission’s budget was cut by -R8.4 million in the October 2020 Adjusted Budget, largely affecting the salaries budget, in particular, cost of living increases; notch increases and the performance bonuses budget. The Commission’s baseline has been revised downward over the medium term as follows: -R16.5 million in 2021/22 affecting the compensation of employees’ budget; –R20.8 million in 2022/23; and –R10.4 million in 2023/24.

 

1. The proposed cuts will have various consequences for operations, including:

• Restricted delivery on the constitutional mandate, with adverse impact on the realisation of human rights. The State of Disaster has increased human rights vulnerabilities and, therefore, there is higher demand for the Commission’s interventions and resources.
• The inability to address systemic human rights violations.
• Inadequate monitoring of the state of human rights in the country, specifically Economic and Social rights; Civil and Political Rights; Equality; International and regional human rights monitoring obligations.
• The inability to host the Schools Moot Court Competition.
• Minimal funding for the NPM.
• An inability to sustain the establishment of the CRPD and Child Rights Units, and restricted related monitoring activities.
• An inability to fulfil the requirement of the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA): Digitisation of operations and legal records.
• An inability to evaluate human rights interventions to ensure greater impact.
• Increasing costs of ensuring the safety of personnel.
• Risks international recognition as an A-status National Human Rights Institution.

 

1. The Administration programme provides for five sub-programmes, namely, Finance, Corporate Services, Internal Audit, Strategic Support and Office of the Chief Executive Officer. There are 13 performance indicators for this programme. The 2021/22 APP provides for one new indicator: ‘Completion of Report on the sufficiency of the SAHRC Budget’ with a target date for 2021/22 of September 2021.

 

1. The Promotion programme is responsible for the promotional aspects of the Commission’s mandate. It contains three sub-programmes” the Commissioners programme, Advocacy and Communications and Provincial Offices. The Commission has removed two indicators from the 2021/22 APP: ‘Accessibility Website’ and ‘SAHRC 25 Years Celebration Event’. The 2021/22 APP, however, provides for six new indicators:

• Action Plan based on 2020-21 Racial Polarisation Conference Resolutions implemented.
• Percentage implementation of Action Plan based on 2012 Amman Declaration and Programme of Action for promoting Gender Equality.
• Action Plan to promote functionality of Equality Courts implemented.
• Action Plan based on 2020–21 Anti-Corruption Conference Resolutions implemented.
• Percentage implementation on Provincial Human Rights Dialogues Resolutions implemented.
• Percentage implementation of Action Plan on National Human Rights Dialogue Resolutions.

 

1. The Protection of Human Rights programme is responsible for carrying out the protective component of the Commission’s constitutional mandate and it contains the sub-programmes Legal Services Unit and Office of the Chief Operations Officer. A key element of this programme is complaints handling and the Commission set a target in 2020/21 of finalising 5000 complaints and enquiries. It has kept this target in the 2021/22 APP and over the medium term. The 2021/22 APP provides for three new indicators:

• Number of national inquiries held.
• Percentage utilisation of the CRM System to promote efficient and effective complaints handling.
• Review of the SAHRC Complaints Handling Procedure. 

 

1. The Monitoring programme is responsible for the Commission’s constitutional monitoring and reporting mandate and contains one sub-programme; Research. The Commission has removed two indicators from this programme:

• Complete IMM-CRPD Monitoring Report.
• Complete CRC19 Monitoring Report.

 

 

1. Information Regulator

 

1. The Protection of Personal Information Act, 2013 (POPIA), regulates the processing of personal information by providing a framework that sets out the minimum standards that responsible parties must comply with when processing personal information. The Act applies to public and private bodies, including juristic persons, and aims to achieve a balance between the free-flow of information and the right to privacy.

 

1. The Information Regulator is established in terms of section 39 of POPIA and has wide range of powers and functions relating to promoting and enforcing the right to privacy. POPIA also transfers certain key responsibilities concerning the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000, (PAIA) to the Information Regulator. These include the handling of complaints, conducting investigations, and making assessments about compliance by public and private bodies.

 

1. On 17 June 2020, the President issued a Proclamation bringing into operation certain outstanding sections of POPIA on 1 July 2020. The remaining sections will come into effect on 1 July 2021. In terms of section 114(1), public and private bodies have until 30 June 2021 to comply with POPIA.

 

1. The Regulator has reported that it has enough time to ensure its readiness before 1 July 2021 and has developed the necessary plans, which were presented to Committee. PAIA functions, however, will only be transferred to the Information Regulator after 30 June 2021, as soon as this becomes possible. The SAHRC and the Regulator will jointly develop a plan of action for the handing over of the function.

 

1. The grace period provided for in section 114(1) of POPIA will come to an end on 30 June 2021 and this period will not be extended. Businesses that do not comply with the Actcan face severe penalties. The Act makes provision for fines of up to R10 million and a jail sentence of up to 10 years, depending on the seriousness of the breach. The coming into effect of the remaining sections of POPIA should contribute towards encouraging foreign and local investors thereby boosting economic development.

 

1. In terms of POPIA, the Regulator is given the power to determine its own administration in consultation with the Minister of Finance. The Regulator has an approved structure of 430 posts.

 

1. The Regulator’s funding is ring-fenced under the Departments’ State Legal Services programme. An amount of R87.2 million is allocated to the Information Regulator for 2021/22, compared with R45.5 million in 2020/21. This represents a real increase of 83.9% and is mainly for compensation of employees and goods and services. The projected allocation for the remainder of the 2020 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) is as follows: R98.7 million in 2022/23 and R106.5 million in 2023/24. Notably, the Regulator is allocated an additional R105 million to its baseline over the medium term for the appointment of 54 new personnel to enforce compliance with the POPIA and PAIA.

 

1. The Information Regulator has five programmes:

 

Table 13: Information Regulator - New indicators

Programme and Purpose	New indicators 2021/22
Protection of Personal Information: To ensure the promotion and protection of personal information processed by public and private bodies in line with the POPI Act.	Percentage of complaints pre-investigated. Percentage of Information Officers registered as prescribed. applications for prior authorisation processed. Approved Guidance Note on Exclusions and Exemption from POPIA. Percentage of applications for exemption from POPIA.
Promotion of Access to Information: To ensure the effective implementation of the promotion of the constitutional right of access to any information held by the state and by any other person and that is required for the exercise of any rights.	Percentage of complaints Pre-investigated and finalised. Approved procedures for making information electronically available and uploaded on the website.
Education and Communication: Provides strategic direction for the provision of Education and Communication.	Approved public awareness and education strategy. Number of communication programmes and products developed and implemented.
Legal, Policy, Research and Information Technology Analysis: Provides legal, policy, research and information technology analysis services	Percentage of prioritised actions in the readiness plan implemented. Approved POPIA compliance framework for the Regulator. Approved rules of procedure for the enforcement committee. Approved POPIA personal information impact assessment.
Administration: Provides effective and efficient leadership and corporate support services in the day-to-day management of the Information Regulator.	Approved Human Resource Strategy and plan. Percentage of vacancy rate on funded posts maintained. Approved ICT Strategy and plan.

 

 

1. Committee’s observations

 

1. Achieving leadership stability. The Committee has previously expressed its concern about the significant number of positions in senior management filled in an acting capacity, linking this to the Department’s poor performance in past years. The Committee, therefore, welcomes the steps that have been taken to stabilise the Department’s leadership through appointments to key positions. On 11 February 2021, the appointment of a new Director-General, Advocate Mashabane was announced, the position having been unfilled for more than a year. Other important appointments include the posts of Deputy Director-General: Corporate Services, Ms C Mamentja, and Chief Master, AdvocateM Mafojane. The Committee congratulates the incumbents and wishes them well. These budget hearings were the first opportunity for the Committee to meet the Director-General, who is in the process of visiting the regions to gain a clearer understanding of the Department’s present challenges. At the appropriate time, the Committee would be very interested in learning more about his insights and plans.

 

1. Expeditious finalisation of disciplinary matters. The Committee notes thatthe Department’s Chief Financial Officer and another senior official (the Supply Chain Director) remain on precautionary suspension. The Committee is aware that the matter is now being heard. Given the importance of the positions that these officials hold, the Committee urges that the matter be finalised expeditiously.

 

1. Vacancies. The Committee has on several occasions expressed concern about the high vacancy rate in the Department, especially among senior management and in critical positions. Furthermore, the slow pace of the recruitment processes has not assisted. The Committee, therefore, welcomes the Department plan to finalise the reconfiguration of its macro structure, as well as the target to reduce the SMS vacancy rate to 10% (it stood at 22.5% at the end of 2020/21) by the end of 2021/22 and will monitor the progress of both closely.The Committee, therefore, requests that the Department provide it with its updated recruitment plan, particularly relating to vacancies at senior management level and in critical posts, and a progress report by 31 July 2021. Furthermore, as part of the quarterly reporting process, the Department should be prepared to brief the Committee on the management of its human resources: The briefing should, among other, address vacancies, turnover rates, training, as well as succession planning.

 

1. Budget reductions.

 

1. The Committee remains acutely aware of the constrained fiscal environment, which has necessitated budget reductions but is concerned about the ‘one size fits all’ approach to determining these. Fiscal policy targets the reduction of the public sector wage bill and so, the cuts are largely felt in the salaries’ budgets of departments. This puts departments that are labour-intensive in an especially difficult position. The Committee has previously noted the negative effect that the cuts will have on service delivery in our courts and justice service points, compromising therights of court users to access to justice. The Committee is of the view that the decision to implement cuts should be fit for purpose and it should not be forgotten that the rule of law supports healthy economies and allows people to feel safe.

 

1. Concerning the NPA, the Committee notes there are high expectations of the NPA to deliver but without the resources to address the obstacles, these expectations may not be realised. Nor does it make sense to reduce the budgets of those entities that bring money back to the State, such as the NPA and SIU. The Committee, therefore, remains opposed to the reduction of the NPA’s baseline, which over the MTEF is a considerable amount.

 

1. Legal Aid SA, which is managed with distinction on a relatively modest budget to achieve impressive results year-after-year, can no longer absorb the budget shortfall/cuts through further efficiencies and cost containment measures. Legal Aid SA has already had to cut posts and the further reduction in the number of legal practitioners, which is substantial, will significantly impact on service delivery, resulting in an increase in pending matters and case backlogs in criminal courts, a reduction in the number of clients assisted in civil matters and advice matters and the further effect of compromising the quality of legal services. All of this compromises the constitutional obligations to make State-funded legal services available if substantial injustice would otherwise result. Furthermore, theCommittee does not believe that reducing the number of legal aid practitioners is the best use of resources, as this is likely to lead to more postponed criminal matters due to the unavailability of legal representation, in so doing increasing the number of awaiting trial detainees in our correctional centres and the length of their stay (for which the State pays). The reductions will also affect Legal Aid SA’s ability to render services to the most vulnerable in our society through it civil work programme.

 

1. The Committee also does not support the proposed reductions in the case of the SIU, whose performance trajectory is most pleasing. As part of the ACTT and also of the Fusion Centre set up to deal with cases of Covid-19 corruption, the SIU does not work in isolation. The budget reductions will, therefore, not only adversely affect its operations but the impact will be felt by all the related law enforcement agencies engaged with the task of combatting corruption. The SIU is also instrumental to the present efforts to swiftly recover monies lost to the State through the Special Tribunal. These efforts have so far proven to be successful and any budget reductions may, in addition, undermine the SIU’s capability in this regard.

 

1. The Committee remains of the view that the decision to apply the budget cuts to the baseline allocation of a Chapter 9 institutions should carefully consider their unique contribution towards strengthening our constitutional democracy, as well as the duty placed on other state institutions to assist these institutions. The Committee, therefore, does not support the application of baseline reductions in the case of the SAHRC and PPSA. The Committee notes that the PPSA has regularly asked for more funding, including for security, a request that the Committee continues to support. The Committee observes once more that the matter of an appropriate funding model for the Chapter 9 institutions needs to be addressed.

 

1. Case backlogs. The Committee remains extremely concerned about the greater than normal workload in our courts, reflected in an increased number of backlog cases, as a result of the courts having to restrict the matters being heard on account of the Covid-19 pandemic. Further, the focus on addressing backlogs impacts on the ability to hear new matters, creating a snowball effect, which may eventually overwhelm the justice system, undermining the right of access to justice. The Committee notes that there is a National Criminal Case Backlog Plan to address the backlogs and a Court Optimisation Committee has been set up to meet monthly to identify blockages in the criminal justice system. Further, a Case Backlogs Reduction Framework is targeted for submission to the Minister at the end of this year. Nonetheless, the Committee believes that it is vital to ensure that the courts have sufficient, even additional capacity – in the form of warm bodies - in order to efficiently deliver court services in line with the standards and the court rules. However, given that the budget cuts affect the compensation of employees’ budget for both voted funds and the direct charges, the Committee is unclear about the extent to which realising the plan will be possible. The Committee will continue to monitor the backlogs in all courts. As such, it asks the Department provide it with quarterly information on the number of backlog cases in the Lower Courts.

 

1. Accelerated Justice Modernisation Plan and Integrated Justice System (IJS) programme. The Committee welcomes the focus on accelerating modernisation projectsand agrees that the present crisis may provide the necessary impetus for role-players in the justice system to rethink the way things are being done. Our legal system is inefficient but initiatives to end these inefficiencies and time wastages have not progressed satisfactorily.The Committeeis also pleased that the JCPS Cluster has identified certain catalytic projects under the Integrated Criminal Justice Strategy and that the Department plans to prioritise ICT infrastructure to facilitate digital transformation for improved service delivery. The Committee has previously identified the need to engage with the Department on its modernisation programme and on the IJS and will arrange a meeting as soon as its programme permits.

 

1. Audit Turnaround and Stabilisation Plan. The Committee made observations on the Department’s poor audit outcome in its Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report. The Committee noted the Auditor-General’s recommendations and will continue to monitor the Department’s progress. Accordingly, the Committee requests the Director-General to provide it with feedback on the implementation and progress of action plans to ensure improvement in the audit by 31 July 2021. The Committee also asks that it be informed of the progress made in appointing a long-term Audit Committee. The Committee notes further that the Audit Committee has repeatedly advised Management to prioritize the setting up of a task team to address the audit findings, the implementation of which will be monitored by Internal Audit and Audit Committee throughout the financial year. The Committee is unclear whether the recommended Task Team has been set up and asks the Director-General to also address this recommendation in his report to the Committee.

 

1. Organisational renewal. The Department once more reports that it has embarked on a process of organisational renewal. As part of this, the macro-structure will be reconfigured in 2021/22. The Committee requests that the Department provide it with a progress report, which also addresses how the renewal process will improve efficiency in respect of service delivery, by 31 July 2020.

 

1. Justice College.The Committee notes that Justice College is set to play a key role in providing functional/niche training programmes to officials. The Committee requests the Department to provide a report on its plans regarding Justice College by 31 July 2021 and be prepared to report quarterly on progress.

 

1. Court infrastructure and planned maintenance. Building new courts in under-serviced areas has been a core element of the Department’s efforts to expand access to justice. However, the tendency has been that capital works projects typically take far longer to finish than projected and, consequently, the costof these projects escalate hugely. There are also challenges relating to the quality of the work done.

 

The maintenance of buildings is largely the responsibility of the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (small repairs can be done at court level) but there has been very little money available for this.

 

The Committee is concerned that the allocation for the building of courts is used well, which has not been the case in the past, as the Department has annually struggled to spend all the funds allocated for this item. Although spending is largely not within the Department’s control, as it is the Department of Public Works that builds our courts, the situation cannot continue.

 

There is also a tendency not to make adequate provision in the budget for planned maintenance – instead savings from the capital works budget are reallocated to planned maintenance for that purpose. Again, our courts are old and if their maintenance is neglected, very soon it becomes necessary to renovate, even rebuild, rather than simply fix.

 

The Committee repeats its intention to schedule a dedicated briefing involving all roleplayers on all aspects of the infrastructure programme, including planned maintenance, as soon as its programme permits. For now, the Committee requests that the Department provide a comprehensive report on this item by 31 July 2021 and continue to report on progress as part of the quarterly reporting process.

 

1. Transformation policies. The Committee notes that the Department plans to develop and implement a number of policies over the MTSF period. The Committee notes the Minister’s commitment to policy certainty and intends to arrange a comprehensive briefing on the Department’s initiatives to bring about transformation of the South African legal system as soon as its programme permits. For now, it requests that the Department provide it with a comprehensive written report of its plans with timeframes by 31 July 2021.

 

1. Combatting Gender-based Violence. The Committee welcomes the large number of sexual offences courts that will be designated as such during 2021/22. However, there have been some concerns from civil society about whether the upgrades are good enough, which the Committee notes. The Committee also notes that the Department implemented a Justice Rapid Results Challenge in March 2020 at selected courts, a pilot initiative that is intended to rapidly eradicate backlog domestic violence cases. Multi-functional teams were established at selected courts to work together under the co-leadership of the Regional Court Presidents and Chief Magistrates. The target provinces were Eastern Cape (Mthatha, Lusikisiki and Motherwell), Free State (Welkom), Gauteng (Palmridge), Limpopo (Nkowankowa and Sibasa), Mpumalanga (Nelspruit and Evander), and North West (Temba). The Committee requests more information on the results of this rapid results challenge and whether it has been expanded to other courts.

 

1. The Committee requests the Department to provide it with the number of GBV backlog cases currently on the roll and the plans to reduce the backlog, in the form of a written report by 31 July 2021.

 

1. Maintenance payments. The Committee welcomes the Department’s intention to make use of cell phone and telephone numbers, credit profiles, property and vehicle purchases, sales and transfers, among other, to trace maintenance defaulters. The track and trace system will be available in about 600 magistrates’ courts and departmental regional offices countrywide. The system will allow defaulters to be traced so that their attendance in court can be secured. The Committee requests more information on this new system and its implementation in the form of a written report by 31 July 2021. The Department should also be prepared to address the Committee on the progress of this item when the Committee meets with it quarterly.

 

1. Barrier-free Access to Justice for persons with disabilities. The Committee notes that the MTSF 2019-2024 requires the Department to develop a system/strategy to ensure consistent barrier-free access for persons with disabilities to justice across the justice value chain, which includes addressing the physical infrastructure of the courts and other justice service points. In this regard, the Committee notes that theDepartment’s APP targets 75 courts to be made compliant with the strategy for universal access for persons with disabilities. The Committee would like a more detailed perspective on the Department’s plans to ensure barrier free access to justice for persons with disabilities and, therefore, asks that the Department to provide it with a comprehensive written report by 31 July 2021.

 

1. State Legal Services. The Committee met with the Acting Solicitor-General on 16 February 2021, who impressed the Committee with his initiatives to turnaround the Office of the State Attorney (OSA). On appointment, the Acting Solicitor-General undertook an environmental scan of the OSA and his findings have informed the present turnaround plan. The Committee, therefore, is pleased that the process to operationalise the State Attorney Amendment Act appears to be progressing well with the appointment of regional heads of the OSA at all High Courts to ensure better management of state litigation. However, the Committee remains concerned that, as the present Solicitor-General is only appointed in an acting capacity for two-years, the position will become vacant just as the OSA begins to make progress. It is unclear whether there is a process in place to ensure that a permanent appointment will be made without any disruption to the progress that is being made in turning around the situation at the OSA.

 

1. Model for the payment of litigation services. The Committee notes that the Department is still engaging with National Treasury on the development of a framework contract model to support the fair and transparent procurement of litigation services. The Committee requests that it be informed of the progress of this collaboration at regular intervals.

 

1. Policy for the management of state litigation. The Committee notes the Department’s plan to develop a policy for the management of state litigation for the Minister’s approval by 31 March 2021 with an implementation date in 2023/24. Given the risk that state liability poses to the fiscus, the Committee believes that finalisation and implementation of the policy should be expedited. The policy has been many years in the making and the Committee doesn’t fully understand the reason for the continual delays.

 

1. Specialized Commercial Crime Courts. The Committee notes the establishment of the five Specialized Commercial Crime Courts well within the targeted timeframes. The Committee notes the intention to ensure that the five courts that have been established are adequately capacitated, as well as the plan to roll out these courts to all provinces over the medium term, and requests that the Department provide it with a written report providing greater detail of these plans by 31 July 2021.

 

1. Master’s Office: The Committee has continually raised service delivery concerns at the Master’s Office, which have been exacerbated by the Covid-19 precautionary measures.  The Committee has noted the appointment of a Chief Master in October 2020 providing the necessary leadership to the Office. However, the overall vacancy rate in the Master’s Office is seemingly high, with insufficient staff to deal with matters. The Committee, therefore requests a report detailing the vacancies and the plans to address these by 31 July 2021.

 

The Committee also notes that the Department’s plan to invest in ICT technology to speed up the processing of matters in the Office. Although this development is most welcome, theDepartment has in the past invested heavily in ICT to automate Master’s processes but that there appears to be ongoing challenges in this regard (for example, downtime on the server). The Committee also notes,with concern, the Special Investigating Unit ‘s observation that largely manual systems and non-automation of some of the processes at Masters’ office creates the opportunity for interference and manipulation of the processes.

 

The Committee has met with the SIU to be briefed on its investigation of alleged irregularities at the Master’s Office and will continue to monitor the progress of the investigation. The Committee notes the SIU’s preliminary recommendations to address systemic challenges in the Master’s office.

 

1. Insolvency Policy. The Committee notes that the SIU’s preliminary recommendations included that a uniform policy to regulate the appointment of provisional/final liquidators as prescribed by the Insolvency Act should be implemented across all the Masters’ offices in the country. The Committee also notes that the SIU has brought in Counsel to assist with the drafting of relevant and effective policies for gaps in governance within the Masters’ Office. The Committee acknowledges the Department’s past difficulties in formulating an insolvency policy but believes that there is urgent need for such a policy. The Committee, therefore, requests a comprehensive report on the progress of drafting the policy by 31 July 2021.

 

1. Information Regulator

 

1. Budget. The Committee notes that the Regulator was one of the few institutions that received additional funds over the MTEF for additional posts as it becomes established. Given the expectations of the Regulator when the Act becomes fully operational on 1 July 2021, the Committee is concerned about whether the additional allocation will be sufficient and will monitor this closely. The Committee is of the view that there is a need to take into account the Regulator’s role within the broader context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the threat to cybersecurity.

 

1. Vacancies and recruitment.The Committee notes that the position of Chief Executive Officer is once again vacant. The Committee understands that recruitment of expertise in the very specialised area of data protection is a great challenge but will need to be addressed if the Regulator is to succeed. The Committee requests the Regulator to provide it with its plans to attract and retain the necessary scarce and critical skills.

 

1. Office accommodation. The Committee notes that the Information Regulator will continue to share office accommodation with the SAHRC to save costs, despite relocating to bigger premises as its grows its establishment, which the Committee appreciates.

 

1. Legal status. The Committee notes that the issue of the listing of the Regulator in the Public Finance Management Act 1 of 1999 (PFMA) remains unresolved. The Committee agrees with the Regulator that this is a risk, which affects the independence of the Regulator and its efficiency due to the continued use of the policies and systems of the Justice Department. (The Regulator website is also currently hosted by the Justice Department.). Furthermore, administrative capabilities are constrained by the delay in separating from the Justice Department. However, the Regulator reports that it is developing a ‘separation strategy’, which will make recommendations to the Minister of Finance on the listing of the Regulator in the PFMA. The Committee asks that it be kept informed of the outcome of the engagement with the Minister of Finance.

 

 

1. National Prosecuting Authority

 

1. Budget reductions. The Committee does not support the reduction of the NPA’s baseline and discusses this in paragraph 17.4 above. Furthermore, the Committee wishes to highlight the NPA’s key role in recovering money for the State, as part of efforts to rebuild our economy and society.

 

1. Establishing an Office of Innovation. The Committee has previously noted the NPA’s intention to create this office to drive new ideas and change within the organisation. The Committee is interested in learning more about the initiative and will engage further with the NPA on this item at the appropriate time.

 

1. Independence.The Committee requests that it be updated on the outcome of the submissions to the Minister regarding measures to give effect to the NPA’s operational independence.

 

1. Covid 19 corruption prosecutions:The Committee requests further information on progress of the matters referred to the NPA for prosecution following the release of a comprehensive report on alleged corruption in Covid-19 related procurements.

 

1. Informal mediation. The Committee notes the widespread use of informal mediation to finalise cases. While mediation has potential benefits for both the victim and the accused (the accused doesn’t receive a criminal record and the victim doesn’t have to go through the trouble and trauma of testifying in court), the Committee is concerned that unless the use of informal mediation is properly regulated, opportunities for abuse may arise. The Committee requests further information on the development of a regulatory framework in this regard.

 

1. Recruitment.The Committee requests that it be provided with an update on the progress of the NPA’s recruitment drive.

 

 

 

1. Legal Aid SA

 

1. Budget reductions. The Committee does not support any reduction to Legal Aid SA’s baseline for the 2021 MTEF and expresses its views in this regard in paragraph 17.4. It is also likely that the growth in backlog cases as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic will require courts to sit additionally. It is, therefore, very concerning that Legal Aid SA not only has no relief capacity because of budget cuts over the past few years but has had to cut posts. Legal Aid SA has provided details of the consequences of the cuts for posts, matters heard and court coverage, and these are most concerning to the Committee.

 

1. Land justice. The Committee is very pleased that the legal representation function (and related budget) currently undertaken by the Land Rights Management Facility in the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development is to be transferred to Legal Aid SA, in order to assist the indigent that seek land justice. This is a very welcome development, which the Committee fully supports.

 

 

1. Special Investigating Unit

 

1. Budget reductions. As discussed under paragraph 17.4, the Committee does not support budget reductions in the case of the SIU. The SIU is a key roleplayer in efforts to (i) bring those responsible for fraud, corruption and non-compliance to book, (ii) recover monies on behalf of the State; and (iii) prevent wrongdoing by instilling a culture of compliance within our society. The SIU also brings money back to the State. Budget reductions will affect its capacity and undermine the State’s anti-corruption agenda.

 

1. Funding model. The Committee agrees with the SIU that the present funding model is not sustainable. As the demand for SIU services has increased, the SIU has grown. However, its compensation of employees’ budget far outweighs the grant allocation. Furthermore, the SIU has experienced great difficulty in recovering monies owed to it by state institutions. This is because many State institutions, especially in the local government,cannot pay the SIU for its services. (At present, the SIU’s debtors book is R630.8 million. Notably R469.3 million or 74% of this is more than 121 days old). The Committee notes that the SIU has, with the Department, engaged National Treasury in the past and will continue to engage in the 2021/22 financial year, with a view to possibly amending legislation to resolve the issue.

 

1. Legislative amendments. The Committee notes that, with the Department’s assistance, the SIU will formulate, develop and promulgate amendments to the SIU Act during the legislative programme of 2021-2022. The Committee understands that some of the amendments being considered are: the establishment of a permanent independent SIU; the status, establishment and the powers of the permanent Special Tribunal to adjudicate upon civil matters emanating from investigations by the SIU; the revenue and expenditure for the functioning of the SIU; and monitoring the implementation of recommendations and taking appropriate action in the event of an organ of the State or any other relevant authority refusing, neglecting or failing to take disciplinary action as recommended by the SIU.

 

1. Recovery of monies owed.The Committee agrees that an intervention is required to recover the monies owed to the SIU by state institutions for the work that it has done. The Committee proposes to write to the Speaker, requesting that she engage the Presidency on the role it can play in facilitating the recovery of these debts from the debtor institutions.

 

1. Employment equity. The Committee has previously noted the SIU’s poor performance with regard to equity targets, especially with respect to the women employees in the professional qualified category and persons with disabilities. The Committee appreciates the SIU’s commitment to address its challenges in this regard, as reflected in its plans, and will continue to monitor progress closely.

 

 

1. Public Protector South Africa

 

1. Budget reductions. The Committee notes the reduction to the PPSA’s baseline over the MTEF and expresses its views on this in paragraph 17.4.5. The Committee notes also that funding has not been made available to the PPSA for it to ensure security at all its offices, despite the Committee’s many requests that consideration be given to making funding available for this. The Committee is especially concerned that only one of the Public Protector SA’ s offices has security given the nature of the work that the PPSA undertakes.

 

1. Amending the Public Protector Act. The Committee notes thePPSA efforts to amend the Public Protector Act, among others to allow it to generate revenue from investigative work. The PPSA reports that it is benchmarking other institutions, such as the Auditor- General South Africa (AGSA), which charges auditees for audit work. The Committee will engage further with the PPSA on this proposal at the appropriate time. The Committee notes also that the process to amend the Public Protector Act, 1994, to bring it in line with the 1996 Constitution, began many years ago but has not appeared to have gained traction and hopes that, this time, a Bill will be brought to Parliament.

 

1. Vacancies.The Committee notes that the PPSA has a number of acting positions at senior management level. The Committee is not in favour of acting positions and urges the PPSA to expedite the recruitment of staff to key positions.

 

1. Litigation costs. The Committee asks that the PPSA keep it informed of the number and status of review applications and the associated litigation costs.

 

1. Collaboration between the PPSA and the SAHRC. The Committee welcomes the collaboration between the PPSA and the SAHRC. The Committee notes that the institutions worked together in a joint-mediation effort aimed at finding solutions to the challenges that had led to students declaring a shutdown of universities across the country.The PPSA has also collaborated with the SAHRC to host a Corruption and Human Rights Conference.

 

1. Access to PPSA services. The Committee notes that the PPSA opened a new regional office in Thohoyandou, Limpopo at the beginning of April 2021 to bring services closer to more than 420 rural villages in central Vhembe District.This follows the closure of an underutilised office in Musina. According to the PPSA, the bulk of the provincial caseload is made up of complaints from the province’s Vhembe area. Consequently, the number of complaints received from communities in and around Musina were not enough to justify keeping that office open. Instead, communities in Musina will receive monthly visits by outreach officers at pre-announced venues to collect complaints.

 

1. The Committee also notes that the PPSA has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Department. In terms of this agreement, PPSA complaint drop-boxes will be installed at certain Magistrates’ Courts countrywide to enhance access to PPSA services. Similar agreements are being explored with the South African Post Office and other stakeholders. The Committee commends the PPSA on its initiative in finding ways to fulfil its accessibility mandate, despite a lack of funds.

 

 

1. South African Human Rights Commission

 

1. Budget reductions. The Committee notes the reduction to the Commission’s baseline over the MTEF and expresses its views on this in paragraph 17.4.5.

 

1. An ideal budget. The Committee notes the Commission’s intention to complete a report on the adequacy of its budget in 2021/22. In the following year, the intention is to engage stakeholders on an ‘ideal’ SAHRC budget. The Committee is interested in this initiative and asks for more information concerning the study and also detailsof the planned engagement with stakeholders.

 

1. PAIA. The Committee is informed that the PAIA handover will take place shortly and requests that the Commission provide it with an update on the Commission’s ongoing engagements with the Information Regulator, in line with the progress of the handover of the Commission’s PAIA responsibilities.

 

1. National Preventative Mechanism (NPM). The Committee notes that in 2019/20, the Commission received R1.68 million from the Justice Department for its work as the co-ordinating body for the National Preventative Mechanism (NPM) established under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) which was ratified in 2019. The Committee requests that the Commission provide a report on the work of the NPM, the challenges, and the impact of the pandemic and funding.

 

1. Monitoring and Reporting on the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD). The Committee notes that the Commission has been designated as the Independent Monitoring Mechanism (IMM) under the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD). However, the Commission’s inability to sustain the establishment of the CRPD-IMM is a serious concern as this undermines efforts to monitor the implementation of the CPRD. The Committee, therefore, requests the Commission to provide it with a report on progress, challenges and lessons learnt.

 

1. Covid-19 and human rights. The Committee agrees that the Covid-19 pandemic has increased human rights vulnerabilities and the Commission has reported greater demand for its interventions and resources. The Committee would be interested in hearing more about the Commission’s work and insights and requests that it be provided with a written report.

 

1. Failure of departments to co-operate. The Committee is aware that some departments fail to co-operate with the SAHRC. The Committee requests that the SAHRC provide it with a list of errant departments so that the matter can be taken up through the Speaker’s Office with the Leader of Government Business.

 

 

1. Appreciation

 

1. The Committee wishes to thank:
2. The Minister and the Deputy Ministers for the political overview and Ministry staff for their co-operation.
3. The Director General and all officials who appeared before the Committee for their co-operation.
4. The National Director of Public Prosecutions and NPA officials for their co-operation in this process.
5. The Chairperson and Members of the Information Regulator and officials for their input to their participation in the process.
6. The Public Protector and the Deputy Public Protector; the Chairperson and the Commissioners of the South African Human Rights Commission; the Chairperson and Members of the Board of Legal Aid South Africa; and the Head of the Special Investigating Unit, as well as all respective officials who assisted with this process.

 

 

1. Recommendation

 

1. The Committee, having the Annual Performance Plans 2021/22 of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, Information Regulator, NPA, Legal Aid SA, SIU, Public Protector SA and SAHRC, recommends that they be approved.

 

1. The Committee, having considered the Budget Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development supports it and recommends that it be approved.

 

 

Report to be considered