The Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, dated 26 October 2011


The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, having considered the performance and additional budget requests for the medium term period of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, National Prosecuting Authority, Legal Aid South Africa, South African Human Rights Commission and Public Protector, reports as follows:



1.       Introduction


1.1.             The Committee oversees the activities of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and other institutions, which all receive their allocation under the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote. These other institutions include the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA); Legal Aid South Africa (LASA); Special Investigating Unit (SIU); South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and Public Protector (PP).


1.2.             Each year, as part of its oversight function, the Committee considers and reports on the annual reports of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the other institutions referred to it.


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


1.4.             This is the second year that the Committee is undertaking the BRRR process. The Committee believes that its engagement with the Justice Department, NPA, LASA, SIU, SAHRC and PP has been robust. However, it is not enough to engage on performance annually. For this reason, in the past year, the Committee has met quarterly with the Department to establish how well it is performing against planned expenditure. The Committee has also met regularly with the other institutions on their respective performance and related spending.


1.5.             The Committee was briefed on the annual performance for 2010/11 of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, NPA, LASA, SIU and SAHRC. The briefings took place from 11 – 14 October 2011. The meeting with the Public Protector was cancelled when she did not appear at the scheduled meeting on 14 October 2011. The meeting was rescheduled to 25 October 2011. The Committee also met with the Auditor-General on the audit outcomes on 18 October 2011. Copies of the presentations are available from the committee secretary. The Committee has already considered and reported on the respective strategic plans and budget proposals of the Justice Department, NPA, LASA, SIU, SAHRC and PP for 2011/12. As mentioned in paragraph 1.4., the Committee has also reviewed the Department’s performance for the first quarter of 2011/12.


1.6.             The National Director of Public Prosecutions was unable to be present at the NPA’s meeting with the Committee on 12 October 2011, tendering his apology at a late stage. Although the Committee is grateful for the presence of the Director General: Justice and Constitutional Development (in her capacity as accounting officer) and NPA officials to answer questions, the Committee is of the view that this is last time it will meet with the NPA on its annual performance without the NDPP being present. The Committee seriously considered cancelling the meeting but did not as this would have resulted in wasteful expenditure.


1.7.             This Report comprises five parts:


  • Part 1 provides background information relating to the core functions of the Department, NPA, LASA, SIU, SAHRC and PP. An overview of the allocation to the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote for the 2010/11 and 2011/12 financial years is provided; and expenditure patterns for 2010/11 and the 1st quarter 2011/12 are discussed. Key issues raised by the Auditor-General relating to the Department’s financial statements for 2010/11 are summarized.
  •  Part 2 provides an overview of the progression of the Department’s strategic plan from 2010/11 to 2011/12 and beyond.
  • Part 3 gives selected performance information, as reported to the Committee for each programme for 2010/11.
  • Part 4 contains the Committee’s observations and recommendations.
  • Part 5 is a summary of the Committee’s requests for additional information and its recommendations relating to the requests for additional funding for the medium term period.



Part 1


2.       Context and background


2.1.             Core functions


Briefly, the core functions of the Department, NPA, LASA, SIU, SAHRC and PP are as follows:


·         Department of Justice and Constitutional Development: The Department’s core function relates to the management of the criminal and civil justice systems. It is also responsible for several activities that are not necessarily related to the management of criminal and civil justice system, for example, the provision of legal services to government, the management of funding for political parties and the reparations policy flowing from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

·         National Prosecuting Authority (NPA): The NPA institutes criminal proceedings on behalf of the State.

·         Legal Aid South Africa (LASA): LASA provides independent legal representation to the poor at State expense.

·         Special Investigating Unit (SIU): The SIU recovers and prevents financial losses to the state that is due to acts of corruption, fraud and maladministration and can institute civil legal action to correct any wrongdoing. Its investigations are mandated by Presidential proclamation.

·         South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC): The Commission’s mandate is extremely broad, encompassing almost every aspect of civil, political, economic and political rights. It must promote respect for human rights; promote their protection, development and attainment; and monitor how well they are observed. The Constitution also provides that the Commission annually monitor the implementation of the socio-economic rights contained in the Constitution. The Commission has specific obligations in terms of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 and the Promotion of Access to Information Act 2 of 2000.

·         Public Protector: The Office of the Public Protector (OPP) was established to ensure government’s accountability and to provide remedies for maladministration and abuse of authority. The Public Protector is empowered to investigate report on, and suggest remedial action for a wide range of wrongdoings in the public administration.


2.2.             Overview: of the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote 2010/11 - 2011/12


Table 1: Overview of Budget and real percent change - 2010/11 and 2011/12


Budget (R million)

Real Percent change

Real percent change



2010/11 (%)

2011/12 (%)


1 427.4

1 625.2

13.86 %

8.64 %

Court Services

3 994.2

4 341.7

8.70 %

3.72 %

State Legal Services



3.96 %

(0.80 %)

National Prosecuting Authority

2 684.3

2 640.3

(1.64 %)

(6.14 %)

Auxiliary and Associated Services

1 959.5

2 055.7

13.86 %

8.64 %

Total (excluding direct charge)

10 787 5

11 413.6

4.91 %

0.10 %


2.2.1.      In 2010/11, the total adjusted appropriation for the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote was R12.7 billion. This included a direct charge against the National Revenue Fund of R 1.9 billion for judges’ and magistrates’ salaries. Of this amount, the main appropriation to Programmes was R10.25 billion but an adjustment of R536 million in October 2010, brought the total adjusted appropriation for the Vote’s programmes to R10.78 billion.


2.2.2.      The allocation is distributed among five programmes:

·                     The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development administers three: Administration; Court Services; and State Legal Services. (Together these three programmes received just less than 55% of the allocation).

·                     Programme 4: National Prosecuting Authority received an adjusted appropriation of R2.7 billion (approximately 25% of the allocation). As has been the case since 2001, separate financial statements were prepared for the NPA, although the Director-General: Justice and Constitutional Development is the Accounting Officer.

·                     Programme 5: Auxiliary and Related Services includes two state institutions supporting constitutional democracy, the South African Human Rights Commission and Public Protector, as well as the Special Investigating Unit and Legal Aid South Africa. The Programme received R1.95 billion for 2010/11 (approximately 17% of the allocation).


2.2.3.      Unforeseen and unavoidable expenditure (adjustments) in 2010/11: The Vote was adjusted by R536 million in October 2010 (of this amount, R320 million was allocated to the Department (Court Services programme), the NPA and LASA for the implementation of Phase 2 of the OSD; R21.9 million was allocated for the Presidential Project: United in Diversity; and R195 million was allocated for higher personnel remuneration increases than the main budget allowed for, including increased housing allowances (This includes allocations to LASA, the SIU, the PP and the SAHRC).


2.2.4.      Virements in 2010/11: There were supplementary virements between programmes after the Adjustments’ appropriation to fund the following shortfalls:

·                     R36.9 million that went unspent on compensation of employees was shifted from the court service programme to the goods and services budget in the Administration programme.

·                     R51.2 million that went unspent on compensation of employees was shifted from the State Legal Services programme to the goods and services budget in the Administration programme.

·                     R175.72 million was shifted from the NPA to the Administration programme to fund overspending in respect of payments for security at courts, municipal rates and taxes and accommodation charges.


2.2.5.      Overall, the Department spent 98.9% of the adjusted budget in 2010/11 compared to 99.8% in 2009/10. The unspent balance of R89.1 million at the end of the 2010/11 financial year is greater than in 2009/10, when only R26.8 million went unspent.

·                     The underspending can largely be attributed to challenges relating to earmarked amounts: R40.1 million in the Integrated Justice System (IJS) went unspent as a result of slow expenditure by  the Departments comprising the Justice Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS) Cluster. The Department reports that the JCPS cluster has an ongoing challenge with ICT integration which has resulted in serious under-expenditure. For close to a decade, the IJS Board has worked to ensure integrated information across the Criminal Justice System. National Treasury reports that the IJS programme tends to spend the largest part of the allocation during the last quarter of every financial year, which is regarded as fiscal dumping and should be avoided in order to prevent a reduction in the budget in 2011/12. The Department noted in its Strategic Plan 2011-16 that problems exist between the IJS and State Information Technology Agency (SITA).

·                     R44.6 million was ‘saved’ when the public-private partnership for Third Party Funds was suspended (on1 April 2010).

·                     In addition, R4.48 million was not paid to the Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority, as the Department had not been invoiced.


2.2.6.      2010 Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report. The Committee had made certain funding recommendations in its 2010 Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report. The following amounts were subsequently allocated for:

·                     Accommodation, specifically to build a high court in Mpumalanga at Nelspruit and to address related infrastructure issues, such as maintenance of buildings. The additional amounts allocated are R240 million and R250 million in 2012/14 and 2013/14 respectively.

·                     Information Communication Technology, specifically to replace obsolete equipment and to expand its network. Additional amounts of R100 million in 2012/13 and R110 million in 2013/14 are allocated for this.

·                     LASA also received additional funds to improve its practitioner-per-court ratio, to accommodate OSD funding and to increase ability to undertake civil work. Additional amounts of R44.6 million, R90.8 million and R106.3 million were allocated for increased capacity, for improved conditions of service and the implementation of Phase 2 of the OSD for legally qualified professionals.

·                     The PP and the SAHRC received additional funds to support their mandate: The PP was allocated additional amounts of R18.3 million, R24.1 million and R27.8 million for increased investigative capacity, improved conditions of service and municipal and accommodation charges. The SAHRC was allocated R6.2 million and R13 million for increased legal capacity, improved conditions of service and municipal and accommodation charges.


2.2.7.      Budget allocation for 2011/12: The Justice and Constitutional Development Vote received R13.5 billion for 2011/12. If the direct charges for judges and magistrates salaries are excluded, the Department received R11.4 billion. The allocation to programmes, overall, grows in real terms by only 0.96% compared to 2010/11. (It is only the Administration, Court Services and Auxiliary and Associated Services programmes that see real growth). An amount of R245 million is added to the baseline for 2011/12: Additional amounts are for the Presidential Initiative (R30 million); OSD Phase 2 – for the NPA and Department (R45 million and R 5 million respectively). The baseline was reduced, however, by R114 million and R33.2 million as a consequence of the cancellation of the Third Party Fund Public-Private Partnership and further savings effected by Cabinet, respectively.


2.2.8.      Spending for the 1st Quarter 2011/12: Overall the Department reported that it had spent R3.08 billion or 25% of the total available budget (excluding the Direct Charges) at the end of July 2010. Capital spending, however, is at 39.9% as payments for buildings and other fixed structures became due earlier than expected.


2.3.             Reported spending pressures: Over the medium term, the Department reports the following spending pressures:

·                     The Department has identified investment in information technology as a key enabler. However, budget cuts have affected the IT maintenance plan with the following consequences: Ageing servers and other infrastructure; out-of-warranty servers that are a high operational risk; an inadequate business continuity plan; and a slow network that impacts negatively on turn-around in service delivery.

·                     There have been incidents of serious crime against staff members and the public (such as intimidation, murder, theft of state assets, theft of dockets and court records, escapes and robberies with aggravating circumstances.) To curb the costs of increasing security at service delivery points, the Department is exploring the possibility of using the South African National Defence Force to secure service delivery points.

·                     The Department has a major challenge in addressing the historical imbalances of the court infrastructure: prior to 1994, most court services were not situated in townships or in rural areas. When the Department decided to increase its services to previously excluded areas; facilities were unsuitable, requiring major refurbishment. Unfortunately, addressing the problem is complicated by the: Escalation of infrastructure costs above inflation, which means the cash flow for building new courts is often insufficient and results in construction being postponed; the need to take into account the maintenance and accessibility programmes of existing facilities; the use of the infrastructure budget for additional accommodation where necessary; the growth in establishment and new services delivered.

·                     There has been a significant increase in litigation against the state that requires interventions such as the development of a policy to manage state litigation and increased resources to the Office of the State Attorney.

·                     Other areas affected by budgetary constraints are: Increasing the establishment of the lower courts and providing the judiciary with adequate ‘tools of trade’; expansion of support personnel establishment (interpreters, finance and supply chain management personnel), as well as personnel performing quasi-legal functions; implementation costs of new and proposed legislation; document and record management; adequate provision of library services to the various courts; and the enhancement of constitutional development programmes.



3.       Key issues raised by the Auditor-General (AG) relating to the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development for 2010/11


3.1.             The Department received a qualified audit outcome for 2010/11, as for previous years, with emphasis of matter and other matters.


Table 3: Department of Justice and Constitutional Development:

Audit findings 2010/11

Third Party Funds

·         Could not rely on the adequacy of the Funds financial system and control system.

·         Could not determine whether the revenue of R306 677 000 had been properly collected and recorded.

·         Could not determine whether potential claims against the Fund as a result of fraud/theft and losses (R67 108 000) were complete.

·         Could not determine whether the money collected on behalf of the state and not yet paid to the Department (R115 261 000) had been properly collected and recorded.

Irregular expenditure

·         Normal procurement policies and policies were not followed. (The PFMA requires the implementation and maintenance of an appropriate procurement and provisioning system.)

·         The Department did not have system for identifying irregular expenditure. The Auditor-General was not satisfied as to the completeness of irregular expenditure of R81 067 000.


3.2.             The Department reported the following key initiatives to achieve an unqualified audit:

·                     Debriefing workshops for executive management, regional heads and regional finance directors.

·                     Comprehensive audit action plans, supplemented by regional audit action plans on identified audit risk areas.

·                     Establishment of internal control component for expenditure management and monitoring, adherence to financial prescripts and reporting.

·                     Additional human resource capacity in supply chain management and asset management.

·                     Task teams deployed in regions for training and technical guidance

·                     Focusing on compliance, asset management, irregular expenditure and supply chain management practices.

·                     Enhancing departmental policies and prescripts – especially three quotes, delegations and tax compliance of service providers.

·                     Monthly progress reporting to Executive management on status of implementation of approved audit action plans.

·                     Quarterly financial statements preparation, which are quality reviewed by the senior manager in financial reporting services. Exceptions are investigated and followed through.

·                     There is a detailed action plan to resolve the qualification of Third Party Funds.


3.3.             The Department also reports initiatives to address the quality of performance information:

·                     Appointment of two directors to address concerns regarding the quality of performance information.

·                     Implementation of policies and procedures to assist with the effective management of performance information.

·                     Implementation of an electronic performance management system (TROUX)

·                     Implementation to the Barn Owl system to assist management of forensic, grievance and disciplinary case information.

·                     Increased focus on performance management by internal audit.



Part 2


4.       Overview of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development’s strategic and operational environment


4.1.             Outcomes-based approach to service delivery


In January 2010, Government adopted an outcomes-based approach to performance. The Justice Department leads the JCPS Cluster, which is responsible for the outcome ensuring that ‘All People in South Africa are and feel safe’. Specific outputs and measures have been identified for the JCPS cluster, and focus largely on measures to combat crime and corruption.


Table 4: Outcome 3 - All People in SA are protected and feel safe


Key spending programmes

1.       Reduce overall level of crime, in particular contact and trio crimes.

2.       An effective and integrated criminal justice system.

3.       Corruption within the JCPS cluster combated to ensure effectiveness and ability to serve as deterrent to crime.

4.       Improve perceptions of crime among the population.

5.       Improve investor perceptions and trust by reducing levels of corruption.

6.       Effective and integrated border management.

7.       Integrity of identity of citizens and residents secured.

8.       Cyber-crime combated.

·         Increase police personnel.

·         Establish tactical response teams in provinces

·         Upgrade IT infrastructure at CS facilities.

·         ICT renewal in the justice cluster.

·         OSD for legal professionals.

·         Deploy SANDF soldier to South Africa’s borders.


The JCPS Cluster is addressing blockages identified in the Criminal Justice Review, implementing the recommendations that form part of the Seven-point transformation plan. Most of these elements have been incorporated in the Cluster’s service delivery agreements. In addition, the Cluster has focused on broadening access to justice for all, improved efficiency in courts and on combating violence and crimes against the vulnerable.


4.2.             Overview of the Strategic Plan 2010-2014


The Department’s strategic plan for 2010/11 reflects the Outcome 3 and the related outputs. The Department has three programmes, directed towards three strategic goals: Improving the administration of justice (with special emphasis on good governance and accountability); providing effective and efficient justice services (facilitate speedy resolution of criminal, civil and family law matters); and providing for transformed legal services. Within these broad strategic goals the Department’s Strategic Plan 2010-2014 established certain core strategic objectives, which were linked to targets and outputs (all of these were revised in 2011/12 in line with the new Strategic Plan 2011-2016). The core strategic objectives were to the following:

·                     Improve corporate governance to comply with the PFMA.

·                     Manage priority projects aimed at improving internal control.

·                     Provide sound management of state resources.

·                     Expand justice infrastructure and services to people living in townships and rural areas.

·                     Provide strategic leadership to the JCPS.

·                     Increase public understanding of justice and demonstrate service delivery.

·                     Intervene to protect the victims of apartheid and crime.

·                     Provide sound support to the judiciary.

·                     Review the criminal and civil justice systems.

·                     Ensure qualitative and timely justice services.

·                     Provide sound administrative support to regional offices.

·                     Improve delivery of services to comply with Batho Pele.

·                     Protect and promote the rights of vulnerable groups.

·                     Promote constitutional development.

·                     Improve provision of legal services to the state.

·                     Administer deceased and insolvent estates, Guardian’s fund and trusts.


4.3.             Overview of the organisational and service delivery environments for 2010/11


4.3.1.      The Department reports the following organisational challenges in 2010/11 that adversely effected service delivery:

·                     A total of 90 days were lost due to public service strike action (at a cost of R2 415 million). This resulted in reduced court productivity during 2010/11 compared to 2009/10.

·                     The number of fraud and corruption cases increased when compared with 2008/09 and 2009/10.

·                     FIFA cases were dealt with through dedicated resource allocation in 56 court rooms with infrastructure and security upgrades as well as additional human resources. (R45 million was allocated for the FIFA courts, which ceased to operate at the end of July 2010).

·                     The Department’s operational budget was reduced by more than R2.1 billion for the MTEF period.

·                     The Department has difficulty in retaining staff in key areas, such as the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, risk management and the strategy unit, although in 2010/11 five senior management posts were filled in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer.


4.3.2.      The service delivery environment has been affected by the following:

·                     Three court buildings were completed (Ashton Periodical court (Western Cape), Ekangala Magistrate Office (Mpumalanga) and Hankey Magistrates Office (Eastern Cape)).

·                     Additional Accommodation was provided at three Magistrates offices in Stanger (KwaZulu-Natal), Swellendam (Western Cape) and Bredasdorp (Western Cape).

·                     A total of 10 other major capital projects were carried over from 2009/10.

·                     As in 2008/09 and 2009/10, the Department reports that a key factor contributing to non-completion of the bulk of capital projects was because of poor contractor performance, as well as labour unrest and ‘unforeseen ground conditions’. These delays have become a major cost driver: Projects end up costing more than anticipated and hamper delivery on new projects and the provision of facilities for people with disabilities.

·                     An invitation to tender was to be made for one capital project in 2010/11 - the Nelspruit High Court. Budget issues and the focus on the construction of the Polokwane High Court led to the lease of alternative accommodation at the Simunye Building for the Nelspruit High Court for the next five years. Construction of the Polokwane High Court (R301.7 million) began in February 2010. The building is expected to be completed by March 2012, although there have been delays.

·                     Maintenance/repair issues continue to be a challenge and funding never seems to be adequate to address the backlog.

·                     The workload of magistrate’s courts, family (divorce) courts and high courts increased substantially.

·                     A total of 61 regional courts were designated for hearing of civil cases and divorce matters. Nine registrars and 51 assistant registrars were appointed.

·                     Investments were made in building regional capacity (the Department reports that R75 million was set aside to ensure all courts are properly capacitated).

·                     A report was compiled to investigate the sheriffs sector in order to address serious capacity and transformation issues.

·                     A total of 26 new Small Claims’ courts were opened and there has been an increase in the number of cases.

·                     A total of 15 designated branch courts were monitored and additional capacity provided depending on increasing case loads.


4.4.             Overview of (revised) Strategic Plan 2011-2016


4.4.1.      The Department has revised its strategic plan 2011-2016 to comply with the National Treasury Framework for Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans, which focuses on outcomes-based planning.

4.4.2.      The Department has the following four strategic goals:

o        Goal 1: To increase the Department’s accountability, effectiveness and efficiency. (Improved compliance with legal and good practice requirements in respect of governance across all branches and structures towards an unqualified audit.)

o        Goal 2: To improve the effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of justice service.(Courts and justice service points are supported to improve finalisation rates, efficiencies and backlogs in respect of all criminal, civil and family matters.)

o        Goal 3: To transform legal services to protect and advance the interests of government and citizens and to promote constitutional development. (The exposure of government to legal risk is reduced, citizens have access to quality guardian and probate services, the state has access to legal advice and services and constitutional development is promoted.)

o        Goal 4: To effectively coordinate the JPCS Cluster in the delivery of Outcome 3.

4.4.3.      The strategic plan refers to three projects that have been prioritised for 2011/12. These are to achieve an unqualified audit outcome in 2012/13; service turnaround in maintenance services; and service turnaround in the Masters’ Branch.

4.4.4.      The spending focus over the MTEF period is on reviewing the civil justice system, implementing approved legislation (such as, the Children’s Act, 2005; the Child Justice Act, 2008; and the Sexual Offences Act, 2008). In addition, rolling out the Constitutional Development branch, repositioning the Master of High Court, turning around audit qualifications, Third Party Funds accounting systems, building high courts in Nelspruit and Polokwane and further modernisation of the systems and procedures in the courts are areas on which spending will focus.



Part 3


5.       Performance information for each Programme 2010/2011


Department of Justice and Constitutional Development


5.1.             Programme 1- Administration


5.1.1.      The Administration programme is responsible for the management of the department, and development of policies and strategies for the efficient adminstrion of justice. It facilitates the resolution of criminal, civil and family law disputes by providing accessible, efficient and quality adminstrative support to the courts.

5.1.2.      Expenditure on Administration grew at an average annual rate of 7% from R1.2bn in 2007/08 to R1.4bn in 2010/11. Growth in expenditure for this programme is expected to be on average 8.7% per annum over the medium term, reaching R1.8 billion in 2013/14. The growth in both periods is mainly due to additional allocations for increased municipal and accommodation charges. In 2010/11, the programme spent 99.7% of its allocated funds.

5.1.3.      Programme performance:

Table 5: Administration: Selected targets and actual performance 2010/11

Administration 2010/11

Selected targets


Resolve 90% of top corporate risks

Target achieved

100% resolved and risk mitigation plans developed

Complete 80% of approved audit plans

Target achieved

96% completed.

Reduce vacancy rate to 10%.

Target achieved

9.8% (including judges and magistrates). 5105 posts filled (1249 permanent appointments, 3520 contract appointments and 336 promotions.) Three key senior management positions were filled in the office of the Chief Financial Officer. A recruitment plan was developed to monitor adherence to the recruitment turnaround time

Train 4500 people at justice college.

Target achieved

5841 trained (5613 were trained in 2009/10 )

Conduct 10 staff awareness sessions in respect of risk management

Target achieved

29 sessions held (400 staff attended sessions)

Roll out of ICMS to 250 lower and 12 High Courts

Target achieved

ICMS was rolled out to 478 lower courts and 12 High Courts.

Respond to 100% of Presidential hotline enquires and finalise 60% within 30 days of receiving them

Target not achieved

62.5% finalised within 30 days

Ensure no repeat of audit findings


Target not achieved

Only 60% of audit findings resolved because of lack of integration between financial systems BAS and Justice Yellow Pages.

Ensure 100% of assets captured

Target not achieved

80% due to non-compliance by staff with asset management/ supply chain management procedures.

100% of lost court records to be reconstructed.

Target not achieved

Only 44% of lost records were tracked and restored in identified priority courts because of challenges in reconstruction of records.

100% of leave forms to be captured within 20 days.

Target not achieved

69% of leave forms were captured within 10 days due to non-compliance by staff and problems with the PERSAL system.

Finalise 60% of disciplinary and 70% of grievance cases

Target not achieved

40% of disciplinary cases and 48% of grievance cases were finalised. For forensic cases, new cases were finalised within six months against a target of 2 months.

Finalisation of outstanding TRC cases and supporting regulations.

Target not achieved

30% of outstanding no. of victims to be identified by 2011.

Development of regulations delayed due to consultation with stakeholders.


5.1.4.      Key challenges arising during 2010/11

·                     Finalisation of disciplinary, grievance and forensic cases: 40% of disciplinary cases and 48% of grievance cases were finalised against the target of 60% and 70% respectively.

·                     Qualification on irregular expenditure and Third Party Funds.

·                     The Auditor-General made audit findings on performance information: The Department’s performance information was found to be deficient in respect of validity and accuracy.

·                     Finalisation of outstanding TRC cases and supporting regulations: Only 8 (1%) of the 875 beneficiaries were paid in 2010/11.

·                     Lost records: Only 44% of lost records were reconstructed against the target of 100%. An off-site record project was implemented to store digital copies of case documentation. This project has been implemented at five courts and a total of 2 877 260 case (75 million pages) digitised.

·                     Finalisation of security roll out projects: Only seven security installations were completed against the target of 127.  Challenges include heritage sites and the lack of building drawings. A plan has been put in place to address the pace of roll out for 2011/12.


5.2.             Programme 2- Court Services


5.2.1.      The Court Services programme facilitate the resolution of criminal, civil and family law disputes by providing accessible, efficient and quality administrative support to the courts and managing court facilities.

5.2.2.      Expenditure on Court Services grew from R2.7bn to R4bn, at an average annual rate of 14.2%, between 2007/08 to 2010/11. Over the medium term, the programme is expected to grow to R5.4bn, at an average annual rate of 10.6%. The historical growth can be attributed to the implementation of a number of projects involving new approved legislation and specialised courts for the 2010 FIFA World Cup, while growth over the medium term isas a result of additional allocations for the construction of new courts, implementation of legislation and improved conditions of service. The programme spent 98.9% of its allocation in 2010/11.

5.2.3.      Programme performance:

Table 6: Court services - Selected targets and actual performance 2010/11

Court Services 2010/11

Performance indicator and target


·         Strengthen establishment in the Office of the Chief Justice: Finalise the structure and appoint 5 critical staff by 2010

Target achieved

The structure was finalised and 5 temporary staff were appointed.

·         Finalise policy framework on transformation of the courts, Superior Courts Bill, the Constitution 19th Amendment Bill and Traditional Courts Bill by 2011

Target achieved

100% complete

Increase finalisation of lower court cases by 2% by 2010

Target not achieved

No increase in finalisation of cases

·         Reduce case backlogs in 42 backlog courts from 11 00 cases to 14 815 (target 14 815 for 2010)

Target achieved

15 403 cases resolved

Increase cases currently diverted by 40% from baseline by 2012/12

Target not achieved

2% increase in adult diversion and 42% decrease in child diversion

Ensure effective implementation of the Seven Point Plan: Appoint at least 4 critical staff to the CJS statistics centre

Target not achieved

No permanent staff appointed

Improve capability of regional offices to improve delivery of justice services: 80% implementation by 2010 of funded priority projects to improve internal control systems

Target partially achieved

Training interventions

Provide sound management of resources provided to the region: Ensure 65% of staff are trained by 2010 on service delivery, IT asset and financial and operation management

Target partially achieved

Training interventions implemented at regional level

Ensure efficient delivery of maintenance services:

80 % of applications resolved within 20 days

Target not achieved

0% resolved within 20 days

Ensure efficient delivery of maintenance services:

Ensure service delivery within 2 hours of being in a queue

Target not achieved

92.1% of courts served clients within this time. 7.8% could not.

Ensure compliance with Child Justice Act and Children’s Act: Implement the Child Justice Act and reduce the criminal cases involving children through diversion by 12% in 2012/13.

Target not achieved

Diversion of children decreased by 42%

Ensure the effective resolution of sexual offences, trafficking in persons, domestic violence and gender hate crimes: Develop a strategy for reduction of gender- based offences and finalise trafficking in persons bill

Targets achieved


5.2.4.      Court services recorded the following key achievements in 2010/11:

·                     A total of 64% of family cases involving children’s matters were finalised during the period under review, against the target of 50%.

·                     A total of 60% of the identified interventions of the 7-point plan of the criminal justice system were finalized in line with the annual target. These include pre-screening protocol for case readiness and improved co-ordination between the NPA and the Legal Aid South Africa.

·                     The number of backlog cases removed was increased to 15 403, against the target of 14 815.

·                     The Department assisted with the formation of the newly established Office of the Chief Justice by providing staff. By the end of the year, 5 key staff members were appointed in line with targets.

·                     A total of 962 317 new cases were enrolled and 535 429 cases were disposed of, resulting in a positive clearance ratio of 2.7%.

·                     There was an increase in the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (ADRM).

·                     Both lower and high courts maintained high conviction rates – High Courts: 87.8%; Regional Courts: 73.4%; District Courts: 90.7%.

·                     The number of cases withdrawn was reduced by 7.1%. This is due to implementation of improved screening processes.


5.2.5.      Key challenges arising in 2010/11:

·                     Case finalisation: There was a 0% increase in finalisation of lower court criminal cases (against the annual target of a 2% increase). The finalisation of criminal cases has dropped compared to 2009/10.

·                     Indicators for diversions and admissions of guilt have been a challenge. Further strengthening of processes to ensure more accurate data recording is being investigated.


5.3.             Programme 3 - State Legal Services


5.3.1.      This programme provides legal and legislative services to government,, supervises the administration of deceased and insolvent estates and the Guardian’s Fund, and prepares and promotes legislation and undertakes research in support of this.

5.3.2.      Expenditure on State Legal Services increased from R390.3m in 2007/08 to R722.1m in 2010/11, at an average annual rate of 22.8%. The strong historical growth can mainly be attributed to additional allocations for improved access to Guardian’s Fund, including deceased and insolvent estates services, as well as increased capacity in the Master’s and State Attorney’s offices. The programme spent 100% of its allocation for 2010/11.

5.3.3.      Programme performance:

Table 7: State Legal Services - Selected targets and actual performance 2010/11

Performance Indicator

Actual Performance

Promotion of the Access to Justice and Constitutional Rights Programme (in conjunction with the Foundation for Human Rights).

Target achieved

Signed service level agreements established community advice centres.


Support services provided to 10413 (refugees, asylum seekers and migrants.

Develop 12 Bills and 48 pieces of subordinate legislation

Target achieved

15 Bills and 48 pieces of subordinate legislation developed

Implement counsel briefing policy and ensure 65 % of value of briefings made to Previously Disadvantaged Individuals (PDIs)

Target achieved

69% of value of briefings to PDIs

Improve access to Masters’ office by capacitating at 402 magisterial court district

Target achieved

All service points reached

Guardians fund. A no audit qualification and ensure 80% of beneficiaries receive payments within 40 days.

Target achieved

Establish a branch responsible for constitutional development


Target not achieved

The Department has not yet received permission from the DPSA to establish the branch.

Reduce legal costs by 25% by 2013

Target not achieved

Legal costs have increased by 9%


5.3.4.      Selected achievements for 2010/11 include:

·                     All 402 magistrate offices have been designated as service points of the Master of the High Court.

·                     There was a steady increase in the registration of new matters particularly on deceased matters. Service Delivery statistics show that Masters’ Offices comply with turnaround times stipulated.

·                     A number of initiatives were undertaken to improve the delivery of services within the maintenance and domestic violence area. A total of 27 additional maintenance investigators were appointed in response to the Service Delivery Improvement Plan. Specialised training was conducted for 270 maintenance officers and investigators through the Justice College.

·                     Turnaround times in the Masters services: 93% of beneficiaries of the Guardian’s Fund received payments within 40 days (against the target of 80%). A total of 99.8% of estate files below the value of R125 000 were finalised within four months and 99.3% of estate files valued at more than R125 000 were finalised within 12 months.

·                     Counsel briefings: A total of 69% of the value of counsel briefs were awarded to previously disadvantaged individuals and firms, against the target of 65%.

·                     Of the 2 210 cases finalised, 757 (34%) were won, 659 were lost (30%) and 794 (36%) were settled.

·                     Legislative development: 15 Bills were drafted against a target of 12. In addition, 48 pieces of subordinate legislation were drafted against a target of 14; 18 research papers were finalised against the target of 15; and 10 rules/amendments to rules were dealt with.

·                     The Department received funding from the European Union in support of participatory democracy and promotion of human rights. This has been used to capacitate 183 community-based organisations (CBO’s) to offer paralegal services; establish 18 community advice centres and assist 10 413 asylum seekers, refugees and migrants.


5.3.5.      Key challenges arising during 2010/11

·                     Reduction in legal costs: The Department’s legal costs increased by 9% in 2010/11 when compared to the target of a 25% decrease by 2013.

·                      Reduction in the turnaround time for legal opinion: Only 60% of legal opinions were finalised within the 21 days stipulated. The target was 100%.


5.4.             Additional funding requests MTEF


Table 8: Department of Justice anD Constitutional Development – Additional funding requests MTEF


(R million)





Infrastructure bid





o        Maintenance and rehabilitation programme





o        Provision for persons with disabilities





Security services (including cash in transit)





PPP – Constitutional Hill and Justice precinct











6.       Programme 4 - National Prosecuting Authority


6.1.             The National Prosecuting Authority provides a co-ordinated prosecuting service to ensure that justice is delivered to the victims of crime through general and specialised prosecutions, protects certain witnesses and removes the profit from crime. Although the Director-General: Justice Constitutional Development is the accounting officer, the NPA reports separately on its perfomance.


6.2.             The NPA spent 99,5% of its appropriation. ‘Savings’ were as a result of delays in filling vacancies and the lower than anticipated expenditure relating to the implementation of the OSD Phase II for the legally qualified personel. However, R175.7 million was transfered in the form a virement to the Department. The virement was for overspending in the Administration programme on operational expenditure and payments for security at courts, municipal rates and taxes and accommodation charges. If the virement is excluded, the the NPA would have spent 93% of its budget.


6.3.             Programme performance:


TABLE 9: NPA Achievement of ENE Targets and Indicators 2010/11


Target 2010/11

Actual 2010/11


Number of cases finalised including ADRM

482 491

460 891

Target not achieved


Number of cases finalised excluding ADRM

357 928

331 045

Target not achieved


Number of complex commercial crime cases finalised

1 465


Target not achieved


Conviction rate: High Courts



Target achieved


Conviction rate: Regional courts



Target not achieved


Conviction rate: District courts



Target achieved


Conviction rate: Sexual offences courts



Target achieved

(2.6%) (Only dedicated courts)

Number of TCCs



Target achieved



6.4.             Key achievements for 2010/11 include:

·                     The NPA achieved an unqualified audit opinion for 2010/11. This is an improvement on the qualified audit findings in 2009/10. There are, however emphasis of matters and other matters.

·                     Courts attained a positive clearance ratio of 2.7%. A total of 962 317 new cases were enrolled and 988 451 cases disposed of.

·                     There was a reduction of 7.1% in the withdrawal rate of cases through the implementation of proper screening mechanisms. A total of 224 983 cases were withdrawn in 2010/11 compared to 242 103 in 2009/10.

·                     The outstanding court roll was reduced by 5.1% at the end of the financial year (218 660 compared to 230 477 during 2009/10).

·                     High conviction rates were retained in courts (High courts: 87.8%; Regional Courts: 73.4%; and District courts: 90.7%).

·                     A total of 605 442 decision dockets were dealt with before enrolment. This is 9.1% more than the 554 806 dockets dealt with in 2009/10.

·                     Thuthuzela Care Centres increased from 20 to 27.

·                     The number of children diverted has increased by 1.8% from 2009/10 – from 16 173 diverted in 2009/10 to 16 462 during 2010/11.

·                     A total of 604 section 105A plea and sentence agreements were successfully concluded. In 184 (36%) of these cases, sentence comprised direct punishment.

·                     A total of 180 prosecutors were trained on the comprehensive manual on maintenance matters in line with the Maintenance Act and latest developments in law.

·                     There was a reduction in the number of grievances by witnesses in the Witness Protection Unit from 10% to 3%.


6.5.             Key challenges identified during 2010/11:

·                     There has been an improvement in the vacancy rate among prosecutors from 16% in 2009/10 to 11.89% as at 31 March 2011. Overall the vacancy rate remains high at 16.8%.

·                     Case flow- related problems and absence of key role players. The NPA has met with the judiciary and the JCPS cluster to see what can be done to solve problems.

·                     Ineffective court utilisation. Of the 962 317 new cases enrolled, 535 429 were removed from the roll.

·                     There is a shortage of critical resources.

·                     There is a lack of alignment in objectives and targets across the criminal justice value chain.


6.6.             Request for additional funding in the MTEF period:


Unfunded MTEF options submitted to National Treasury









AFU – curator fees and increase in capacity

39 000

44 000

50 000

133 000

Roll out of TCC and institutionalisation of donor-funded positions

23 591

25 271

26 504

75 366

SOCA – training on Sexual Offences Act, Child Justice, Human Trafficking, Domestic Violence and Maintenance

4 500

3 500

4 000

12 000

Job creation – Aspirant prosecutor programme

44 658

47 113

49 704

141 475


111 749

119 884

130 208

361 841


7.       Programme 5 Auxiliary and Related Services


7.1.             This programme includes Legal Aid South Africa, the Special Investigating Unit, the South African Human Rights Commission and Public Protector.


Table 11: Budget allocation and Audit Opinion 2010/11


Audit opinion

Budget allocation 2010/11

(R million)

Budget allocation 2011/12

(R million)

South African Human Rights Commision




Public Protector




Legal Aid South Africa



1 145.1

Special Investigating Unit





7.2.             Legal Aid South Africa

7.2.1.      Selected achievements, as reported, for each institution for 2010/11 include:

·                     Provided services at all criminal courts in the country through a national footprint of 64 Justice Centres and 64 Satellite Offices.

·                     Delivered quality legal services in 421 365 new legal matters (there were 419 149 new matters in 2009/10.

·                     A total of 405 891 legal matters were finalised in 2010/11, compared to 416 149 in 2009/10 (both criminal and civil matters).

·                     Provided legal assistance in 31 451 civil legal matters, compared to 29 028 in 2009/10. A total of 257 619 clients received general legal advice, compared to 211 874 in 2009/10.

·                     Assisted 28 115 children in 2010/1, compared to 59 266 children in 2009/10. There has been a decrease in the number of children awaiting trial in detention for more than a month.

·                     All categories of practitioners exceeded their quality assurance targets.

·                     The number of matters taken on automatic review (this occurs when accused are unrepresented in the lower courts) reduced from 30 306 in 2002/03 to 7 094 in 2010/11 (8 770 in 2009/10).

·                     Launched a Client Call Centre (in November 2010).

·                     Project to assist children beneficiaries in estate matters with the Master’s Office rolled out to all provinces.

·                     Implemented five agency agreements to serve rural courts.

·                     Exceeded its legal and non-legal training targets.

·                     Established civil units at 13 Justice Centres.

·                     Ensured a recruitment level of 96%, compared to 94% in 2009/10.

·                     Successfully implemented the OSD.

·                     Successfully continued with the implementation of the Leadership Development Programme for the second year.

·                     Wide area network of IT further enhanced by the rollout of the Virtual Private network platform.

·                     Spent 99.2% of the allocated budget (99.5% spent in 2009/10).

·                     Received an unqualified audit opinion for the past 10 years, with no matters of emphasis for the past five years.

·                     Has been accredited as a ‘Best Employer’ for the second year.

·                     The LASA Board is appraised by an external evaluator as being in the top quartile of similar institutions assessed and would rank as among the best of public sector assessed.


7.2.2.      Key challenges arising during 2010/11:

·                     The practitioner-per-court ratio remains a challenge (in the district courts, there is one practitioner-per-court but courts are only covered for four out of five days per week (83% coverage); in the regional courts, most courts are covered all 5 days of the week (96% coverage); and in the High Courts, coverage is as per the court roll). Ideally, there would be additional capacity to increase coverage to 100% in the district courts, 110% in the regional courts and 125% in the high courts, as well as greater relief capacity, for both improved case flow and to reduce the high caseloads of many practitioners.

·                     Expanding access, especially in rural areas, remains a challenge, although LASA has concluded agency agreements to increase access in remote rural areas. LASA has requested funding for the conversion of six existing satellite offices to full justice centres, establish one new justice centre and four new satellite offices to increase the national footprint.

·                     Although capacity to render civil legal aid services has increased, this service remains limited.

·                     The number of children assisted in criminal matters has reduced dramatically in the past year since the implementation of the Child Justice Act, possibly as a result of more children being diverted or not being arrested and charged by the police.

·                     Difficulties accessing clients for consultations and accommodation shortages resulting in consultations in court corridors.

·                     Contractual escalations have increased at rates that are higher than the macro budget increase, especially for office leases.


7.2.3.      Additional funding requests for the MTEF:




2012/13 (R)

2013/14 (R)

2014/15 (R)


Increase in practitioner per court ratio

41 900 785

44 414 832

47 079 722

133 395 339

Increased civil capacity

7 205 560

18 237 894

19 332 167

54 775 621

Expansion of the national footprint

17 000 000

12 720 000

7 865 200

37 585 200

IT infrastructure (upgrading of)

5 250 000

1 100 000

1 166 000

7 516 000

Total (R)

81 356 345

76 472 726

75 443 089

233 272 160


7.3.             Special Investigating Unit


7.3.1.      The SIU is an independent, statutory body that investigates corruption and maladministration and can institute civil legal action to correct any wrongdoing. Each investigation it conducts is mandated by a proclamation from the President.


7.3.2.      The SIU is funded by way of a transfer payment from the Vote. In 2010/11, the SIU received R171 million. The 2011/12 budget (of R193 million) provides for additional allocations for the MTEF for investigative capacity and inflation. The SIU also generates income by charging client departments for its investigations. In 2006/07, its projects accounted for 60% of its total income. This has decreased to 44% in 2010/11: In 2010/11, it generated revenue to the amount of R143.2 million.


7.3.3.      Expenditure at the SIU has increased from R199.1 million in 2007/08 to R301.1 million in 2010/11, at an average rate of 15%. The growth is largely due to a 68.5% increase in expenditure on goods and services in 2008/09 as a result of the appointment of consultants for the SIU’s organisational design process. Expenditure is expected to increase over the MTEF, at an average rate of 7.6%, to reach R375.2 million in 2013/14. This is largely because of spending on personnel as the SIU expands its establishment.


7.3.4.      The SIU’s strategic environment takes into account the following:


·                     In 2009/10, the SIU found itself largely dependent on partner funding. Given the global recession, this was risky. The SIU concluded an intensive organisational development process to better capacitate it and adopted a 3-5 year approach to strategic planning. A key focus was to position the SIU as the forensic service provider to the state and to increase projects and funding.

·                     In 2010/11, the SIU formed part of the new government initiatives to combat corruption. This has had a significant impact, increasing its workload and funding. The SIU has also aligned its strategic plan with outcomes-based approach of government and linked its work to Outcome 3 (Output 3) and Outcome 12 (Output 4).

·                     A major focus has been to build more capacity through recruitment and development initiatives to deal with investigations of corruption. It also sourced additional forensic investigators from the private sector as a short term intervention and skills transfer initiative.


7.3.5.      Overall, regarding performance, there has been a significant change in the SIU’s focus from small, multiple cases to fewer, complex, long term investigations into procurement. This coincides with government’s new focus on procurement irregularities. The SIU is participating in initiatives like the Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT), Multi-Agency Working Group on Procurement (MAWG) and the Special Anti-corruption Unit in the Department of Public Service and Administration (Wasps).


7.3.6.      Government has set a target of successfully convicting 100 people who have assets of more than R5 million obtained through illicit means. This is a difficult target to achieve as there have been approximately five such cases in the past 10 years. In 2010/11, there were 16 new proclamations – the most ever in a single year. Two proclamations relating to ongoing investigations were also extended.


7.3.7.      The following challenges were identified in 2010/11:

·                     The PFMA provides accounting officers with control of the investigation, disciplinary action, possible civil action or referral for criminal actions, and the implementation of recommendations. This can be a problem where the accounting officer fails to take action or is even implicated.

·                     Delays in amendments to the SIU’s enabling legislation that address, among others, the issue of the SIU’s locus standi in pursuing civil litigation, restricts the SIU’s overall impact.


7.3.8.      Additional funding requests for the MTEF:


The SIU has legal advice that prevents it from entering into new co-operation agreements, as the Special Investigating Unit Act is silent on this issue. For this year, the SIU can continue to receive payment for work done, provided that a proclamation exists and an agreement is already in place. It can also renew agreements that expire in the present financial year (2010/11). This is on the condition that there is a process to regularise the situation through an amendment to the Special Investigating Unit Act. Amending legislation has been drafted. At present, the SIU cannot enter into new co-operation agreements: This has led to loss of revenue - it was expecting to invoice an additional R90 million in 2011/12. The National Treasury has agreed to support the SIU providing R97 million additional funding for 2011/12 to compensate for the loss of revenue and to allow the SIU to take on additional work. The SIU, however, has requested that its baseline is increased by R150 million in the MTEF period to reduce reliance on funding from co-operation agreements and to allow it to increase capacity (200 new positions over the MTEF).


7.4.             South African Human Rights Commission

7.4.1.      The Commission received an allocated budget of R73 474 million for 2010/11. Additional funding of R894 000 and donor funding of R608 000 brought the budget to R74 958 million. R50.3 million (67%) of the Commission’s budget is spent on compensation of employees. The 2011 Budget sets out additional amounts for additional capacity in the Legal Services programme, improved conditions of service and municipal and accommodation charges - R6.17 million (2011/12), R10.16 million (2012/13) and R12.9 million (for 2013/14).


7.4.2.      Over the reporting period financial constraints have meant certain programmes have been put on hold including the acquisition of a new human resources system, a review of the performance management system and staff/management development initiatives. The recruitment for and filling of vacant positions were also suspended. The fact that the PAIA and PEPUDA mandate is largely unfunded continues to hamper delivery.


7.4.3.      Key achievements as reported by the Commission for 2010/11:


·                     In 2009/10 the Commission achieved only 52% of its strategic objectives. In 2010/11 this figure improved to 67% of strategic objectives.

·                     The Commission achieved an unqualified audit with no matters of emphasis. However, the Auditor-General raised concerns regarding the Commission’s performance targets.

·                     The SAHRC released the Seventh Economic and Social Rights (ESR) Report (2006-2009), which was submitted to Parliament in December 2010. The report focuses on an assessment of how far South Africa has come in attaining the Millennium Development Goals. The ESR reports have been criticised in the past. However, the seventh report appears to be much more analytical and points to a ‘conceptual misunderstanding by the government of its constitutional obligation to progressively realise economic and social rights.’

·                     The Commission published a Review of Equity and Child Rights (with UNICEF).

·                     In total, 5 626 complaints were handled during 2010/11. A total of 2 328 of the complaints were accepted as prima facie human rights violations and are current and active matters under investigation. The total number of complaints that were finalised during this period was 886. Complaints typically relate to equality (30%); human dignity (25%); just administrative action (20%); arrested, detained and accused persons (15%); and labour disputes (10%). The Commission litigated 24 matters in the Equality Courts.

·                     Relocation of the Head Office and the Gauteng Provincial Office to new premises in Braamfontein by end March 2011. This will save the Commission approximately R1.5 million each year.

·                     More than 1000 public officials were trained on the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA).

·                     Noteworthy interventions include: Xenophobic attacks (post-World Cup); sexual-orientation matters involving DIRCO; universal periodic review process; focus on the ratification of the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and engagement with national and provincial government on the ‘open toilets’ cases,


7.4.4.      Key challenges for 2010/11:

·                     Current administrative challenges include the restructuring process (to be completed by March 2012), financial constraints and human resource constraints related to the restructuring and to skills.

·                     Substantive challenges identified include the tendency for government to approach human rights by focussing on meeting the indicators (compliance-driven), rather than the ensuring that the right, itself, is fulfilled.

·                     Government’s failure to respond to requests for information in terms of section 184(3) of the Constitution (for the ESR report).


7.4.5.      Additional funding requests for the MTEF:


·                     A restructuring process was initiated in September 2010 resulting in the development of a new mission, vision and strategic plan and the realignment of the Commission’s structure. The implementation of the new structure, which creates 33 new positions will commence during the third quarter of this fiscal year. The majority of the new posts will be based in the Commission’s provincial offices and relate primarily to the provision of legal services. The total cost of creating the 33 new positions, amounts to R15 871 969.

·                     The settlement of the outstanding debt to the Institute for Democracy in Africa (IDASA) stemming from the European-Union (EU) -funded project referred to as CSAP (to which the Human Rights Commission, Public Protector and the Commission on Gender Equality are parties). The Commission has already engaged with the Deputy Ministers of Finance and Justice and have been advised that assistance will be provided to settle the debt of R1.2 million.

·                     The Human Rights Commission was appointed as the Chairperson of the Network of African National of Human Rights Institutions (NANHRI). The Chairpersonship will commence in October 2011 and run for a period of two years. In order to successfully manage the responsibilities associated with this prestigious position, additional funding amounting to R1 833 700 is required.

·                     The Human Rights Advocacy Programme is primarily responsible for discharging the Commission’s ‘promotion mandate’. It currently has a budget of R551 400, which translates into R50 000 for each Province for all advocacy awareness interventions for the whole financial year. Funds to the value of R2 million is needed for two specific outputs of the Human Rights Advocacy Programme, namely: Training of Trainers and Human Rights Month Campaign. (Training of Trainers - Additional funds to the value of R700 000 will be required to conduct Training of Trainers for Community Development Workers and other providers of human rights in rural communities in 10 offices of the Commission. Human Rights Month Campaign - Additional funds of R1.3 million are required to enable the Commission to design, plan and implement high impact, nation-wide Human Rights Month Campaigns to commemorate National Human Rights Day on March 21st, 2012.). Over the MTEF, the following additional funds are needed: R2 million for 2011/12; 2.5 million for 2012/13 and R3 million for 2013/14).

·                     The PAIA mandate requires R5.2 million for 2012/12 (R1 172 000 is needed for awareness and education; while monitoring and compliance requires R3 899 395).


7.4.6.      Additional funding requests for the MTEF:














Accommodation: Rentals


1 771

1 992

2 241

Video Conferencing








Central Registry






Security Services





Public Works

2 873




Civil Society Advocacy Programme

1 200





1 833




Advocacy Programme





Access to Information

5 250

5 565

5 899

6 253

Legal Services

2 300

2 438

2 584

2 739


15 872

20 004

21 205

22 477


30 529

31 620

33 717

35 943


7.5.             Public Protector


7.5.1.      Key achievements as reported by the Commission for 2010/11:

·                      Total of 16 251 complaints were received or initiated and 14 148 cases were finalized. 52 % of them were finalised within 1-3 months.

·                     The Public Protector published 41 reports during the year under review.

·                     A total of 616 outreach clinics were conducted out of an annual target of 720 clinics.

·                     The Public Protector had 102 radio slots out of a target of 40  and 48 newspaper articles out of a target of 40 were published.

·                     Hosted the Public Protector Good governance Week.


7.5.2.      Key challenges for 2010/11:

·                     Investigative capacity remains the main challenge. Additional investigators were appointed and 18 Senior Investigator posts are to be advertised. The shortage of investigative capacity impacts on attempts to balance rigor with promptness in the conduct of investigations or implementation of alternative dispute resolution.

·                     Staff retention remains a problem. Remuneration is the main reason given in exit interviews. The internal strategy alignment process is still at a rudimentary phase.

·                     Finalisation of rules required.


7.5.3.      The Public Protector reported the following spending pressures for the MTEF:

·                     Increased investigative capacity.

·                     Operating lease expenses.

·                     Implementation of integrated human resources and financial management and accounting systems.

·                     Administrative expenses

·                     Implementation of approved structure.


7.5.4.      Support requested from Parliament

·                     Support for additional resources, including the Deputy Public Protector’s remuneration package, OSD-review for investigators, expanded footprint and review of number and remuneration for outreach facilitators.

·                     Support of structure currently being reviewed by DPSA.

·                     Facilitate conclusion of PP rules process.

·                     Holding to account organs of state, who unjustifiably do not implement PP’s findings made in terms of section 182(1) of the Constitution.

·                     Assistance with outreach by including PP in parliamentary public participation projects.


7.5.5.      Additional funding requests for the MTEF:




2012/13 (R’000)

2013/14 (R’000)

2014/15 (R’000)

Additional capacity

28 041

42 004

50 818



Part 4


8.       Committee’s observations


The Committee has a number of observations and recommendations after considering the annual reports of the Department, the NPA, LASA, SIU, PP and SAHRC. These also take into account the detailed information from the Department received in the year that has past:


Department of Justice and Constitutional Development for 201011


8.1.             The Committee has broadly categorised its observations as relating either to the Department’s operations and governance, and to performance. The Committee is, however, acutely aware of the close relationship between operations and performance – and, in that sense, the distinction is ‘artificial’.


8.2.             The Department’s Annual Report for 2010/11, although much clearer and accessible in presentation than in 2009/10, has several shortcomings: A specific concern is that important data relating to court performance, found in previous annual reports, appears to have been been omitted (For example, there is no data for the children’s courts, sexual offence cases, Constitutional Court cases, Supreme Court of Appeal cases, the labour courts and the land courts). Overall, this makes the Committee’s assessment of the Department’s performance for 2010/11 considerably more difficult. The Committee also notes the inconsistency in the collation of information between the Department and other departments and institutions within the Cluster, which makes it very difficult for the Committee to assess


8.3.             The Committee has previously stated that the Department’s strategic and operational planning needed considerable refinement: ‘Overall, within the context of the Department’s strategy there should be a limited, more definable, measureable set of targets with clearer deadlines that are prioritised and that serve as a “building block” to develop greater capacity to identify and more effectively achieve other targets within its mandate’ (BRRR, 2010). The shift to an outcomes-based approach to service delivery, has required that the Department rethink its strategy to comply with the new Treasury requirements for ‘outcomes-based’ strategic plans and annual performance plans. This should address the Committee’s concerns. The Committee has already considered the Department’s strategic plan for 2011-2016. The Committee notes that the Department’s annual performance plan for 2011/12 is supposed to have performance indicators that adhere to SMART principles but has yet to formally consider it, as it had not been tabled when the Committee considered the budget. (There was some consideration, however, of the annual plan at the 1st Quarterly review in August 2011).


8.4.             The Committee also notes that the Auditor-General identified the quality of performance information audited as a problem. The Department acknowledges this and has reported that it has plans to address the problem. The Committee believes that the usefulness and reliability of performance information is strongly related to the soundness of the strategic planning, monitoring and reporting systems. Where planned and reported targets and indicators are not sufficiently clear, the likelihood is that information collected and reported may not be useful as a measure of performance.


Governance and operational issues


8.5.             The Committee notes the recurring qualified audit opinion, although it acknowledges the Department’s ongoing efforts to address the underlying causes. The qualification continues to relate to the adequacy of the Third Party Funds’ financial and control system and to irregular expenditure.


8.5.1.        Management of Third Party Funds. The Department indicated in 2010 that it did not have the necessary knowledge and capacity to prepare annual financial statements for the Third Party Funds. The Department processes approximately nine million payments to beneficaries annually to the value of almost R3 billion. Third Party Funds are administered at more 490 locations with 501 bank accounts. Each of these locations has its own JDAS 4 (Justice Deposit Account System) database and is responsible for all aspects of accounting. JDAS 4 was built as an administrative and not a financial management or accounting system, with resulting reporting challenges. The Department’s strategy to achieve a ‘no-audit qualification’ for the Funds led to the appointment of a service provider to initially prepare baseline annual financial statements (baseline financial statements for 2009/10 and 2010/11 are being prepared, with a submission date of 31 October 2011) and then to assist the Department to prepare its own annual financial statements for the Funds for 2011/12. A skills assessment was done of staff working in the Third Party Funds environment and various training interventions launched. In addition, to improve service delivery to beneficiaries and to reduce the volume of cash payments, an EFT payment system was introduced at court level.


The Committee notes that the legal status of the Third Party Funds has not been resolved. The Department had reported that it would introduce legislation for the separate administration of the Funds. After informally consulting with National Treasury, it was advised that a trading entity would be enough to ensure that the Fund becomes a separate reporting entity. The Committee was told that a request to Treasury to establish a trading entity was forwarded in November 2010, but despite discussions in March 2011 and subsequent reminders there has been no formal response. The Department told the Committee at the 2011 Budget briefing that it has reverted to its original plan to bring legislation in order to finally resolve the Fund’s status.


8.5.2.        Irregular expenditure. The Committee notes that Auditor-General’s qualification relating to irregular expenditure: Inadequate systems for identifying and recognising all irregular expenditure contributed to a situation where the completeness of the irregular expenditure could not be assured. Irregular expenditure to the value of R420.7 million also featured as a matter of emphasis relating mainly to supply chain management. These all point to weakness in the internal audit function. The Auditor-General commented that while the Department has an internal audit function, its capacity needs increasing, especially as the Department operates from more than 500 locations.


8.5.3.        On the qualified audit opinion, the Committee specifically recommends that, by 20 November 2011:

·                     The Department provide written details of all its audit action plans.

·                     The Director-General provide the Committee with details of the formal commitments made to address the audit findings.

·                     The Department provide a progress report on how far the Department has come in drafting legislation to resolve the status of the Funds.

·                     The Department detail its plan to increase capacity within its internal audit component.

·                     The Department provide it with written details of initiatives to improve the quality of performance information and progress made.


8.6.             Vacancies in critical posts


The Committee is aware that vacancies in critical areas (such as finance, risk management, internal audit and strategy) are an ongoing problem for the Department. For some time, the Committee has expressed its concern at the high vacancy rate within the Department, although it acknowledges that overall there has been some progress – the vacancy rate is 9.8%, if the judiciary is excluded). However, unacceptably high vacancy rates at the senior management level and in critical occupations remain. Given the Department’s focus on achieving a ‘no qualification’ audit opinion by 2012/13, the Committee is especially concerned at the high vacancy rate in the Chief Financial Officer’s office, which was at 24% at the end of February 2011. It welcomes the appointment of three Chief Directors to that office in April 2011. The Committee requests that the Department report to it in writing by 20 November 2011 on progress made in filling vacancies at senior management level and in critical areas; its retention strategy; and interventions to increase the pool of skilled capacity and to ensure that officials are adequately trained, especially in the regions.


8.7.             Performance agreements


The Committee notes that not all senior managers entered into performance agreements for 2010/11, contrary to the relevant Public Service regulation. The absence of performance agreements creates difficulties for officials, who are unclear about the standard of performance expected and creates difficulties for leadership when holding officials to account. The Committee requests that the names of the managers are provided, together with an explanation for this failure and whether there has been any consequential disciplinary action by 20 November 2011. Were performance bonuses paid in the absence of a performance contract? What steps, if any, have been taken to ensure that all senior managers sign their performance contracts for 2011/12?


8.8.             Infrastructure and maintenance of facilities


The Committee has observed first hand the state of disrepair that prevails at many courts. It has learn that, in some cases, working conditions are so compromised by the state of the buildings that officials are unable to carry out their duties effectively and efficiently. The Committee established that the Department of Public Works is responsible for maintenance of facilities, although court managers do have a role to play in the daily maintenace of courts. The Committee felt that maintenance of courts and facilities might be better achieved were the Department to assume responsibility and would like the Department to investigate this possibility. The Department informed the Committee that this item was a concern for all departments within the JCPS Cluster and is being addressed at that level: A proposal is being prepared for submission to Cabinet on how to move forward. The Committee requests a written report on progress made by 20 November 2011.


The Committee is sympathetic to the Department’s request for R 1.2 billion in additional funds for the MTEF period for the repair and maintenance programme and to provide for persons with disabilities.


8.9.             Additional accommodation


The Committee has been briefed on the events surrounding the lease of the SALU and Birhati buildings in Pretoria, resulting in fruitless and wasteful expenditure. The Committee believes that the Department should investigate to determine where responsibility lies for the wasted costs and, if appropriate, hold the officials to account and requests a written report on this by 20 November 2011.


The Committee, overall, can understand the rationale for consolidating operations at its Head Office - the Department’s head office component is currently occupied in three different buildings in Pretoria. There are also associated efficiency gains in terms of reduced security and infrastructure costs. It understands that the Department’s Head Office will be accommodated in the refurbished SALU building, which will be ready for occupation shortly (November 2011). The Committee asks that it is provided with a progress report on how far the relocation has come at the next quarterly meeting in January – February 2012.


8.10.          Security at courts


Security at Courts has become a high priority as a result of increased criminal incidents relating to the Department’s property and personnel. The Department has calculated that it needs R300 million for improved security for courts and justice offices over the MTEF. The Committee shares the Department’s concern and is supportive of the Department’s bid for this amount. It, however, feels that it should be given more information on security at courts, and requests that the Department provide it with the necessary information in writing. It also urges the Department to look at measures to increase co-ordination and collaboration with the SAPS to improve security at courts.


The Committee recommends that –


·                     The Department is given additional funding in the amount of R300 million for security for courts and justice offices.

·                     The Department brief it on security at courts and other justice facilities before the end of November 2011. The Committee is specifically interested in hearing of the extent of the problem, how the Department is addressing the problem at present at identified high risk courts, as well as its plan to secure all its courts and other facilities adequately in future.


8.11.          Information Technology (IT) infrastructure


The Committee’s learnt on its oversight visit to Manguang that the Department’s IT systems are extremely slow, affecting turnaround in service delivery The Committee acknowledges that the Department has indicated that budget cuts have affected its IT maintenance plan and that its IT infrastructure urgently needs upgrading. (Additional funds have been allocated for upgarding IT infrastructure for 2012/13 and 2013/14). The Committee requests that the Department provides it with a detailed report on the nature of the problems, with its IT maintenance plan by 20 November 2011.


8.12.          Integration of IT systems


The Committee is dismayed that, despite the recommendations of the Criminal Justice Review and the Seven-point plan, intended to address blockages in the system, the IT systems of the JCPS Cluster departments continue to operate in silos. The intention was that these sysems be integrated to allow for seamless tracking of offenders as they progress through from arrest to conviction (and beyond). The Department conceded that this is a challenge, that sufficient progress has not been made, and that it intends to address the problem. The Committee requests that the Department provide it with a detailed action plan, together with targets and timeframes, by 20 November 2011.




8.13.          Truth and Reconciliation Commission process


Parliament approved assistance measures for victims identified in terms of the Truth and Reconciliation process. The Committee, however, has been extremely disappointed at the Department’s ongoing delay in giving effect to those assistance measures which it must implement and had said so on previous occasions. The Committee welcomes the progress this year in identifying and locating beneficiaries, while some regulations are close to being finalised. But the lack of finality - after so long – remains unacceptable. The Committee requests that the Department provide it with a comprehensive written report of how many beneficiaries have been and still need to be reached, as well as on progress made to resolve the outstanding recommendations (with targets and timeframes). In addition, the Committee would like to be informed of the progress relating to the finalisation of related Regulations. The Department should also indicate any difficulties it may be experiencing in obtaining the necessary co-operation from other roleplayers. The Department should also be prepared to brief the Committee on progress at the next quarterly meeting early next year (January – March 2012).


8.14.          State litigation and briefing patterns


Litigation against the state has increased significantly recently for reasons that include citizens being more aware of their rights, opportunism, a fragmented approach to the management of state litigation and the absence of a framework making use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. The Committee learnt recently that the Department also has difficulty in collecting monies it disburses on behalf of client departments in legal proceedings and is extremely concerned at the negative effect this has on the Department’s budget. The Committee requests that it receives a full written report on monies disbursed on behalf of other departments and the progress made in recovering these costs.


The Committee believes that the absence of a policy framework to manage state litigation creates many problems, and has expressed itself accordingly in the past. In addition, the Committee remains of the view that it is difficult to address briefing patterns to ensure representativity and encourage the passing of knowledge and skills from senior to junior practitioners, in the absence of a specific policy on this that applies to all state departments conducting litigation. The Committee was not especially satisfied by the response to previous requests for the names of practitioners being briefed and, specifically, requests that this is provided, in writing, by 20 November 2011.


8.15.          Vulnerable groups


8.15.1.    Increased access to justice of women, children and persons with disabilities is a priority of government and of the Department. As such, the Committee welcomes the prioritisation of maintenance matters in the Department’s revised strategic plan and the many planned initiatives to ensure improvement in the delivery of maintenance services – Committee members receive many requests for assistance from the public relating to maintenance. The maintenance statistics for 2010/11, however, show not only an increase in enquiries, but a worrying failure to meet their targets, indicating a decline in performance. Even where targets are met, service delivery is not good enough: In the Committee’s view, having to wait two hours in a queue to be helped with a maintenance matter, is too long. The Committee, therefore, asks that the Department provide details of its turnaround strategy, with timeframes and targets, as well as progress to date, by 20 November 2011.


8.15.2.    The Committee notes that there has been an increase in the number of domestic violence cases struck off the roll accompanied by a decline in the number of protection orders issued. The Committee is interested in the explanation for this trend. Has the Interdepartmental Domestic Violence Task Team been able to identify specific challenges that may be contributing factors? The Committee asks that the Department provide the information requested by 20 November 2011.


8.15.3.    The Committee is not satisfied overall with progress in implementing the Child Justice Act or that it is receiving adequate attention from the Department’s leadership. LASA reports a dramatic decrease in the number of child accused being assisted, which is puzzling, especially as the NPA reports only a slight increase in children being diverted. In addition, there is a recent newspaper report that alleges serious shortcomings in the collection of data. In terms of spending, child justice does not appear to be a priority - the Committee also learnt on a recent oversight visit to Manguang that the One-Stop Child Justice there, which is internationally acclaimed as a model of best practice, receives minimal funding support from the Department. The Committee intends to call the Department with other role-players before the end of this quarter to brief it on the progress to date and on any specific challenges experienced. The Department is requested also to provide a written report on the diversion statistics.


8.15.4.    Dedicated sexual offence courts. The Committee has expressed its view previously that sexual offence matters require specialist skills and that, for this reason, it supports dedicated sexual offence courts. The trend, however, has been to ‘mainstream’ these courts with the result that there are now only six dedicated courts. The Committee does not properly understand the reasons for the reduced number of dedicated courts, nor the resistance among role-players to the need for specialisation. (The Committee has been told that the judiciary is not in favour of specialist courts, as it can lead to unequal provision of services and for reasons of career-pathing.) The Committee feels that it should look at the management of sexual offence case in a more focused way. It intends to meet with all role-players in the next quarter.


8.15.5.    In addition, the Committee requests that the Department specifically provide a break-down of expenditure (against planned expenditure) for vulnerable groups quarterly.


8.16.          Judicial training


The Committee was told that challenges in establishing the South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI) had severely impacted on training of judicial officers. This includes the training of magistrates, who previously received training at Justice College. This practice changed in April 2011 when the responsibility for training magistrates was transferred to SAJEI. The Committee, however, was told, during discussions with the Magistrate’s Commission and with the Judges of the Supreme Court of Appeal in September 2011 that, in fact, there is no judicial training programme at present. The Committee has subsequently heard that training is taking place. The consequences for the delivery of justice services are potentially grave, as there are many newly implemented Acts, such as the Child Justice Act that require judicial training. In addition, given the problems that magistrates and judges appear to have in gaining access to research materials, such as cases and legal textbooks, the need to ensure that there is ongoing training, becomes more critical. Of course, another function of SAJEI is to drive a transformation agenda through continuous training of incumbents and aspirant judges – this cannot occur while the Institute is not operational. The Committee requests that the Department clarify the current situation regarding the training of magistrates; provide an explanation of the difficulties being experienced in establishing SAJEI, as well as an action plan to address the problems (with targets and timeframes). This is requested by 20 November 2011.


8.17.          Training of magistrates to adjudicate in Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) matters


The Committee understands that, despite the Rules allowing magistrate courts to hear PAIA cases having come into operation, a lack of training as required by the Act has prevented these courts from being used to adjudicate PAIA matters. The Committee asks the Department to explain why this is so and what remedial action it is taking.


8.18.          Resourcing of judicial officers


The Committee notes that LASA’s practitioners and the NPAs’ prosecutors have access to up-to-date case law and law reports but that judicial officers, especially magistrates, do not have similar resources available to them. At present, the amount allocated for library services is approximately R60 million. The Committee has been told that the Constitutional Court has a ‘state of the art’ library, many librarians and researchers. It understands that some of this is funded by trust monies, but the resources at its disposal, when compared to those available at most other superior and lower courts in this country, appear disproportionate. The Committee understands that the comparatively large allocation to the Constitutional Court subprogramme is also to fund the new Office of the Chief Justice but believes that, even so, care should be taken to ensure that all courts have sufficient resources so that their judicial officers are equipped with the necessary legal reference materials to perform their functions effectively and efficiently and are, therefore, have adequate research and library support services for them to perform their duties optimally. The Committee feels strongly that there needs to be funds for this. It also requests that the Department provide it with a written action plan (with targets and timeframes) addressing the needs of judicial officers for up-to-date statutes and law reports, as well as related support services (researchers and librarians) by 20 November 2011.


8.19.          Masters’ services


The Committee is pleased at the appointment (finally) of a Chief Master of the High Court. It looks forward to receiving regular updates at the quarterly meetings from the Chief Master of initiatives to to ensure that delivery Masters’ services is increasingly more efficient and effective. The Committee is also interested that there is to be a revised policy for the appointment of liquidators and would like to be kept updated on this.


8.20.          Traditional Courts Bill


The Committee requested that the Traditional Courts Bill be introduced in the National Council of Provinces. This has not happened yet as a result of procedural diffciulties. In the meantime, the Committee has learnt that traditional leaders require letters of conferment to allow them to adjudicate matters but that recently these have not been issued. The Committee requests the Minister to look into this urgently.


9.       National Prosecuting Authority


9.1.             The Committee congratulates the Director-General: Justice and Constitutional Development for the excellent effort to ‘turnaround’ the audit outcome.


9.2.             The Committee is reminded that the Thuthuzela Care Centres are largely donor-funded; as are the NPA staff there (there are now 27 TCCs, compared to 20 in 2009/10). Given the priority on combating violent crime, especially sexual violence against women and children, the Committee fails to understand how the establishment of more TCC’s can form an integral part of the justice sector’s strategy, when this is an unfunded mandate. The Committee strongly supports the NPA’s request for additional funding of R75.3 million for the rollout of more TCC’s and the institutionalisation of donor-funded positions, as well as an additional R12 million of the MTEF for training on sexual offences, child justice, domestic violence, human trafficking and maintenance legislation.


10.   Legal Aid South Africa


10.1.          The Committee congratulates LASA on receiving an unqualified audit for the past 10 years, with no matters of emphasis for the past-six years. Once again, LASA impressed the Committee greatly with its strategic vision and planning, management of resources and considerable achievements.


10.2.          The Committee supports the need for more practitioners to increase coverage in all courts. Recently, the Committee conducted oversight of courts in the Free State, where it was made clear that insufficient capacity (including relief capacity) has a considerable adverse effect on case-flow, contributing to backlogs and, generally, to delays in the criminal justice system.


10.3.          The Committee also supports LASA’s goal of expanding expand its civil work and impact litigation, despite the financial constraints that it faces in this regard.


10.4.          LASA has been extremely innovative in expanding its reach. It has launched a call centre with toll-free number, which provides free legal advice to everyone, regardless of means. The Committee welcomes this, and would like to be kept informed of the impact that the call centre is having, as well as any challenges that the LASA may experience, if any.


10.5.          The Committee notes the sharp decrease (about 50%) in the number of children being assisted. As research has not been done into why this is the case, the Committee is unable to comment on the significance of the trend. However, it would be interested in establishing why the decline and whether this is a positive development. It intends to closely monitor all data relating to child justice and, in the new year, will call a meeting with all role-players to evaluate the second year of the Child Justice Act being implemented.


10.6.          The Committee supports the LASA’s aim to reach to the rural poor. In addition, LASA has entered into agency agreements to service remote courts and co-operation agreements that will expand its national footprint. The Committee is interested in how effective these are and would like to be informed of developments at quarterly meetings.


10.7.          The Committee welcomes LASA’s agreement to look into expanding its services to provide support in maintenance disputes.


10.8.          The Committee wishes to thank Judge Mlambo, whose term of office is due to expire shortly, for his outstanding contribution to the provision of legal aid services. With Judge Mlambo as Chairperson of the Board, LASA has become a centre of excellence. The Committee is extremely grateful and his presence will be sorely missed.


10.9.          The Committee therefore recommends that -

·                     LASA is provided an additional R133 million and R54.7 million in the MTEF period to improve its practitioner capacity and to continue to increase its civil work, respectively.

·                     LASA is allocated an additional R37.5 million over the MTEF period to expand its national footprint, making its services more accessible.

·                     LASA receives an additional R7.5 million over the MTEF period for the upgrade of its IT servers.

·                     LASA continue to provide information quarterly on:

  • How implementation of the Child Justice Act has affected it, and any other observations it may wish to make on this.
  • The co-operation and agency agreements concluded and their impact on improving access to services.


11.   Special Investigating Unit


11.1.          The Committee commends the SIU for the exceptional work it is doing in tackling fraud and corruption within government.


11.2.          The Committee congratulates the SIU on its unqualified audit.


11.3.          The Committee is concerned at the levels of fraud and corruption in government departments and other bodies, suggested by the SIU’s workload. It agrees with the SIU that it is encouraging that the government has accepted that corruption is a problem. The fact that targets were set for the JCPS cluster reveal determination to root out this problem.


11.4.          The Committee is pleased to see the capacity expansion and the range of multi-disciplinary skills at the SIU. However, the Committee is concerned that a large number of employees are employed on a contract-basis.


11.5.          The Committee understands that the Justice Department is bringing legislation to amend the SIU’s enabling legislation to address any challenges when it pursues civil litigation to make recoveries. It intends to follow up with the Department precisely when the amending legislation will be tabled.


11.6.          The Committee learnt that the SIU is unable to enter into new co-operation agreements, as the Special Investigating Unit Act is silent on this issue. Amending legislation has been drafted but, at present, the SIU cannot enter into new co-operation agreements: This has led to loss of revenue - it was expecting to invoice an additional R90 million in 2011/12. The National Treasury has agreed to support the SIU providing R97 million additional funding for 2011/12 to compensate for the loss of revenue and to allow the SIU to take on additional work. The SIU, however, has requested that its baseline is increased by R150 million in the MTEF period to reduce reliance on funding from co-operation agreements and to allow it to increase capacity (200 new positions over the MTEF).


11.7.          The Committee supports the SIU’s request for additional to increase its baseline allocation for the medium term by R150 million. Although the exact amount that is lost through fraud and corruption in the public sector is unknown, estimates place the amount at approximately R30 billion each year. The consequences of the loss of this money are significant, impacting on funds available for service delivery and contributing to loss of investor confidence with a ‘knock on’ effect to the economy, job creation, etc. The demand for the SIU’s service testifies to a willingness to tackle problem. The Committee notes that at present the SIU’’s investigative capacity is stretched, with plans to expand its establishment in the MTEF period. For the SIU to do this, it needs assurance that it can pay its permanent staff establishment. (The Committee notes that, at present, a large number of staff is employed on a contract-basis, which is largely because of the uncertain nature of project-funding). The Committee agrees that co-operation agreements, while providing useful additional income, are not sufficiently reliable, and that the SIU would need to continue to employ contract staff to supplement its capacity. This potentially has adverse implications for case management should contract workers leave in the middle of an investigation and for the development of ‘in-house’ forensic and investigative skills.


11.8.          The Committee will also follow-up with the Department on when it is the necessary amending legislation is likely to be introduced.


12.   South African Human Rights Commission


12.1.          The Committee congratulates the Commission on receiving an unqualified audit opinion for 2010/11. It acknowledges that capacity constraints remain a challenge for the Commission, and that budget plays a significant role in this regard. The Committee commends the Commission on its efforts to save costs. It also congratulates the Commission on its 7th Socio-Economic Report and Review of Equity and Child Rights.


12.2.          The Committee will also engage with the Office on Institutions Supporting Democracy and Related Institutions in the Deputy-Speaker’s Office to clarify its role in supporting these institutions.


12.3.          The Committee recommends that:

·                     The Commission brief it on its Report on Access to Information separately.

·                     Consideration is given to identifying ways to generally increase support for the Commissions work, especially where there is non-compliance by government departments with their reporting obligations.

·                     The additional resources be allocated to it to be able to deliver on its mandate.


13.   Public Protector


13.1.          The Committee congratulates the Public Protector on its unqualified audit opinion.


13.2.          The Committee was told that the PP needs more investigators and to improve access to its services by expanding its footprint in the medium term. On the matter of opening more offices, the PP informed the Committee that people prefer to bring their cases in person. This is compounded by high illiteracy rates and a strong oral tradition. The Committee acknowledges the excellent work done and the importance of the PPSA’s interventions in making a difference and to improved service delivery. It, however, feels that, given the scarcity of resources, the Public Protector needs to investigate alternative ways of expanding the PPSA’s footprint.


13.3.          The Committee intends considering the adjustment of the Deputy Public Protector’s salary as soon as a mutually convenient date can be arranged (before the end of the year). Provision may need to be made in the budget allocation for increased funding for this item.


13.4.          The Committee will meet with the Public Protector before the end of the year to consider the Public Protector’s Rules.


13.5.          The Committee needs more information on the request for additional funding should OSD be applied to PPSA staff in the manner proposed and the implications for the medium term.



Part 5


14.    Summary of Department’s reporting requirements


Reporting matter

Action required


Audit outcomes - strategy and action plan to address audit outcome, including:

·         Details of audit action plan.

·         Details of formal commitments to address audit findings.

·         Report on status of legislation to address legal status of TPFs.

·         Action plan to strengthen internal audit component.

·         Detailed progress report of strategy to improve quality of performance information.

(See paragraphs 8.4 and 8.5)

Written report



20 November 2011


At next quarterly meeting in January – March 2012 (see Committee programme)

Vacancies and increased skills base: Action plan to address vacancies at senior management level and in critical occupations and retention plan; and interventions to increase skills within Department, especially in regions.

(See paragraph 8.6)

Written report with targets and timeframes

20 November 2011

Details of managers who failed to sign performance contracts and details of remedial action taken for 2011/12.

Have any of these cases been taken up as grievances.

Were performance bonuses paid in absence of performance contract?

(See paragraph 8.7)

Written report with targets and timeframes

20 November 2011

Progress report on feasibility of Department assuming responsibility for maintenance and repair of buildings.

(paragraph 8.8)

Written report

20 November 2011

Report on investigation of responsibility for wasted costs for SALU and Birhati buildings leases (see paragraph 8.9)

Written report

20 November 2011

Relocation of Department’s Head Office to SALU building – progress report on relocation (paragraph 8.9).

Written progress report (with targets and timeframes)



20 November 2011



At next quarterly meeting in January-March 2012. (refer to Committee programme)

Strategy and action plan to address security at courts (see paragraph 8.10.

Written report

20 November 2011

IT infrastructure – Explanation of IT problems/challenges and written plan to address IT maintenance (see paragraph 8.11).

Written report with targets and timeframes

20 November 2011

JCPS IT integration – Detailed strategy and action plan with targets and timeframes (see paragraph 8.12)

Written report (with targets and timeframes)

20 November 2011

Strategy and action plan to address the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (see paragraph 8.13)

Written report 




20 November 2011



At next quarterly meeting in January-March 2012. (refer to Committee programme)

State litigation – Details of monies disbursed on behalf of client departments and monies recovered (see paragraph 8.14)

Written report

20 November 2011




Briefing patterns - Details of legal practitioners briefed by the Department in state litigation (see paragraph 8.15.)

Written report

20 November 2011

Maintenance – Strategy and action plan maintenance turnaround plan (with targets and timeframes) (see paragraph 8.15.1.)

Written report

20 November 2011

Domestic violence – written report on finding of interdepartmental domestic violence task team (see paragraph 8.15.2)

Written report

20 November 2011

Child Justice – Progress plan for implementation of Child Justice Act (see paragraph 8.15.3)

Meeting with roleplayers



See committee programme


At next quarterly meeting (January – March 2012)

Strategy and action plan for improved management of sexual offence cases (see paragraph 8.15.5 )

Briefing together with roleplayers

Refer to Committee programme

Spending plan on vulnerable groups  (see paragraph 8.15.5)

Written report


Quarterly Briefing

20 November 2011


At next quarterly meeting (January – March 2012)

Judicial training – Strategy and action plan to address magistrate’s training needs.

Strategy and action plan to train Magistrates in PAIA (see paragraph 8.17).

Progress report on establishment of SAJEI (see paragraph 8.16)

Written report

20 November 2011

Resourcing of judicial officers – strategy and action plan (with targets and timeframes) (see paragraph 8.18)

Written report

20 November 2011

Constitutional Hill and Justice Precinct public private partnerships – written strategy and action plan (with targets and timeframes) on progress made.

Written report

20 November 2011


15.   Summary of recommendations relating to requests for additional funding for the MTEF


15.1.          The Committee recommends that the Department of Justice be provided with the following additional funds for the MTEF period:

·                     Infrastructure for the maintenance and rehabilitation to provide for persons with disabilities.

·                     Improved security services.


Description (R million)










Security services including cash in transit






15.2.          In addition, after its recent oversight visits to the Supreme Court of Appeal and to the High Court and magistrates’ courts at Manguang, the Committee feels strongly that there should be additional funds for library materials so that judicial officers have access to up-to-date case law and law reports, as well as the legal text books necessary for them to make rulings and write judgements. After its visit to the Supreme Court of Appeal, the Committee also feels that presiding officers would benefit from additional capacity in the form of librarians and researchers. The Department has not specifically asked for additional funds for these items, but the Committee has learnt that an additional R20 million each year is needed. A further consideration is that there are funds for the appointment of more judges and magistrates: These judicial officers will also need to be equipped with the necessary ‘tools-of-trade’.


15.3.          The Committee recommends that the National Prosecuting Authority be provided with the following additional funds for the MTEF period to

·                     To pay curator fees and to increase capacity at the AFU.

·                     To roll out the TCCs and to institutionalise donor-funded positions.

·                     To provide training on the new sexual offences legislation, child justice, human trafficking, domestic violence and maintenance.











AFU – curator fees and increase in capacity

39 000

44 000

50 000

133 000

Roll out of TCC and institutionalisation of donor-funded positions

23 591

25 271

26 504

75 366

SOCA – training on Sexual Offences Act, Child Justice, Human Trafficking, Domestic Violence and Maintenance

4 500

3 500

4 000

12 000


15.4.          The Committee recommends that the Legal Aid South Africa be provided with the following additional funds for the MTEF period to:

·                     Increase its practitioner per court ratio.

·                     Increase capacity to undertake civil work.

·                     Expand its national footprint.

·                     Upgrade its IT infrastructure.



2012/13 (R’000)

2013/14 (R’000)

2014/15 (R’000)

MTEF (R’000)

Increase in practitioner per court ratio

41 900

44 414

47 079

133 395

Increased civil capacity

7 205

18 237

19 332

54 775

Expansion of the national footprint

17 000

12 720

7 865

37 585

IT infrastructure (upgrading of)


1 100

1 166

7 516


15.5.          The Committee recommends that the South African Human Rights Commission be provided with the following additional funds for the MTEF period to:

·                     Provide for additional capacity, mainly for the provinces (legal services) and related administrative costs.

·                     Expand the Legal Services programme.

·                     Fulfil the Commission’s advocacy mandate.

·                     Fulfil the Commission’s access to information mandate.









Accommodation: Rentals

1 771

1 992

2 241

Video Conferencing







Central Registry





Security Services




Advocacy Programme




Access to Information

5 565

5 899

6 253

Legal Services

2 438

2 584

2 739


20 004

21 205

22 477


15.6.          The Committee recommends that the baseline of the Special Investigating Unit be increase by R150 million in the MTEF period to reduce reliance on funding from co-operation agreements and also to allow it to increase capacity.



Report to be considered.