/ MEDIA STATEMENT / The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

The DA welcomes the ruling of the Constitutional Court judgement which vindicates the DA’s contention that amendments made to the South African Police Service Act through the South African Police Service Amendment Act 10 of 2012, the so called Hawks Act, does not meet constitutional muster.
       

       
Chief Justice, Mogoeng Mogoeng, in his judgment, instituted the severing of “those parts of specific sections that were found to be inconsistent with the constitutional obligation to create an anti-corruption unit that enjoys adequate structural and operational independence.”
   

   
The DA has long held that this is the only way to keep undue political influence at bay.
       

       
Chief amongst the DA’s concerns with the Act are:
       
       

1. The appointment process for the Head of the Hawks is still the overall responsibility of the Minister of Police – with the concurrence of Cabinet. The DA maintains that the appointment should involve a process of consultation with Parliament.
2. Should the Head of the Hawks step on the toes of senior politicians, the Minister of Police may provisionally suspend him or her. This does very little to encourage the Hawks to fight corruption without fear of retribution.
3. That financial independence is a prerequisite for independent anti-corruption efforts. The Hawks, like the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID), should have a separate budget vote and require greater financial independence to ensure that they will not face spurious budget cuts or resource constraints when zooming in on corrupt officials and politicians.

       
The Constitutional Court ruling vindicates the DA’s position with respect to the independence of the DPCI.
       

       
However, the DA continues to believe that the appointment process in its current incarnation still leaves considerable room for undue political influence by members of the ANC Executive. Indeed, as held by Cameron J in his minority judgment, by continuing to leave the power of appointment of the Head of the Directorate of Priority Crime Investigations (DPCI) solely at the Police Minister’s discretion, without recourse to the oversight of Parliament, will jeopardise the DPCI’s independence.
       

       
The DA will closely examine the judgment in order to fully remedy this state of affairs and finally bring credibility to the DPCI.

Issued by DA