We have detected that the browser you are using is no longer supported. As a result, some content may not display correctly.
We suggest that you upgrade to the latest version of any of the following browsers:
close notification
Date
: 29/06/2004
Source: Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
Title: J de Lange: Justice & Constitutional Development Dept
Budget Vote debate, NCOP
BUDGET SPEECH BY ADVOCATE JOHNNY DE LANGE, MP, DEPUTY MINISTER FOR
JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF
PROVINCES, Parliament, 29 June 2004
Chairperson
Honourable Ministers, Deputy Ministers and Members
Distinguished Guests
Comrades and Friends
INTRODUCTION
On this historic occasion please allow me to express my delight and
honour in taking part in this budget vote, my first in the National
Council of Provinces, as the Deputy Minister for Justice and
Constitutional Development. I also want to use this opportunity to
apologise for the absence of my Minister, Ms Brigitte Mabandla, MP,
who is not well.
This budget vote takes place against the background of ten years of
transformation of the justice system in a democratic South Africa.
Ten years ago, we took the first tentative steps on our journey to
a transformed justice system for all, by merging 11 different
justice departments, which included those from the former
Bantustans, into one national Department.
Those first small, tentative steps in the journey where significant
in charting a path towards a fair, impartial, effective and
accessible justice system geared towards the needs of all South
Africans irrespective of their backgrounds.
Let me remind all of us present here today, that government's role
is to serve the needs and aspirations of all of our people to the
best of its ability and in doing so to use the resources entrusted
to us by the people in the wisest and most responsible way
possible. It is therefore imperative for us to take measures that
would have a positive effect on the lives of the people of this
country.
Increasing capacity among the Department's personnel in order to
improve service delivery excellence, in line with the principles of
Batho Pele; extending access to justice to all, including the
poorest and most remote areas; re-engineering the maintenance
system and optimising other measures meant to alleviate the plight
of the poor and the marginalized and disadvantaged amongst us;
reducing case backlogs and improving court efficiency, and
transforming all our institutions, systems and procedures
administering justice; are all part and parcel of this basic
principle which we have embraced.
Key to the Government's Programme of Action, as outlined in the
President's State-of-the-Nation address, is also the duty to
improve the safety and security of all our citizens and
communities. For my Department, this duty is deeply rooted in the
provision of improved access to quality, swift and visible justice
through the transformation of our institutions and systems
administering justice. We remain committed to these
principles.
In my address, I will therefore also attempt to give feedback on
some of the notable achievements of the Department in the past
years in that regard.
RE AGA BOSWA
Because our court system is the core business of the Department and
the first point of contact with the public, massive resources and
effort have accordingly gone into transforming our court systems
and processes. Our aim is to ensure that our courts are operating
properly and therefore enable the judiciary and the prosecution to
perform their duties optimally.
Through the Re Aga Boswa project, processes at the Court Services'
Unit and court level have been re-engineered to streamline
organisational and management structures. The Re Aga Boswa project
is premised on a decentralised court services delivery model, which
ensures the devolution of decision-making powers to competent and
capable Court Managers for effectiveness and efficiency in the
court system. The benefit impact of the decentralised model is the
reduction of the turn around time on administrative decisions and
thereby leading to reduced case backlogs and case cycle times,
disciplined staff and optimal utilisation and management of
resources.
The preliminary results from the KwaZulu-Natal pilot project are
indeed encouraging, and once the model's best practices have been
analysed, assessed and refined, we will be rolling-out to other
parts of the country. Critical resources currently located at
regional offices will therefore be redeployed to courts. The
KwaZulu-Natal model will also assist in determining the cost
implication of the rollout of the model to other provinces.
ESTABLISHMENT OF IJS CO-ORDINATING COMMITTEES
Chairperson,
The Department is an active participant in the Justice, Crime
Prevention and Security Cabinet Cluster, as well as the Social
Cabinet Cluster. This is in recognition of the fact that to have a
positive effect on the lives of our people we need to integrate all
the services by various departments within the criminal justice
system. All our Department's activities are therefore in line with
the priorities of these clusters.
The JCPS Development Committee carried out a national survey among
related stakeholders to validate the establishment and to structure
and define the terms of reference of inter-departmental committees
at provincial, area and local levels. These committees are intended
to promote cooperation and coordination between cluster departments
and to facilitate and support the implementation of initiatives to
improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Integrated Justice
System.
The survey brought to light that, although numerous and divergent
forums currently exist between departments and related
stakeholders, some are operating effectively, others less so.
Comprehensive Terms of Reference for the establishment of IJS
Co-ordinating Committees at the various levels were developed. Work
sessions with provinces to discuss the establishment of such
Committees are now in the planning phase and will commence during
July and August 2004.
In the meantime existing co-operation structures are being utilised
to deal with both operational and strategic crosscutting
issues.
RATIONALISATION OF HIGH COURTS
Chairperson,
We are progressing towards getting rid of a fragmented court system
and have established, as policy, that no new courts should be
established outside the existing court structure.
After a long consultation process with relevant stakeholders,
including the judiciary, with regard to the rationalisation of the
High Courts, the Superior Courts Bill and the Constitutional
Amendment Bill were tabled before the Portfolio Committee on
Justice and Constitutional Development of the National Assembly
(the Justice Committee). As you would know, the names, seats and
jurisdictions of the High Courts are still reflective of the
apartheid state and the Bantustans.
The Superior Courts Bill is intended to rectify these discrepancies
and legacies we inherited, by rationalising the former Supreme
Court of South Africa and the High Courts of the former TBVC
States. It also deals with the integration of the Labour Court and
Labour Appeal Court into the High Court system. This
rationalisation will bring the court structure in line with our
post 1994 dispensation. The Department has already included in its
major capital works projects for next year, a High Court building
for both Limpopo and Mpumalanga provinces. Hopefully the Bill will
be passed by Parliament this year still.
RE-DEMARCATION OF REGIONAL COURTS
Discussions with Regional Court presidents and with inter-sectoral
representatives on the matter of the re-demarcation of District
Court jurisdictions have also been concluded. Following this,
Regional Court jurisdictions have been aligned with provincial
borders and as per proclamations implemented. However, two
districts from the Eastern Cape namely, Umzimkulu and Matatiele
(Maluti) were included in the area of jurisdiction of the newly
created regional division of KwaZulu-Natal. This was being done to
align the Regional Court jurisdictions with that of the Interim
High Court jurisdictions. However, this whole issue may have to be
re-assessed once the Superior Courts Bill has been adopted.
RE-DEMARCATION OF MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS
Chairperson,
An extensive consultation process, involving all stakeholders, on
the re-demarcation of magisterial district boundaries was carried
out at a provincial and area level. Access to courts by all sectors
of the population, existing court infrastructure and the need to
provide cost effective court services were the guiding principles
in this process.
Nine provincial reports have been finalised and the digital (GIS)
maps depicting all new boundaries and recommended changes are in an
advanced stage of completion.
The recommended changes to magisterial boundaries, if compatible
with the Superior Courts Bill, will be implemented in a phased
manner, as funds become available (the process is largely unfunded
at present). Where the change in a main seat of court has been
recommended, a thorough assessment of available facilities will be
carried out. An amount of R36 million has been requested from
National Treasury for the implementation of the re-demarcation
process as it is currently one of the Unfunded Priority Projects in
the 2004/05 financial year. Further amounts of R40 million and R44
million have been requested in the 2005/06 and 2006/07 financial
years respectively to finalise the process.
LAY ASSESSORS
As part of the Department's strategic imperative to improve access
to justice and increase public participation in the adjudication
process, the Lay Assessor system will be extended to all regional
divisions during the next three years. In line with Section 180 of
the Constitution, the Lay Assessor system places a strong emphasis
on community participation in the workings of the court system. In
1995, an assessors' co-ordination committee was appointed to
oversee pilot projects to increase the use of lay assessors in
criminal matters in the magistrate's courts. As a result of these
projects, the Committee recommended a suitable legislative
framework in order to facilitate the expansion of the lay assessor
system. The legislation that emerged from this process was the
Magistrates' Court (Assessors) Amendment Act, 1998. However,
because of lack of funds the system's implementation process has
been slow.
For the full implementation of the project to take place,
structures for the governance and coordination of lay assessors
will need to be established. Other challenges facing this
initiative relate to the funds required to compensate the
assessors, the office space that will be required at court houses;
the identification of assessors who fit the requirements; and the
possible delays in the finalisation of cases that the
implementation of the assessor system may lead to.
All the pilot sites in the Western Cape and Gauteng were visited by
the project manager during 2003, in order to assess first hand what
the challenges are and to plan for further roll-out. Regulations
relating to the Act have been developed and approved by National
Treasury. The concerns of stakeholders such as the Association of
Regional Court Magistrates of SA, the National Prosecuting
Authority and the Law Society of SA will be taken into
consideration before implementation. But the roll-out of the
project will not be stopped.
LEGAL AID BOARD
Chairperson,
The issue of the high costs of private legal services is of concern
to government in general and in to us as a Department in
particular. The cost of litigation means that the rich can freely
litigate while the poor, especially in civil cases, cannot enjoy
this right. The Legal Aid Board therefore plays an important role
in providing legal aid to indigent persons and legal representation
as provided by the Constitution, especially to accused persons
facing substantial prejudice.
The Legal Aid Board is consolidating the significant progress
already made in transforming itself into a stable, efficient,
effective and credible organisation by providing legal services
throughout the country. This has been largely achieved through
establishment of the 58 Justice centres, 27 satellite offices and
13 High Court Units.
The LAB has also deliberately shifted from the judicare method of
delivery of legal aid services to using public defenders. The
judicare method has proven to be unacceptably expensive and
cumbersome to administer. The Board has therefore continued to
reduce its reliance on Judicare (now only 18% of budget) and is
increasingly using the services from its Justice Centres in this
regard (56% of budget).
A major part of the criticism that was levelled against the LAB in
the past was the quality of the services provided.
But having moved to the justice centre model, the LAB is now able
to monitor the performance of its legal practitioners and is
therefore able to identify and respond to the gaps in service
delivery. The LAB has also initiated a host of training
programmes.
However, we will have to continue to monitor the system to ensure
that the quality of legal services delivered is consistently high.
In addition, the Department and the Legal Aid Board will also have
to look at alternate forms of legal assistance to the poor in place
of costly litigation - for this alternative dispute resolution
services may provide an answer.
The LAB has really drastically improved their services and we owe
the former chairperson, Judge Navsa and the continuing good work of
the present chairperson, Judge Mlambo, the CEO and the Board
appreciation for this.
CHILD JUSTICE BILL
Chairperson,
We are committed to strengthening the protection of vulnerable
persons in the criminal justice system.
As you are aware, the Child Justice Bill is presently being
finalised by the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional
Development. The Department has planned and costed inter-sectorally
for the implementation of the Bill. Work in this regard is
continuing and a holistic inter-sectoral document is being
finalised. To drive the process, monthly meetings of the
Inter-sectoral Child Justice Steering Committee, chaired by my
Department, are held.
In the meantime, Interim guidelines for children awaiting trial, to
divert them as much as possible for the mainstream criminal justice
system, have been implemented. This is in part inter-sectoral
monitoring and interventions to unblock bottlenecks in areas such
as KwaZulu-Natal.
A protocol has been drafted and implemented regarding children
awaiting placement in reform schools. We have further facilitated
the establishment of 3 One-Stop Child Justice Centres and mapped
out a process for the establishment of one in each province for
three years after the Child Justice Bill has been passed.
We believe that the approach of planning and budgeting for the
Child Justice Bill may serve as a model for every inter-sectoral
piece of legislation that comes before Cabinet and Parliament in
future.
MULTI-PURPOSE CENTRES
Chairperson,
We are committed to strengthening the protection of vulnerable
groups, such as women and children, in the criminal justice system.
The Department, together with other departments, is involved in
integrating and increasing the coverage of governmental services.
In addition to our efforts around the Child Justice One-Stop
Centres and we have established the Thuthuzela Care Centres for
victims of sexual offences.
The Multi-purpose centres involve the four core departments within
the criminal justice system, the South Africa Police Service,
Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, Department of
Correctional Services and the Department of Welfare, as well as,
the Department of Health. The Multi-purpose centres are aimed at
bringing services rendered by these departments to communities
where these services either do not exist, or do exist but are not
easily accessible, especially in rural areas, in an integrated way
and under one roof. These Centres are currently available in:
Thembalethu (George, Western Cape; Nsimbini (Umbumbulu, KZN);
Leboeng (Praktiseer, Limpopo); Khutsong (Oberholzer/Carletonville,
Gauteng); Tshidilamolomo (Molopo, NW) and Centane (Eastern
Cape).
Other centres receiving attention are: Thabong (Welkom, Free State)
and Augrabies (Kakamas, Northern Cape). In conclusion, we believe
that as we integrate more of our service delivery between major
role players in the criminal justice system, we will be able to
leave a larger footprint, which will touch more of our people in a
positive way.
I wish to thank everyone working in the Department for the good
work done over the past years. I recognise the Director General,
Advocate Vusi Pikoli, senior managers in the Department, leaders of
the judiciary, particularly the Chief Justice, Judge Arthur
Chaskalson, the magistracy, the National Prosecuting Authority and
of all the institutions linked to the Department.
Thank you!
Issued by: Department of Justice & Constitutional
Development
29 June 2004
Source: Department of Justice & Constitutional Development
(http://www.doj.gov.za)
Map
