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 battle against corruption took a step forward over the weekend when two associates of Stellenbosch University’s (SU) School for Public Leadership (SPL) <http://www.schoolofpublicleadership.co.za/> won the Hugh Glenister Challenge. Their plan to restructure the Hawks – the police’s directorate for priority crimes – was chosen as the best of 50 entries.

“We are ecstatic that the judges considered our work worthy enough to choose us as winners. It is an honour to be counted among the top thinkers in the anti-corruption field in South Africa,” Ms Liezl Munnik said. She and her colleague, Ms Nicolette Louw, won the nationwide competition for restructuring the Hawks.
The competition was sponsored by Hugh Glenister, businessman and anti-corruption activist, as part of his on-going battle around legislation pertaining to the Hawks. Glenister invited South Africans under the age of 30 to construct a framework to restructure the Hawks. Louw and Munnik accepted the challenge under the leadership of Erwin Schwella, professor in Public Leadership at the SPL.

“The work of Louw and Munnik is of an exceptionally high standard. We are proud of our association with them. Their work clearly shows that they are highly committed and analytical,” Schwella said.
Munnik, who is a risk analyst at auditing and consultation firm Deloitte, is a law graduate of SU and closely involved with the SPL’s Anti-corruption Centre for Education and Research (ACCERUS) <http://accerus.org/> . Louw, who lives in France, did research for the SPL.

“Nicolette and I met earlier in the year at the international Winelands Conference <http://blogs.sun.ac.za/news/2012/03/02/director-of-transparency-international-to-attend-winelands-conference/> , where matters around governance and corruption was discussed, and she asked me to work with her on this project,” Munnik said.
“We had previously worked independently but we saw the competition as a great opportunity to combine our ideas on how addressing corruption.”
According to Adv Paul Hoffman, head of the Institute for Accountability in Southern Africa (IFAISA) and legal representative of Glenister, four teams out of the 50 that had entered the competition were chosen as finalists. Besides the SU team, the other finalists were two teams from Rhodes and the fourth was from Ndifuna Ukwazi, an organisation that under the leadership of Aids activist Zackie Achmat works for an open and transparent democracy.
Hoffman considers the SA Police Service Amendment Bill recently signed off by Pres Jacob Zuma to be unconstitutional. The Hawks are regulated in terms of this piece of legislation. According to Hoffman, Section 207 (2) of the Constitution determines that the head of the police manages and controls the police. However, the new Bill gazetted on 14 September determines that the head of the Hawks have powers that supersedes those of the Commissioner of Police.
Hoffman also argues that an anti-corruption unit should be more independent and should operate outside of the police.
“The Hawks are doing good work in combating rhinoceros poaching and human trafficking, but we need a specialised unit that focuses on corruption alone. The Hawks’ mandate is very wide and this means that investigations into corruption are often moved to the back burner.”
The competition was launched to promote public interest in anti-corruption measures, says Hoffman.
“We received 50 entries of which many came from individuals from outside academia. It is clear the fight against corruption is of interest to all South Africans.”

Hoffman said Glenister intends filing papers about the Hawks “in the next month or so,” adding that the matter will be heard will be heard on a date to be determined by the court.
“The entries are being reviewed and finally edited before they are submitted to the various interested parties. If the case is a success, the content of the entries will help inform the government on what to do next.
“The court itself will not be prescriptive about this. The best Mr Glenister can hope for in the next round of litigation is that the court sends parliament back to the drawing board.”

With their winning entry Munnik and Louw won R60 000 for themselves and R50 000 for their faculty. The other teams were awarded R30 000 for themselves and R25 000 for their faculty or organisation. Each team also received five Samsung Galaxy tablet computers.

The judges were retired Constitutional Court judge, Justice Johann Kriegler, retired Appeals Court judge and now head of the Marikana Commission of Inquiry, Justice Ian Farlam, and retired Cape High Court judge, Justice Wilfred Thring. They branded the winning entry as an “Integrity Commission for South Africa” and commended it for being of a high standard.