Chairperson, I have partly answered this. I am not going to answer all of it but just to give you an indication of the exodus out of the National Prosecuting Authority: Over the last four years, from April 2003 to March 2007 this year, we have lost 112 prosecutors. Seventy-one of them were ordinary prosecutors; 22 were regional court prosecutors; six were senior public prosecutors; 12 were state advocates; and one was a senior state advocate. So it is a big pool of experience that we have lost over the last while.
As the hon member knows, the National Prosecuting Authority has been losing a significant number of prosecutors to the magistracy and to the private sector, including to law firms. Competition for skilled lawyers has therefore had an impact on the NPA.
In order to address this matter holistically, government has, through the Department of Public Service and Administration, started a process of determining an appropriate salary level dispensation for officials performing legal functions in government as a whole. This will ensure that such officials are remunerated equitably within the same bands for similar work. This will hopefully reduce the movement of officials from department to department or within departments.
I wish to advise the hon member that this process is now at an advanced stage. Negotiations between government and labour have commenced at the bargaining chamber and the outcome will be communicated to all stakeholders. In addition, the NPA has embarked on extensive capacity- building programmes, both at organisational but particularly at an individual level to try and make the NPA an employer of choice.
Excellence and performance across and within the NPA, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the Legal Aid Board and the judiciary, underpinned by the availability of capacity - that is skills, human capital resources and systems - attracting and retaining the right capacity, its location and optimal use, as well as maintaining an ethos of service is of central concern and importance for government, and this occupation-specific dispensation that is being proposed is part of addressing that problem. Thank you.
Chair, let me start by thanking the Deputy Minister for going to such great pains to explain the whole setup, particularly in regard to magistrates and prosecutors. What I don't fully understand, or maybe I do and I don't know what the answer is, is that it sounds to me as if what is happening there is that it is the principle of borrowing from Paul to pay Peter or Peter to pay Paul.
The prosecutors, a large number of them, are migrating to the position of magistrates and yet we do sometimes read of backlogs in cases because of a shortage of even magistrates, if I have understood that correctly. If you block that advancement channel, where will you get the magistrates from to fill the positions that have been filled by those many prosecutors?
I don't think it is a question of blocking anyone anywhere because as you correctly point out, people will always, as they get better skilled, move on to better positions. I do not expect any person and I don't expect any prosecutor, who can get a better salary in another position - even in government - not to take it.
So that is not the issue but what we are going to have to look at is that our system doesn't have loopholes and gaps within it; that you do not create a system in government which actually implodes on itself. It is fragmented; it is wrong. What you want to do is if someone wants to work in government and if you have one year legal experience, then you should be on a certain level and you should get paid for that.
You should not, as is happening now, have one year legal experience and then because you are upwardly mobile because you may be female or black, be able to take a job at a five-year experience level and get another salary. In that way, we undermine the system.
That does not mean that we shouldn't have affirmative action policies and so on and that doesn't mean that someone should not be promoted. The problem is at the moment the only rule there is that you apply for a job and you get it or you don't. What we are starting to say is that if you want to move from a particular level you should at least go through a process of evaluation in order for people to see that you are ready for that post and then it will be fine for us to do that.
At the moment, if you are in government, for example, you are looking for a person with legal skills, you look around and you will quickly find someone, a relatively junior someone, who has been trained into a post. They have just been trained and now we move them on. It's the same with the prosecutors. Do you know how much money we spend to train a prosecutor until he has got five years experience and then he never uses it again? He or she becomes a magistrate.
That kind of inequity that exists in the system - I must be honest - there is not an easy answer for it. For example, we cannot - suddenly there is this gap of R80 000 between a magistrate's and a prosecutor's post - just go through the system and say: Well, everyone at five years' experience, we are now going to put you up by R80 000. That impacts on the people above them who must go up by R80 000; the people below also go up by R80 000 and we just cannot do that. Firstly, we can't afford it, and secondly, it doesn't make sense.
What we are really saying is that we have to try and find answers within what we have got to try and attract the best legal skills we can in government, but, equally, we cannot have a system where we are undermining and destabilising government departments because people are forever on the move somewhere since they are getting, for the same qualification and same experience, a totally different salary at another place. That is really the issue.
Particulars regarding suspension of magistrates with pay
148. Mr S Shiceka (ANC) asked the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development:
In the past 12 months, (a) how many magistrates were suspended with pay, (b) how long have they been suspended and (c) what is the cost of these suspensions to her department? CO2952E
Chairperson, this House has a lot of questions on Justice. This is a bit easier.
There are currently four magistrates under suspension; three of whom have been provisionally suspended pending inquiries into their fitness to hold office as magistrates. You know them; you processed them in Parliament. The fourth one has been suspended, pending consideration of his removal from office. Of the four magistrates, only one is receiving remuneration.
However, this is the good news, on 8 November 2007- well, I don't know if it is such good news - the relevant magistrate was convicted by the special crime court in Pretoria on a charge of receiving stolen property and was sentenced on 12 November 2007 to a 12-month period of imprisonment, suspended for five years. On 21 November 2007, which was yesterday, the ethics committee of the Magistrates' Commission decided to recommend to the Magistrates' Commission to withhold the person's salary further until they are removed. That commission was going to meet today to make that decision. I imagine the decision will then be sent to Parliament. So it is not really good news; it is sad news that our judicial officers can be found guilty of receiving stolen property.
Chairperson, the last point that I want to raise, which is the last follow up from my side in this question session, is to ask whether there is any investigation or research being done by the department to look at the reasons for these misdemeanours.
The people on the bench, the presiding officers, are expected to be an example to the country, to be beyond reproach compared to us as mere mortals. Is there anything that has been looked at so that these things can be prevented? I don't think it comes across very well. The media has not picked up these problems that we have been having in the magistrates' division.
It is really unfortunate that we have had these examples in our country and particularly after we have become a democracy. Obviously, it is very difficult to find out, when you are appointing someone, whether they're a crook or not. That is what we are seeing now - this one has turned out to receive stolen property. A while ago we removed one who murdered someone. Then there were the guys who had sex on the backseat of a car with a young girl. I mean these people that have been appointed, it is very difficult to find out what their morals are, what their ethical values are. Having said that, although it is difficult, our system, at the moment, doesn't work as effectively as it should be to weed out the bad eggs.
There are flaws in our system and one of the things that we want to do, once we have dealt with the transformation at a High Court level - the Bills that were here that we've slowed down on doing the policy - we need to then, as government and all of us, even the opposition parties, look at how we want to change the magistrates' courts and how we want them to function, since 95% of our court cases go through them. They are absolutely vital. Part of that will be that we have to relook at the appointment mechanism.
The appointment mechanism, and I want to choose my words carefully, has the potential to let people through the system that should not necessarily go through. Therefore, I am going to say why it is like that. Many magistrates who are appointed for the first time are sifted by what is called provincial committees. They are not dealt with at the Magistrates Commission itself.
The Magistrates Commission has created, and your Chief Whip will know this very well, provincial committees. Then, members of the commission, one of them serves in each of those provincial ones, but the vast majority of people in those committees are not from the commission.
They are magistrates and officials and so on that have a self-interest and a particular interest, in how people are and who is going to be appointed. Secondly, I do not think that the different committees, although they are now working on changing that, have the same criteria for the magistrates they are actually recommending for appointment. Thirdly, I do not think that the mechanism is very good in actually sifting people. For example, a magistrate was appointed the other day that had actually been suspended and kicked out of the NPA. He gets appointed as a magistrate and no one picks it up in the process.
There is clearly a lack of capacity, when these committees at the provincial level - I mean the commissioners themselves and the people who are there - don't have capacity of researchers to say, "Take this person's curriculum vitae and go and check what they have done in the past".
There are problems with the way the system that we took over functions because we are still using the same one that was created before we came into government. That system has got the potential to create big problems. Members that are part of that will know what difficulties they have.
Remember, this commission also only sits maybe once in three months. Then they just try and look at certain things like how you appoint people into higher positions. They don't look at the people that enter the system. That is done by these different committees that all use their own appointment criteria.
In the process, unfortunately, we've seen that we have appointed people that should never have got close to the bench; I mean, people that are murdering each other, taking stolen goods, having sex with young girls on the backseats of cars, and so on.
Clearly those things are not good for our democracy. It is not good for our judiciary and I know that the judiciary itself and the magistracy are very worried about this. Hopefully, as part of all these transformation processes, we will have to change the appointment mechanism. The magistracy quite severely makes it much more foolproof and creates some checks and balances in the system which doesn't let these friends of Baba Mzizi slip through like they are slipping through at the moment. [Laughter.]
Measures adopted by SA National Defence Force to avoid accidents like the one at Lohatla, and assistance to families affected thereby
149. Mr N J Mack (ANC) asked the Minister of Defence:
(1) What measures have been put in place to avoid accidents similar to the one that took place at Lohatla during the training session by the SA National Defence Force;
(2) whether there will be any assistance to the families of the members involved in the accident; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? CO2953E
Chairperson, a board of inquiry to determine the cause of the accident is in progress. The South African National Defence Force will be in a position to review measures only after the release of the findings. However, the firing of all 35mm anti-aircraft weapon systems has been put on hold until the cause of the accident has been determined.
All families were assisted by the SA Army in terms of the following: provision of liaison officers who were detached to the families in the week following the accident; pastoral support by army chaplains who met and conferred with the families; financial support, not public funds, to each family has already been provided, namely R6 000 for funeral arrangements and other incidentals and R3 000 to families of the injured to utilise for travel arrangements to Bloemfontein; accommodation in Kimberley and Pretoria, as needed, at no charge to the families; families were flown to Kimberley and Lohatla in order to attend the memorial service and complete their rituals at the site of the accident; support in realising the payout of all insurance-related payments; comprehensive support in terms of finalising the various funerals; and continued support in terms of finalising all administration regarding outstanding payments.
The families will be transported to Kimberley in order to attend the annual SA Army Air Defence Artillery Formation memorial service on 5 December this year. All families are in possession of telephone numbers of the SA Army Formation and personnel. Liaison will continue until all outstanding issues have been resolved.
Chairperson, usually when such an accident happens there are huge psychological and traumatic experiences for those who are left behind. Sometimes you get a situation where one blames the other. Are there measures in place for any psychological assistance in cases where we get a blaming situation, just to evaluate it?
I feel that kind of a situation could be very dangerous and might lead to the next accident happening because of the whole trauma. The evaluation of the group on interaction with their families when they go back ... What I am trying to explain to you is that when a cracker goes off, this person might just jump up and lose some of his senses due to the experience that he has gone through. Is there any assistance in that regard?
Madam Chair, we have all sorts of professionals in Defence. All of them are involved. We have psychologists who are helping the families. We have psychotherapists, doctors and social workers. All of them are working together to make sure that this situation experienced by families and those soldiers who were involved is handled in a manner in which trauma is minimised.
Criteria used in recruiting members for the SA National Defence Force
154. Mr A J L Moseki (ANC) to ask the Minister of Defence:
(1) What criteria are being used by his department in recruiting members for the SA National Defence Force;
(2) whether the criteria include getting new recruits from various schools in the provinces; if not, why not; if so, from which schools? CO2962E
Chairperson, the criteria used by the SA National Defence Force to recruit candidates for the Military Skills Development System are as follows: The candidate must be a South African citizen aged between 18 and 22 years, having passed Grade 12. If that person has got a diploma or a degree certificate, the maximum age is 26 years.
If you have Grade 12 it is 18 to 22 years, if you have got a degree or a diploma it is 18 to 26 years. The minimum requirement is Grade 12 and they must be medically fit. We check every disease, unlike what has been said that we only check for HIV and Aids. We check every chronic disease. You cannot be employed in Defence if you have diabetes.
With regard to psychometrical evaluation recommendations, there must be psychometrical tests and preferably you must be single, especially for soldiers. I am not saying if you are married we won't take you but you must also realise the minimum age is 18 years. That's why we prefer single people. We don't want people who will think about their wives and children when they are supposed to fight a war.
The recruitment process for the Military Skills Development System takes place in all provinces and the schools are identified by the Department of Education. During 2007 the following schools according to provinces were visited for recruitment: Eastern Cape, 77 schools and tertiary institutions; Northwest, 145 schools and tertiary institutions; Northern Cape, 101 schools and tertiary institutions; Western Cape, 79 schools and tertiary institutions; Free State, 70 schools and tertiary institutions; Limpopo, 84 schools and tertiary institutions; Mpumalanga, 120 schools and tertiary institutions; KwaZulu-Natal, 80 schools and tertiary institutions; Gauteng, 20 schools, tertiary institutions and 10 career expos.
The Department of Education rotates the schools every year to give the opportunity to as many schools as possible to be part of this recruiting drive. You will understand, when we go to schools, we have to liaise and work with the Department of Education. It also provides an opportunity for urban and rural schools to be part of the drive. Thank you.
Chairperson, just a request to hon Mluleki, what seems to be lacking is communication in the form of brochures, especially for us also so that we can communicate the criteria that you have just articulated for us as members. That's one thing we would request, that information in the form of brochures.
Secondly, I would like to ask if the same information can be distributed to the constituency offices and other relevant offices so that at least that information can be known in our communities. Thank you very much.
Well, thank you very much, hon member. I think this has been one of the weaknesses we have identified in the system. We started to improve it by asking our communication system to broadcast it on all radio stations. But with regard to what you are saying, I can assure you that we can definitely work on it as from next week Monday to make sure that the information is sent to all constituency offices so that Members of Parliament can make it known in the communities, especially the different types of youngsters we need because, for instance, if you talk about the navy and the air force, we need youngsters with Maths and Science.
And also, there are so many opportunities, just in the navy and the air force alone. Of course, we still have a big problem. We probably produce the biggest number of technicians in the country but the poaching by other departments is amazing. We lose them because they are being poached or stolen.
I can say that we will make sure that the information is sent to all constituency offices; fortunately Mr Ratsuma is here. He is going to see to it that that happens, I can assure Members of Parliament. [Applause.]