Deputy Speaker, I wish to refer the hon member to a discussion document on the transformation of the judicial system and the role of the judiciary in the developmental South African state, which I released yesterday. That document deals extensively with the question that has been raised by the member.
Coming to the statement that the President made in relation to the powers of the Constitutional Court, that statement is entirely consistent with the ongoing debate on the question whether the Constitutional Court should be the Apex Court with general jurisdiction, and what impact there would be on its composition and sitting. Similarly, the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development is currently considering the Constitution Seventeenth Amendment Bill and the Superior Courts Bill, which also look at the powers of the Constitutional Court.
Let me reiterate that the approach adopted by Cabinet with regard to the assessment of the impact of the decisions of the Constitutional Court on society, which has been linked to the President's statement, is not an isolated matter, but forms part of a package of recommendations which relate to the transformation of the judicial system and the role of the judiciary in advancing the ideals of the Constitution.
Let me once again reaffirm our commitment as the ANC-led government to the Constitution as the embodiment of the values of the ANC that it stood for and fought for. The ANC-led government will defend these values, including the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law. Thank you.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development yesterday pledged to uphold the independence of the judiciary and the Constitution. However, his statement does not support this commitment and it remains unclear what the ultimate purpose of this review process will be.
In responding to the outcry over the President's comments, the President's spokesperson, Mac Maharaj, said that we should view the President's comments on changing the powers of the court in the context of this assessment. The President's remarks were clearly different to what the Minister is referring to here, which is the question of jurisdiction. He was talking about the powers of the court.
The report that was released by the Minister yesterday has failed to clarify the very purpose of this review and it has not allayed fears that the review will precede an amendment to the powers of the Constitutional Court.
Will the hon Minister provide this House with the assurance that Cabinet will not propose changes to the powers of the Constitutional Court, regardless of what the outcome of this review process is? Thank you. [Applause.]
Deputy Speaker, the document that we released yesterday is not a document about reviewing the powers of the Constitutional Court. It is a discussion document on the transformation of the judicial system and the role of the judiciary in the transformation project. So, can the hon member take time to read this document and not be influenced by party politics of the Democratic Alliance?
The statement by the President was even clarified by his office so that it is not misrepresented by what the DA wants to read into what the President has said. The DA itself, in the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, has views about the issue of the Apex Court in the Constitutional Court.
So, there is nothing unusual in what the President said. Everybody expresses opinions on what has to happen. If you care to read the Constitution Seventeenth Amendment Bill and the Superior Courts Bill, you will realise that the comment that you are trying to make is ill-founded. Thank you. [Applause.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, Minister, in your own discussion document released yesterday, you quote from the UN's basic principles on the independence of the judiciary and cite a number of key elements that are critical to the independence of the judiciary, namely prohibition against inappropriate and unwarranted interference with a judicial process and no revision of judicial decisions, except through judicial review.
Does the Minister agree that his so-called assessment is potentially such a revision of the decisions of the Constitutional Court contrary to this UN principle and which poses a danger to the independence of the judiciary; and if not, why not?
Deputy Speaker, I don't agree with the hon member's assertion. There is nothing in the document that suggests that we want to encroach on the independence of the judiciary. The track record of the ANC government since 1994 affirms the fact that we are the ones that respect the independence of the judiciary more than other people in this House.
As we speak, President Zuma is the first President of the Republic to sign a proclamation to create the Office of the Chief Justice as a step towards reaffirming the institutional independence of the judiciary. If we were inclined to encroach on this independence, why would we go about such fundamental transformation of the judiciary in South Africa? So, that is why I'm saying that you must read the document without being influenced by party politics to gain cheap votes from the electorate. [Applause.]
Deputy Speaker, arising from the hon Minister's reply, how would he respond to the analysis of Prof Steven Friedman of Wits University's of government's document as being an invitation to South Africa's civil society, including our judiciary and legal profession, to engage in the debate on the transformation of our judicial system and the role of the judiciary in our developmental state?
Secondly, would the hon Minister also agree that the establishment of the Office of the Chief Justice is testament or proof of the ANC's commitment to the independence of the judiciary and the enhancement of the powers of the Constitutional Court?
Deputy Speaker, I agree with Prof Friedman. In fact, it is a challenge to South Africa. We are inviting them to enter into this national dialogue because the issues of the judiciary are so important. They play a very critical role in advancing the ideals that the Deputy President indicated in our Constitution.
All those who want to participate, even the DA, are being called upon to express their views in this document. I agree that Prof Friedman is correct. We are going to see a dialogue in South Africa in which people should express views about the judiciary, in as much as they express views about the legislature and the executive.
On the issue of the creation of the Office of the Chief Justice, it is a further affirmation of our deep commitment in creating institutional independence of the judiciary, unlike what is happening at the present moment where some of the functions are being handled by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. So that, as I have indicated, is the first step towards this institutional independence of the judiciary. Thank you.
Deputy Speaker, Minister, on the point that I raised with the Deputy President yesterday on reality and perceptions, we all have read, or we should read the judgments of the Constitutional Court. We all ask ourselves what they mean and what impact they have on the legislation we are adopting. When you, Minister, invite us to think about the exercise of the government function to embody that activity, the people of South Africa, the legal fraternity cannot but read that government exercises a scorecard, an assessment, a government function leading to the assessment of whether the Constitutional Court is doing well or is not doing well, whether one agrees or disagrees with it. How can we not step back and say this is an attack on the independence of the judiciary, if that independence, as the hon Schfer was reading before, means to have a measure of executive restraint? Thank you.
Deputy Speaker, I would suggest to hon Oriani-Ambrosini that he read the document, as I don't think he has read it. In any event, many legal organisations in South Africa have supported this initiative.
The Black Lawyers Association has been unequivocal in supporting this dialogue and the basic tenets that are enunciated in the document. The National Association of Democratic Lawyers, Nadel, supports this initiative and in the phone-in programme this morning with the Deputy Minister on SAfm, the majority of South Africa applauds this initiative. I was at Kaya FM last night and it was the same story.
So, this notion that the majority of people do not support this is not borne out by the facts. We are going to work with the majority of South Africans in advancing the transformation agenda of all arms of the state. Thank you. [Applause.]
Particulars regarding decision to award food and nutrition tender to a certain company
28. Mr P B Mnguni (Cope) asked the Minister of Correctional Services:
(1) Why did the national commissioner ignore the advice of the department's advocates not to go ahead with the awarding of the food and nutrition tender to a certain company (name and details furnished);
(2) whether she intends to investigate the matter; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NO318E
Deputy Speaker, the Department of Correctional Services did not award any tenders for food and nutrition services in 2012. The existing contracts were extended by one year. Moreover, this decision was consistent with legal advice that was sought by the National Bid Adjudication Committee, which advised that, under the circumstances that prevailed, the department could consider extending the existing contract for the time period that would be required for the publication of a new tender, in compliance with supply chain management procedures.
At no stage in the work of the National Bid Adjudication Committee was this advice or the further legal advice from two other practitioners ignored. The national commissioner, secondly, has instituted an investigation into various aspects of management of the nutrition services contract in the department over the past 18 months to determine any possible managerial failures, any possible systems failures or any possible misconduct, to enable the department to avoid such situations in future. Where there has been failure, remedial action will be taken; and, if necessary, practical steps will be taken against officials who are so implicated. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Mnguni, do you have a supplementary question?
Deputy Speaker, I am happy with the explanation from the Deputy Minister.
Deputy Speaker, this re-award of the contract to Bosasa is only one element in a very long ongoing saga. This contract was first awarded in 2004. It was extended in 2007. It was re-awarded in 2009, and now it is being re-extended again. It was the subject in an investigation by the Special Investigating Unit, SIU, and it is the subject of criminal procedures in a court of law.
It is quite clear that this contract is rotten to the core. The question that I want to know is whether the Ministry will ask the President to appoint a full investigation into this contract and its extension; and if not, why not? [Applause.]
Deputy Speaker, aspects of the contracts which are under investigation and before the courts are sub judice. I think I have already answered the question when I said we have, in fact, been looking at this contract over the past 18 months. There is a process of investigation going on. Thank you.
Deputy Speaker, Deputy Minister, can you give this House the assurance - because this is the third time that this contract has been renewed - that you have been briefed about the termination or the renewal of this contract? What will happen if you find out that other people are involved? Will they be fired or criminally charged? What will happen to them?
Deputy Speaker, whenever the law has been broken in this country, the rule is that it must take its course. Someone must be held accountable for their actions. Let me say, regarding the termination, that we have said to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Scopa, we are preparing to take the function over by this time next year. Apart from that, we have agreed with the Standing Committee on Public Accounts that, on their part, they shall visit our facilities on a regular basis, and that we shall report to them on a regular basis with regard to the progress made in the process of acquiring these services ourselves. Thank you.
Intentions regarding eradication of staff shortages at refugee reception offices
6. Mrs M M Maunye (ANC) asked the Minister of Home Affairs:
Whether she intends to eradicate staff shortages at understaffed refugee reception offices; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what (a) is the timeframe for eradicating the specified staff shortages and (b) are the further relevant details?