Madam Chair, hon Ministers, Deputy Minister, fellow members, heads of courts, in considering whether we are going to support the granting of R13,5 billion to the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, a good starting point is to look at how it has managed its money and general affairs in previous financial years.
The Auditor-General's view is instructive in this regard, having given the department a qualified audit for the past five consecutive years. One of the key issues leading to the audit qualification is the management or, rather, lack thereof, of third-party funds. This matter has also been raised in reports of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Scopa, since 2007.
So one would hope and, indeed, expect that the department would tackle this with some degree of urgency - even more so, when the Public Service Commission has found that the most common forms of alleged corruption in the department include fraud and bribery and mismanagement of government funds, and raised concerns about the capacity constraints in the Forensic Audit Unit. The Minister reported in October last year that an estimated R80 million had been stolen from the Guardian's Fund by corrupt officials and syndicates.
Set against this background, we were somewhat surprised when the department appeared before us last year and earlier this year, and it was quite clear that they had absolutely no solution to the problem. There had been a possible solution in place involving a public-private partnership, which was mothballed by the private company because the department could not make a decision.
Then the department had the brainwave of trying to deal with it "in-house". Minister, with all due respect, when we look at the management of the department, it can hardly inspire us with confidence that they can deal with this critical issue "in-house". They have not been able to up until now. What has changed?
It is quite clear that we are on our way to yet another qualified audit this year, and that as long as these issues are not resolved, the way is clear for many more millions to disappear.
Despite some reduction in the general staff vacancy rate, there is still a vacancy rate of 25% in senior management. It is quite clear from reading last year's annual report that the single biggest problem in this department is what I would, in fact, call a crisis of management. When so many senior positions remain unfilled, the climate for corruption and lack of accountability is allowed to flourish. And without this, speedy access to justice will not become a reality.
Numerous references are made in the annual report and parliamentary reports of low staff morale and high staff turnover. This is hardly surprising given the conditions under which they have to work. Again, in the year's annual report the most ludicrous examples of outright incompetence were reported, such as struggling to gather information to compile monthly financial statements, and "the filing of the relevant documentation for employee files remains an ongoing problem". Who appointed people who cannot fulfil the simplest of functions for the department to operate properly? Yet, again, it is management.
Then we have the position of the Chief Master that has remained unfilled since 31 August 2007. The reasons given recently by the Minister in a written reply were, and I quote:
... due to the possible restructuring of the Master's branch. The restructuring process was completed and the department undertook several unsuccessful attempts to fill the position culminating in the last advertisement in October 2010 and the headhunting process in January and February 2011.
So let's unpack this a little. We have a vacancy for nearly four years. It takes this long to consider whether a restructuring should occur, and then to implement it. During this time, Mr Lester Basson has been acting in the position. While he sits in a portfolio committee meeting, the director- general advises us that she has been very disappointed with the quality of the applications received for the position. How is it, Minister, that a man can be good enough to act in a position for almost four years, but his application is "disappointing"? If he is no good, he should not have been there for four years. If he is, he should have been appointed as the Chief Master. The reasons for the lack of morale could not be clearer.
The management and maintenance of the courts is also reaching crisis proportions. Basic needs are not being met, even such basic needs as even flushing toilets in some courts, although admittedly these are often related to infrastructural inadequacies in ANC-run municipalities, which do not set great store by investment in infrastructural maintenance.
But the department generally appears to be fiddling while the courts are burning - unfortunately, quite literally in Pretoria. Why is it that we have to wait for a court building to burn down before we do something about fixing it? When we have only two senior counsel applying to be judges in the South Gauteng High Court, because the building is "uninhabitable" and the working conditions unacceptable, we have a real problem. Once again, it is lack of adequate management.
And is it true, Minister, as I have heard, that in the Pietermaritzburg Magistrate's Court, no default judgments have been granted since March this year, because it has no budget for file covers, has run out of them, and the staff are writing exams?
Minister, I'm sorry to say this, but your department is in chaos, and you are failing to deliver easier access to justice, especially for the poor. There is no use trying to force lawyers to cut their fees, when very often fees are unnecessarily increased because of delays occasioned by inefficiencies in your own department.
Lastly, I would like to raise one issue of particular concern. You may recall an incident in April this year at the South Gauteng High Court, when a certain individual, whose name does not merit mentioning in this august House, arrived at court for a trial with a heavily armed private army, carrying illegally exposed semi-automatic weapons. It is unclear whether they, in fact, went inside the courtroom, but from media reports, it would appear that they did, and that they certainly stood outside the courtroom and inside the court building.
Not one word was uttered by you, Minister. This leads us to one of three conclusions: one, any member of the public can arrive at court with their armed security guards with illegally exposed weapons, thereby placing members of the public potentially at risk, and intimidating innocent people with this heavy-handed behaviour or, even worse, attempting to intimidate the judge; two, you are too scared to take action against this individual, which raises its own questions; and, three, some people are more equal than others under South African law.
Not one of these options, Minister, is acceptable in a constitutional democracy. By failing to act decisively against this type of behaviour, I believe you have committed a grave error of judgment, one which I sincerely hope will not be ignored and which will not ever be repeated.
Finally, we would also like to join in remembering the late Albertina Sisulu and we extend our sincere condolences to her family and friends. [Applause.]