service delivery media briefing
16 August 2007
Welcome and introduction
Ladies and gentlemen, our esteemed guests from the media, I am very pleased
indeed to welcome you to our first media briefing for the 2007/08 financial
year. This briefing comes a little late than it was originally anticipated. Be
that as it may, it still remains our resolve to hold regular media briefings,
at least once per quarter and as often as there may be matters to be reported
on.
We continue to appreciate the role that the media is playing in assisting us
to fulfil our Constitutional mandate. The fact that we do sometimes differ with
the media should never be seen, nor interpreted, as a sign of enmity between
us. It is in the nature of the dynamics of democracy that we all have the right
to freedom of expression and that we sometimes have different views on certain
matters. We therefore thank you most sincerely for your regular presence and
participation in our media briefings.
It thus fills us with pride and gratitude that one of the matters that we
are reporting on today emanates from an article that appeared in the Beeld
newspaper. The matter relates to a complaint lodged against the Minister of
Transport. The details of this matter gave us the opportunity to explore the
legality or otherwise of possible behaviours alleged to have been committed by
the Minister. We deal with this matter shortly.
Again, earlier this year, another article appeared in the Beeld. This
article highlighted the plight of a complainant who was battling to be paid her
pension benefits and it was so long that it began to become unforeseen that she
would ever receive her pension in the near future. Through our intervention and
in less than a month she was paid her pension benefits, her stress and
frustration was eased off because of our joint and timely intervention. So you
will understand better why we say the media and us are partners as we share the
common constituency, that is, members of the public.
Although we did not have a media briefing this financial year it does not
mean we did not conclude other investigations. On the contrary we have
interrogated about 35 reports at our so called Think Tank meetings and 14
reports have been signed and issued. About four to five reports are being
edited before they are signed and issued.
It is indeed pleasing that some of the signed reports received extensive
publicity in some print and electronic media, we thus continue to make an
appeal that the media should, as it has been doing, continue to help publicise
our reports in order to dispel the unfortunate notion and some stereotypes that
our office only deals with high profile cases at the expense of matters
relating to bread and butter issues as suffered by the poor and the
marginalised. In the main the majority of the cases that we have so far
concluded this year, relate to bread and butter issues and information is
available to confirm what I have just said.
Purpose of the media briefing
At a similar media briefing held at this venue on 3 March 2006 I said "The
purpose of this media briefing is, amongst others:
To regularise briefings of this nature as part of our outreach programme
This will create an opportunity for us to share with you the mandate of our
office, successes and difficulties that we encounter in the execution of our
mandate. To adequately brief you on the rationale of some of the decisions we
arrive at in some of the cases we investigate, so that as you report on such
matters, you do so from a better perspective. This will of course go a long way
in curbing possible misconceptions. We all have the duty to inform the public
as accurately as possible. Most importantly, briefings of this nature will
offer an opportunity to share your views, ideas and opinions on how best our
office can improve its service delivery record.
While we espouse and canvass the regularity of these meetings it is
definitely not our intention to in any way influence your reporting tactics,
but to offer sufficient information for the benefit of both your accuracy in
reporting and in that way minimise the possibility of errors in your reports."
Today's meeting is therefore a continuation of our frequent briefings and we
will be briefing you on the following:
*. our investigative theme for 2007/08 financial year Protect the
Child
* two important own initiative investigations namely, service delivery and
inter-departmental conflict that prejudices the poor
* release reports on the following complaints that we investigated:
1. Minister of Transport
2. appointment of Matlosana Municipal Manager
3.progress on the Majali matter
4.launch of a Pilot Project on the Outreach Mobile Clinic
5. annual report
Protecting the child
We have selected 'Protecting the Child' as the theme of our investigations
in the current financial year. The exact and detailed activities that the
office will be engaging around this theme will be unveiled at an appropriate
meeting on a date in the near future. At this stage we are engaged in
preliminary preparations before take off. In the interim we have however
enjoined all our investigators to prioritise all complaints and investigations
affecting children.
This means that all complaints affecting children will be given priority in
terms of completion and turn around times. Communities are invited to submit
complaints affecting children. The reason for selecting this theme for this
year is that children have been identified as one of the worst vulnerable group
in our society. This can be attributed to many factors e.g. children do not
have a "voice" and have to be spoken for by parents and various other role
players.
We have noted with deep concern the number of children that are subjected to
rape, murder and abuse and we therefore want to contribute in highlighting the
plight of children as a vulnerable group in our society. Our mandate and our
interest in this matter lie in the fact that we want to establish the reasons
that contribute to the vulnerability of children in the whole service delivery
network within our government. We want to find out if there is any action of
intent, omission or negligence that might be a contributory factor to this
vulnerability and if so what steps should be taken to ameliorate such a
situation.
We have in the meantime received numerous complaints that affect children
and as our contribution to the plight of children we have dedicated 2007/08 as
the year of "protecting the child" wherein we shall do our best to expedite any
cases that affect children, investigate any acts of negligence, omission,
maladministration etc that affect children. So far the main subject matter of
the cases we are currently dealing with relate to pension benefits to
dependants, poor service delivery in violation of children's rights,
application for foster care, rights of children of asylum seekers and
maintenance money that has disappeared and fell between the cracks in the
justice system.
Service delivery
We have decided to conduct an own initiative investigation on service
delivery. We have received numerous complaints about service delivery and have
noticed an increase in the number of community protests concerning municipal
service delivery. The complaints are varied, numerous and differ from
municipality to municipality.
These protests are increasing and quite unpredictable in some cases.
Recently, these protests have become violent to the extent that some
individuals have lost their lives. While law enforcement agencies are doing
their best to calm the situation and in essence try to normalise the situation,
it does seem something more still needs to be done.
The advent of democracy in South ushered new hopes for a better life for
all. Those who lived in abject poverty saw the dawn of democracy as a panacea
that would rid them of their sufferings. The skirmishes between the police and
marchers for service delivery that we often witnessed are indeed a grim
reminder of the apartheid period.
We have already started with our preliminary investigation. We are in the
process of identifying specific municipalities around which our investigation
would be centred. We have already embarked on preliminary consultative
processes with some of the main stake holders such, the Speaker of the National
Assembly, the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, the Honourable
Minister of Provincial and Local Government and the Chairperson of South
African Local Government Association (Salga). We hope to finalise our
investigation at the latest by the end of the year.
We are working on the Modus Operandi of our investigation and we will inform
the public accordingly. What is certain is that we will endeavour to involve
relevant members of the public, politicians, councillors and non-governmental
organisations (NGOs).
Annual Report
We will shortly be tabling our 2006/07 Annual Report in Parliament. It gives
me joy and pride to announce that for the fifth consecutive year the Office of
the Public Protector (OPP) has once again received an unqualified audit report
with no matters of emphasis. I accordingly express my utmost thanks and
gratitude to the entire staff of the OPP for these achievements in all these
years.
During the year under review we continued to receive complaints from the
public and we have finalised in excess of 13 000. These cases deal with bread
and butter issues. There were of course some high profile and indeed
controversial cases that many of you commented on.
Reports of investigated complaints
Appointment of Matlosana Municipal Manager
We investigated a complaint that was lodged by a Member of Parliament
concerning the appointment of Mr M Moadira as the Municipal Manager of the City
of Matlosana. It was alleged that the appointment was improper as there was a
cloud hanging over him relating to financial misconduct at Moqhaka Local
Municipality, where he was previously employed as the Municipal Manager.
The Free State MEC for Local Government commissioned an investigation in
December 2004 by Majavu and Associates, a firm of attorneys based in
Johannesburg, to investigate a number of aspects of the administration within
the Moqhaka Municipality. The Majavu report was released in May 2006. Mr
Moadira was only suspended in September 2006 and in October was served with a
charge sheet three months before his contract expired. The majority of charges
at Moqhaka Local Municipality related to his alleged failure to take
disciplinary action against one of the managers that was under his supervision.
Mr Moadira resigned shortly after he received the charge sheet and left the
employ of Moqhaka Local Municipality at the end of October 2006. The vacancy in
Matlosana was advertised on 10 September 2006 and Mr Moadira was interviewed on
6 October 2006.
It was found that Mr Moadira, based on his curriculum vitae (CV), qualified
for the position of Municipal Manager of the City of Matlosana and had declared
to the interviewing panel that he was suspended on allegations of misconduct.
In assessing whether the decision to appoint Mr Moadira was improper, we took
following into account:
* that Moadira had not been convicted of any offence
* he claimed he had a valid defence to the findings made against him
* no hearing was held to determine the validity and credibility of the findings
made against him
* the Executive Mayor of Matlosana was aware of Mr Moadira's suspension and the
contents of the Majavu report
* the Mayor held a further interview with Mr Moadira, contacted his references
and was satisfied that despite what was stated in the Majavu report, Mr Moadira
was the best candidate for the position of municipal manager
* that Mr Moadira possessed the necessary qualifications as per
advertisement.
We therefore found that the decision of the Municipal Council of the City of
Matlosana to appoint Mr Moadira as its Municipal Manager complied with the
legislative prescripts and requirements and that the Municipality complied with
the standards for the exercise of public power by an official body as set out
by the Constitutional Court. Therefore, the allegations that the appointment of
the Municipal Manager by the Municipal Council of Matlosana in North West was
improper, is unfounded.
Minister of Transport
Our office was requested to investigate a complaint by a Member of
Parliament that Transport Minister Jeff Radebe acted improperly by allegedly
allowing his driver to exceed the speed limit after launching a programme to
discourage speeding.
The Beeld Newspaper publish said that his motorcade left the launch of the
National Road Safety Project, at Rayton on 5 December 2006, at a high speed in
the direction of Pretoria. As the complaint was solely based on the said media
report, from which it was not clear who made the observations reported on, the
newspaper concerned was requested to provide more information during the
investigation.
The Deputy Editor of Beeld declined to co-operate with us saying they
preferred to be independent observers. They instead said we should consult with
other witnesses at the scene and specifically mentioned the Media Liaison
Officer of the Minister, Mr C Msibi. Mr Msibi confirmed that he was part of the
ministerâs convoy but that they were driving at 120 kilometres per hour. The
South African Police Services, who were transporting the minister, denied that
they exceeded the speed limit and the Minister also denied this. No valid
reason could be found under the circumstances to question the credibility and
reliability of Mr Msibi's evidence which was supported by that of the Minister
and the driver.
It is the responsibility of the South African Police Service (SAPS) to
transport the Minister on official business. The driver of the vehicle
transporting the Minister may only exceed the speed limit if the protection of
the Minister requires him or her to do so. Exceeding the speed limit at the
instruction of the Minister for any other reason would be unlawful.
From the evidence that could be obtained during the investigation, it could
not be found that the Minister acted improperly as it was alleged. It is indeed
unfortunate that the media decided to exercise their right of not disclosing
their source of information.
Inter-departmental conflict that causes prejudice to the poor
We have launched an own initiative investigation into allegations of
maladministration that have resulted in 60 600 families not receiving food
parcels they are entitled to. The national Department of Social Development
awarded a tender for the distribution of food parcels to 60 600 underprivileged
children in KwaZulu-Natal to three entities.
One of the unsuccessful bidders took the department's decision to award the
tender to these entities to the High Court on review and was successful. The
department and the three private entities appealed without success. There now
appears to be a dispute between the national and provincial departments as to
who is responsible for re-advertising the tender. There appears to be an
impasse between the provincial and the national departments at the expense of
the poor. This situation cannot and should not be allowed to continue
unabated.
Sandile Majali
We have previously released a report on the "Oil gate matter" where we found
no impropriety by PetroSA in granting an advance to Imvume Management. On 6 May
2007, however, the Sunday Times alleged that Mr Majali stated, through his
attorney, that an advance was never requested by Imvume Management and that it
was deliberately used by PetroSA to channel public money to the African
National Congress (ANC) in December 2003. We are currently investigating these
allegations and we will be finalising our report which will be tabled in
Parliament soon.
Outreach mobile clinic
During the past year the OPP was subjected to a rigorous landscaping study
that was conducted by the European Union (EU). The latter made a number of
valuable recommendations some of which we are currently implementing. One of
the outstanding recommendations was that the OPP must take decisive steps to
embark on an advocacy programme. The EU made some funds available to us for the
purpose of carrying out the advocacy programme. The programme is intended to
make our offices as well as the services that we render known to the
people.
We decided to embark on a pilot programme on outreach mobile clinics that
will take place in three provinces namely, Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and
Limpopo. These projects will be launched 18 September 2007 at Lusikisiki
followed by provincial launches in KwaZulu-Natal on 11 October at the District
of Ugu and in Limpopo at Sekhukhune on 16 October 2007.
The aim is that from these dates to the end of 2009 these mobile clinics
must have passed through every rural village in each of these provinces. During
these long and arduous journeys we will be educating communities about their
rights, the services that we render and where they can go to exercise their
rights and, where necessary, take their complaints. We will also be
establishing centres where we will be able to report back on their complaints
in particular those who do not have fixed postal addresses.
Various stakeholders including the other Chapter 9 institutions will be
involved. In due course we will issue road maps to indicate the routes that
will be followed by the mobile clinics.
Thank you.
Issued by: Public Protector
16 August 2007
