Question
Adv A de W Alberts (FF Plus) to ask the President of the Republic:
Whether he has received the final report of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) into irregularities in the Midvaal local authority, as authorised by Proclamation R33 of 2011, from the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services; if so, (a) when was the report received, (b) when will he disclose the report and (c) whether he will authorise the State to implement the findings and recommendations of the Public Protector in her report It can't be right – Remedying Self-interest in Midvaal (Report No 42 of 2010-11) regarding the activities in the Midvaal local authority; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
Reply
As indicated in the press statement (Presidency update on the Special Investigating Unit Proclamations) that the Presidency released on 22 July 2014 regarding the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) proclamations, the investigation into irregularities in the Midvaal local authority is still on-going.
Therefore, the decision regarding the disclosure of the contents of the report will be made upon it's receipt and subsequent consideration of its content.
Question
Mr M Khawula (IFP-KZN) to ask the President of the Republic:
(a) How many instances did he utilise state resources in respect of (i) air travel, (ii) road travel and (iii) accommodation to attend events and campaigning activities of a certain political organisation (name furnished) from 1 January 2014 to 31 May 2014, (b) what are the details of each event, (c) where was each event located and (d) what was the total cost of each event?
Reply
In terms of the 2003 Cabinet Policy, which prescribes for the administration of benefits of Presidents, Deputy Presidents, former Presidents and former Deputy Presidents, government provides air and ground transport for the President of the Republic wherever he or she travels, regardless of the purpose of the visit. In terms of the aforesaid policy, government also provides secure accommodation for the President at all times.
Question
Mr M G P Lekota (Cope) to ask the President of the Republic:
Whether the Government has a clear policy on disqualifying applicants to key posts in all institutions where the Government made appointments who allegedly (a) misrepresented their qualifications, (b) withheld any damaging information, (c) battered or abused women, (d) did not have their tax affairs in order and (e) exited a previous position under a controversy; if not, why not; if so, (i) what is the policy and (ii) how has it been applied during the period 1 January 2009 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?
Reply
a) Yes, a system is in place whereby applicants can be disqualified from employment in the Public Service. With effect from 1 January 2008, departments have to conduct the following pre-employment verifications in respect of a candidate before an appointment or the filling of a post is affected:
(i) Criminal record checks
(ii) Citizenship verification
(iii) Financial/asset record checks
(iv) Qualification/Study verification
(v) Previous employment verification (Reference checks)
b) In cases where an applicant deliberately misrepresents their qualifications or withheld damaging information, such an act can establish acceptable grounds for the rejection of an application. All Public Servants are required to abide by the Code of Conduct. Failure to abide by the Code of Conduct results in disciplinary action and possible dismissal.
A department's decision to reject an application on the aforesaid grounds must however conform to the concept of a fair administrative action as provided for in the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000.
c,d,e) Matters such as the abuse of women, problematic tax affairs and the circumstances for leaving previous employment will be considered during the aforesaid criminal record checks, financial/assets records checks and the previous employment verification.
Should a verification result in a negative finding, a department has to consider the relevance thereof to the person's suitability for employment in a particular post on the following basis:
(a) The nature and severity of the negative finding.
(b) The relevance of the finding to the job duties and work environment in question.
(c) The amount of time that has passed since the negative incident and the applicant's subsequent behaviour since then
(d) The record of the applicant in respect of multiple incidents of misbehaviour and convictions.
All applicants for posts in the public service are obliged to indicate on the application for employment form (Z83) whether they have been dismissed from previous employment or been convicted of a criminal offence. This information is verified through the compulsory verification checks undertaken by each department prior to appointment. The failure to honestly disclose may result in disqualification.
(ii) The above prescripts are applied by each department within a decentralized recruitment environment. Grievances or disputes arising from the recruitment process are dealt with by the affected departments, the Public Service Commission and through the relevant public sector bargaining councils.
Question
Mrs M R Shinn (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:
(a) What is the status of the investigations by the Special Investigating Unit on the recommendation of the Auditor-General following probes into corruption at the SA Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) after 2008 and (b) please supply details of (i)(aa) the number and nature of active investigations and (bb) for what suspected crimes, (ii) the number of persons charged and for which offences and (iii) the case numbers and the police station at which these charges were laid?
Reply
The investigation was completed by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) and a report has been submitted to me. The SIU investigated allegations regarding the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) personnel. The allegations included undisclosed or unauthorised conflicts of interest with service providers of the SABC.
The outcome of the investigation resulted in twenty eight criminal cases being referred to the police, nine for fraud and 19 for the Contravention of Companies Act of 61 of 1973. In addition, 464 disciplinary cases have been referred to the SABC for recommended action.
Enquiries:
Mac Maharaj
Cell: 079 879 3203
Email: macmaharaj@icloud.com
