Public Protector dialogues with
Gauteng stakeholders
Wednesday,
20 July 2011
Public Protector Adv Thuli Madonsela says the implementation
of remedial action emanating from her investigations is a
key ingredient for administrative justice and accountability
to be possible.
Speaking at a stakeholder consultative forum meeting in
Germiston on Wednesday, the Public Protector reiterated that
without the implementation of remedial action her office
would be a gate to nowhere.
“Diagnosing the problems and issuing reports is not where it
should all end. It should not be over until the remedial
action is fully implemented,” she told government and civil
society representatives at the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan
Council Chambers.
During their interaction with the Public Protector,
representatives of various non-governmental organisations
and individuals who spoke in personal capacities raised
several issues. These included remedial action that is not
implemented, poor service delivery by government, Public
Protector turnaround times as well as the institutions’
visibility and accessibility.
Responding to the questions, the Public Protector said
certain matters often took long to be resolved because some
organs of state were uncooperative during investigations.
Adding that this had a negative impact on turnaround times,
the Public Protector appealed to organs of state to be
cooperative during investigation, emphasizing that they were
required by section 181 (3) of the constitution to support
her office.
She indicated that while resources remained an impediment on
her office’s drive to be accessible to all persons and
communities, available avenues such as the toll-free line
and outreach programmes were being used to reach
communities.
The Public Protector added that her office had the
responsibility to ensure administrative justice and to exact
accountability in the exercise of public power and control
of state resources. In terms of accountability, she said her
responsibility includes ensuring that public funds that are
acquired unlawfully are paid back and any criminal
activities are referred to appropriate authorities for
prosecution.
Regarding service failure, the Public Protector told
delegates that it was her responsibility to resolve the
actual complaint, bringing the complainant as close as
possible to where they would have been had the state acted
right the first time. This would also include fixing the
system to ensure that there are no recurrences.
The Public Protector further indicated that the role of her
office should be seen as reconciling the state with its
citizens, ensuring that people do not have to embark on
violent protests in order to be heard by government.
Delegates agreed that the Public Protector was an important
avenue through which ordinary people get administrative
justice for grievances against the state instead of using
courts which take time and resources. The Public Protector
promised to follow up on all complaints raised during the
session by engaging with relevant organs of state.
The meeting formed part of a two-month nationwide
stakeholder consultative forum launched last week under the
theme “The Public Protector Dialogues with the Nation.”
Aimed at soliciting feedback regarding the work of the
Public Protector and foster a common understanding of the
institution’s mandate and role, the programme focuses on the
importance of implementing the Public Protector’s remedial
action.
This is for purposes of ensuring administrative justice by
organs of state in respect of the state’s dealings with the
public and promoting accountability within state affairs in
cases of conduct failure.
For more information, contact:
Kgalalelo Masibi
Senior Manager: Outreach, Education and Communications
Tel: (012) 366 7006
Cell: 079 507 0399
Email:
kgalalelom@pprotect.org
www.publicprotector.org
|
