Media Briefing: Adv M L Mushwana-Public Protector RSA

1. 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 2007/8 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 (THIRTY FIVE) reports at our so called Think Tank meetings and fourteen 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.

2. PURPOSE OF THE MEDIA BRIEFING.

At a similar media briefing held at this venue on the 3rd of March 2006 I said “ The purpose of this media briefing is, amongst others :

1. 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:

1. Our investigative theme for 2007/8 financial year PROTECT THE CHILD.
2. Two important own initiative investigations namely, SERVICE DELIVERY and INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CONFLICT THAT PREJUDICES THE POOR.
3. Release reports on the following complaints that we investigated
   
    (aa) Minister of Transport
    (bb) Appointment of Matlosana Municipal Manager.
4. Progress on the Majali matter Launch of a Pilot Project on the Outreach Mobile Clinic Annual Report

3.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 lies 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.

4.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 is 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 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 NGOs.

5. ANNUAL REPORT

We will shortly be tabling our 2006/7 annual report in parliament. It gives me joy and pride to announce that for the fifth consecutive year the Office of the Public Protector 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.

6. REPORTS OF INVETIGATED 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 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:

1. That Moadira had not been convicted of any offence,
2. He claimed he had a valid defence to the findings made against him,
3. No hearing was held to determine the validity and credibility of the findings made against him.
4. The Executive Mayor of Matlosana was aware of Mr Moadira’s suspension and the contents of the Majavu report.
5. 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.
6. 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 published 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 cooperate 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 minister’s convoy but that they were driving at 120km/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 Services 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/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.

7. 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.

7. 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 ANC in December 2003. We are currently investigating these allegations and we will be finalising our report which will be tabled in Parliament soon.

8. OUTREACH MOBILE CLINIC

During the past year the OPP was subjected to a rigorous landscaping study that was conducted by the European Union. 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 on the 18th of September 2007 at Lusikisiki followed by provincial launches in KwaZulu-Natal on the 11 October at the District of Ugu and in Limpopo at Sikhukhune on the 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.