STATE OF PARLIAMENT AND ITS MPs: IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES TO OVERSIGHT AND PROPOSING SOLUTIONS

The report finds that while the South African Parliament possesses sufficient legal powers to oversee the executive, its actual capacity to enforce accountability is weak. This failure is attributed to a political environment that disincentivises scrutiny, inefficient committee processes, inadequate technical and research resourcing, and a lack of capability or commitment among many MPs. The authors distinguish between 'explanatory accountability' (giving reasons), which is routinely performed but often procedurally superficial, and 'amendatory accountability' (remedying defects), which is described as 'barely extant'. Key recommendations include establishing a dedicated committee to oversee the Presidency, reforming the appointment of committee chairs to include more opposition members, and creating a formal system to track and enforce executive compliance with parliamentary resolutions.

• Parliament's ability to hold the executive accountable is fundamentally undermined by a political environment where MPs of the majority party are disincentivised from scrutinising senior party members who influence electoral lists.
• There is a critical gap between 'explanatory accountability'—the routine process of receiving reports and answering questions—and 'amendatory accountability', which is the obligation to actually remedy policy or legislative defects.
• Committee effectiveness is starkly uneven and often hampered by a meeting format that prioritises lengthy executive presentations over robust questioning and a preoccupation with formal protocol.
• Many Members of Parliament lack the necessary skills, preparation, or commitment to perform oversight, with some treating the process as a 'tick-box exercise' or focusing on political showmanship.
• Parliamentary committees are severely under-resourced in terms of technical and research support, with many vacancies in the research unit remaining frozen.
• The Presidency currently lacks adequate, systematic oversight, as it is the only department that receives a budget without detailed scrutiny by a dedicated parliamentary committee.
• Executive non-responsiveness is a primary challenge, as there is no structured mechanism to track whether the executive implements the remedial recommendations made in committee reports.
• The appointment and removal processes for heads of State Institutions Supporting Democracy (ISDs) lack uniformity and codified rules, leaving them vulnerable to political influence.
• The internal ethics processes for sanctioning MPs are described as opaque and slow, which damages the institution's credibility.

APA

Pillay, D., & Meny-Gibert, S. (2023). STATE OF PARLIAMENT AND ITS MPs: IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES TO OVERSIGHT AND PROPOSING SOLUTIONS. Public Affairs Research Institute. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/parlOversight27-09-2389.pdf

Chicago

Pillay, Devi, and Sarah Meny-Gibert. STATE OF PARLIAMENT AND ITS MPs: IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES TO OVERSIGHT AND PROPOSING SOLUTIONS. Public Affairs Research Institute, 2023. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/parlOversight27-09-2389.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Pillay |first1=Devi |last2=Meny-Gibert |first2=Sarah |title=STATE OF PARLIAMENT AND ITS MPs: IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES TO OVERSIGHT AND PROPOSING SOLUTIONS |publisher=Public Affairs Research Institute |date=September 2023 |url=https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/parlOversight27-09-2389.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{pillay2023state, author = {Pillay, Devi and Meny-Gibert, Sarah}, title = {{STATE OF PARLIAMENT AND ITS MPs: IDENTIFYING CHALLENGES TO OVERSIGHT AND PROPOSING SOLUTIONS}}, institution = {Public Affairs Research Institute}, year = {2023}, month = sep, url = {https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/parlOversight27-09-2389.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }