DELIVERY OF JUSTICE INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY

This report is a monograph of a symposium hosted by the Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF) on 7 August 2019. It examines the independence and accountability of South Africa's criminal justice system, specifically focusing on the appointment and removal processes of the heads of key state institutions to prevent political interference and 'state capture'.

• The Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF) identifies significant legislative gaps in the appointment and removal of heads of eight criminal justice institutions, which have been exploited to allow the retention or appointment of 'questionable' leaders, contributing to the system's deterioration over ten years.
• For five of the eight analyzed institutions, the President possesses the discretion to appoint candidates with minimal to no oversight. Specifically, the President appoints the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), the National Commissioner of the South African Police Service (SAPS), and the Head of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) without a statutory requirement for consultation.
• Eligibility criteria for the heads of criminal justice institutions are generally vague or non-existent, with the Public Protector being the only exception with extensive criteria. Most institutions rely on terms such as 'fit and proper' or 'experience, conscientiousness and integrity', while the National Commissioner of SAPS has no eligibility criteria at all.
• Removal procedures for these heads are largely controlled by the President or relevant Ministers. A notable example is the Head of the SIU, who can be removed by the President 'at any time' based on 'sound reasons', a term that is not defined in the SIU Act.
• The HSF recommends a comprehensive legislative overhaul to implement a 'Judicial Service Commission-type model' for all appointments of criminal justice heads. This model would use broad-based committees to reduce the power of single political office holders and include independent disciplinary committees to ensure public accountability and security of tenure.
• Judge Zak Yacoob argues that there is a critical need to separate political roles from professional execution. He asserts that while Ministers should determine policy, the application of that policy is a professional function that should remain independent of political interference.

APA

Public Affairs Research Institute (2019). DELIVERY OF JUSTICE INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/report-on-delivery-of-justice-independence-and-accountability.pdf

Chicago

Public Affairs Research Institute. DELIVERY OF JUSTICE INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY. 2019. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/report-on-delivery-of-justice-independence-and-accountability.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Public Affairs Research Institute |title=DELIVERY OF JUSTICE INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY |date=7 August 2019 |url=https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/report-on-delivery-of-justice-independence-and-accountability.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{publicaffairsresearchinstitute2019delivery, author = {{Public Affairs Research Institute}}, title = {{DELIVERY OF JUSTICE INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY}}, institution = {Public Affairs Research Institute}, year = {2019}, month = aug, url = {https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/report-on-delivery-of-justice-independence-and-accountability.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }