Off Track?

The paper critiques South Africa's first APRM Implementation Report for failing to distinguish between general post-apartheid achievements and specific progress made under the APRM National Programme of Action. It identifies significant gaps in reporting on corruption, xenophobia, and corporate governance, while noting that the report was likely rushed and lacks self-criticism. The author suggests that the South African government viewed the APRM as an external diplomatic requirement rather than a domestic tool for governance improvement.

• The First Report on the Implementation of South Africa’s APRM Programme of Action is fundamentally flawed because it conflates general achievements since the 1994 democratic transition with specific progress made in response to the National Programme of Action (NPoA).
• The South African government's approach to the APRM was primarily externally focused, driven by a desire to lead by example for other African states rather than a perceived domestic need for governance reform.
• The Implementation Report is characterized by technical errors, inconsistencies, and a lack of detail, suggesting it was hastily prepared to meet a deadline.
• Reporting on corruption is superficial and avoids discussing high-profile incidents or criticisms of government inconsistency in fighting corruption.
• The report fails to adequately address the root causes of xenophobic violence, despite the 2008 attacks that left 62 dead and 670 injured, and contains inaccuracies regarding the nature of these attacks.
• The Corporate Governance section is identified as the weakest thematic area, listing only legislation that existed prior to the APRM review as achievements.
• There is a significant lack of self-reflection and criticism within the report, with a tendency to present a glowing view of government performance while omitting failures.
• Institutional memory loss and political instability within the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) hindered the implementation and reporting of the APRM.
• The report contains contradictory data regarding the eradication of the bucket system for sanitation, claiming total eradication in formal settlements while the matrix indicates six provinces still have buckets outstanding.

APA

Turianskyi, Y. (2010). Off Track? South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Occasional-Paper-53.pdf

Chicago

Turianskyi, Yarik. Off Track? South African Institute of International Affairs, 2010. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Occasional-Paper-53.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Turianskyi |first1=Yarik |title=Off Track? |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=January 2010 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Occasional-Paper-53.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{turianskyi2010off, author = {Turianskyi, Yarik}, title = {{Off Track?}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2010}, month = jan, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Occasional-Paper-53.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }