1 PRESENTATION TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT 04 JUNE 2003 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT BUSINESS UNIT: COURT SERVICES HIGH COURTS (criminal courts):

2 OUTLINE This presentation will touch on the following focal points: A synopsis of court performance during the last financial year, and trends in performance Interventions to improve court productivity Implementation of legislation and the protection of vulnerable groups An update on the recommendations emanating from previous site visits made by the Portfolio Committee Budget aspects

3 A synopsis of court performance during 2002/2003 HIGH COURTS (criminal courts): New cases:2 596 (Jan – Dec 2002) Cases finalised:1 468 (Jan – Dec 2002) Cases outstanding:984 (as at end April 2003) Average court hours:3h32 (during 2002)

4 A synopsis of court performance during 2002/2003 (continued) REGIONAL COURTS: New cases: (Jan – Dec 2002) Cases finalised: (Jan – Dec 2002) Cases outstanding: (end March 2003) Average court hours: 3h51 (during 2002)

5 REGIONAL COURTS A four-year trend in the workload of the regional courts is shown in the graph below The graph shows that the number of new cases increased by 35% between 2001 and 2002 The number of cases finalised declined during the same period, with a resulting increase in the outstanding roll This is due to insufficient regional court magistrates, delays with legal representation and cases taking longer periods to be finalised

7 A synopsis of court performance during 2002/2003 (continued) DISTRICT COURTS (criminal courts): New cases: (Jan – Dec 2002) Cases finalised: (Jan – Dec 2002) Cases outstanding: (as at end March 2003) Average court hours: 4h08 (during 2002)

8 DISTRICT COURTS The trend shows that the number of new cases increased by 50% between 2001 and 2002 A four-year trend in the workload of the district (criminal) courts is shown in the graph below The number of cases finalised also increased, however this was not sufficient to deal with the number of new cases, leading to an increase in the outstanding roll

10 COMPARING COURT HOURS The graph below gives a comparative four- year trend in the average court hours in the high, regional and district courts The graph shows a steady, but slow increase in average court hours in all three court environments

These graphs show how the district courts spend their time. The average daily court hours appear to be fairly high and some of the divisions almost reached the target of five hours set for the year There seemed to be a bigger difference per division in the average number of cases disposed of per hour. The productivity of district courts can be considered in a number of ways. In the above figure, average court hours for 2002 is compared across divisions (note that the National Prosecuting Authority reports the information that it gathers from district courts per high court division).

To determine if the courts can keep up with the incoming new cases, the number of cases disposed of can be divided by the number of new cases and expressed as a percentage. (100% would mean that the courts dispose of as many cases as the new cases coming in, more than 100% would mean they are disposing of more than the new cases and therefore reducing the outstanding roll.) To show the size of the outstanding roll (on average throughout the year), the number of cases on the outstanding roll is given in terms of the number of cases disposed of in the month to show the outstanding roll as a workload. The outstanding roll needed between 1.26 and 3.26 months in the different divisions. Another important measure is extent to which courts are able to dispose of their incoming new cases, which naturally impacts on their outstanding roll, and the time needed to work down the outstanding roll.

14 Interventions to improve court performance The following main projects have been planned for 2003/04 to improve court performance: Re aga boswa Integrated Case Flow Management Integrated Justice Court Centres Court Operations Centre and Court Management Information System Additional and Saturday courts

15 Best and worst performing courts Court Services has devised a comprehensive, overall performance measure for ranking all district criminal courts in terms of their performance The measure is based on a combination of case disposal rate, case withdrawal rate and average court hours In terms of this overall performance measure, the following 29 courts were the poorest performers of all district, criminal courts during 2002:

16 CalaLichtenburgHoopstad UmzimkhuluBrakpanKhayelitsha NatalspruitPretoriaSteynsburg NewlandsMankweVryburg OdiSomerset EastKranskop UmlaziVosloorusMamelodi VanderbijlparkBloemfonteinWentworth Pretoria NorthWarrentonColesberg MadadeniLady FrereNtuzuma GelvandalePietermaritzburg The “worst” performing district courts:

17 The list below gives an indication of the 20 best performing courts during 2002: BabanangoNewcastleBloemhof VuwaniReitzThabankulu LouwsburgLehurutsheBonnievale MbibaneBoshofKing Williams Town MutaleExcelsiorPhungashe ZastronTheunissenCathcart Beaufort WestTshitale

The provincial distribution of the 29 “worst” and 20 “best” performing courts can be seen in the graph below:

19 PROCESS FLOW IN THE INTEGRATED JUSTICE SYSTEM The process flow of criminal cases in the broader integrated justice system has a direct impact on the workload and productivity of all criminal courts The number of new cases being sent to the district and regional courts is directly related to the number of cases reported to the police The following two figures presents the process flow in the IJS in graphic format and shows the actual figures for March 2003:

Prosecution Process Adjudication Process SAPS DCS Crime to Court Prosecuted Guilty Not Prosecuted/ Withdrawn in Court Settled Alternatively Not Guilty Referred back to SAPS Referred back to Prosecutor/ SAPS for further Investigation Process Flow in the Justice System Footnote : Each bubble could be collapsed in several sub processes or activities.

Crimes Reported To Court Crime reporting, Investigation & Arrest TOTAL Crimes under Investi- gation. Prosecution and AdjudicationIncarceration Withdrawn Settled alternatively Not Guilty Guilty Settled by SAPS Settled otherwise by SAPS Disposed of by Court Sentenced prisoners Awaiting Trial TOTAL TOTAL Crimes in the Court Process

22 IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGISLATION AND PROTECTION OF VULNERABLE GROUPS Prioritised legislation for 2003/04 financial year: Maintenance: 52 Maintenance Investigators have been appointed as from 1 April to reduce maintenance case backlogs. Equality Act: 47 Equality Courts will be established country-wide and sufficient Equality Court Judges and their administrative support staff have already been trained to run the courts Lay Assessors: Pretoria, Cape Town and Port Elizabeth identified for gradual implementation

23 IMPLEMENTATION OF LEGISLATION (continued) Small Claims Courts: Courts render an important service to the indigent and the poor. Need to amend rules to be able to increase the jurisdiction to R7,000 Domestic Violence: Guidelines to assist the judiciary and role players in the implementation of the Act will be finalised by August 2003

24 PROTECTION OF VULNERABLE GROUPS The following will receive priorities: Specialised Courts: Imore sexual offences courts by an additional 17 courts to current 40; Establish 47 Equality Courts; Extend the Special Commercial Courts to Durban, Cape Town and Port Elizabeth; Capacitate the existing Family Courts Child Justice Bill: One Stop Child Justice Centres Appointment of Maintenance Investigators: Mobilise additional funds to increase number of 52

25 Major Capital works The following areas have been identified for new courts: Tembisa, Benoni, Randburg, Khayelitsha, Port Elizabeth, Atteridgeville, Scottburgh The following courts have been identified for renovations: Johannesburg Magistrate’s Court, Thohoyandou High Court, Pretoria North Magistrate’s Court

26 Renovations an Maintenance Programme (RAMP) Huge backlog due to the fact Public Works manages the maintenance budget. Formal request sent to Minister of Finance to transfer the budget to Justice. Pending approval of Min of Finance, Service Level Agreements is being negotiated with DPW to improve services

27 Update on the recommendations from site visits made by the Portfolio Committee not covered above Over population of prisons; Integrated Justice System and interaction/cooperation between all role players Case backlogs Implementation of Legislation: Minimum security measures to be improved in all courts over three years; alarm, access control, burglar proof windows and doors, guarding services; In 2001/02 walk- through metal detectors and X-ray machines installed in 75 additional courts. A further 60 courts will receive same this year; Cash in-transit to be effected in high risk areas

28 Budget Allocation and High Level Programmes Total budget allocation from vote: R2,064,372,000 Split per main budget items: – Personnel: R1,227,161,000 (59%) – Administration: R186,924,000 (9%) – Equipment, Land and Buildings: R 38,1979,000 (19%) – Programmes and Projects R501,083,209 (24%)

29 Budget Allocation and High Level Programmes Programme 1: Programme and Project Support – Total operational budget: = R25,152,000 Programme 2: Specialist Services and Protection of Vulnerable Groups – Total operational budget = R77,150,000 Programme 3: Facilities and Infrastructure Support: - Total operational budget = R311,940,000 Programme 4: Court Performance – Total operational budget: = R72,555,805 Programme 5: Quality Management and Service standards – Total operational budget = R14,285,404

30 THANK YOU QUESTIONS Simon Jiyane Managing Director: Court Services