1. OFFICE OF THE DPCI JUDGE
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
BRIEFING TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON POLICE ON THE FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE OFFICE OF THE DPCI JUDGE, COMPLAINTS MECHANISM, ESTABLISHED IN TERMS OF SECT 17L OF SAPS ACT NO:68 OF 1995,AS AMENDED

2. TABLE OF CONTENTS Content Pages Introduction 3 Operational Budget 4
Memorandum of Understandings
Launch of the Office
Development of Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan
Performance Information
Case Management System
Public Awareness Campaign
Meeting with Stakeholders
Performance Management System
Investigation of Complaints
Trends and Recommendations
16/11/02 2

3. INTRODUCTION
The purpose is to brief the Portfolio Committee on Police on the Fourth Annual Report of the Office of the DPCI Judge, Complaints Mechanism, established in terms of Sect 17L of the SAPS ACT.
As the Head of the Office of the DPCI Judge, I take pleasure in briefing you on the Fourth Annual Report of my Office. The Report covers the period 1 April to 31 March 2016.
Our Primary function is to provide oversight over the investigations conducted by the HAWKS. We essentially investigate complaints from and against members of the HAWKS.
16/11/02 3

4. Graph 1 below depicts budget expenditure and balance
OPERATIONAL BUDGET
The Annual Operational Budget for the year under review was R 5, The total amount spent during the year was R5, of which R1, was for salaries and R2, was for goods and services. The balance is R
Graph 1 below depicts budget expenditure and balance
16/11/02 4

5. INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF INTELLIGENCE
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
During the period under we concluded 14 MOU’s with various stakeholders informing them of our role and function and to regulate our working relationship in terms of referral of complaints.
13 MOU’s were signed with SAPS, DPCI, IPID, Secretariat for Police, Public Protector, SAHRC, CRL Commission, CGE, IEC, AGSA, ICASA, NDPP and Judicial Inspectorate of Correctional Services. The IGI must still be signed.
Graph 2 depicts our stakeholders
OFFICE OF THE DPCI JUDGE
NPA
SAPS
DPCI
IPID
INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF INTELLIGENCE
SECRETARIAT
PSIRA
INSPECTING JUDGE
CHAPTER 9 INSTITUTIONS
16/11/02 5

6. LAUNCH OF THE OFFICE OF THE DPCI JUDGE
On 15 March 2016 the Honourable Minister of Police, Mr Nkosinathi Nhleko
officially launched the office at Parliament, in Cape Town .
The aim of launch was for the Hon Minister of Police to formally inform the key
stakeholders,roleplayesr and public of the existence of the DPCI Judge and to
proclaim it fully operationally.
Keynote address by the Minister and inputs by other speakers including the
messages of support were well received.
More than 100 representatives from across section of the society attended the
occasion.
16/11/02 6

7. DEVELOPMENT OF STRATEGIC PLAN AND ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN
The Office of the DPCI Judge developed the Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan to guide our performance and to enable the office to achieve its objectives and targets.
The Annual Performance Plan (APP) and the Strategic Plan came into operation during the financial year 2015/2016.
16/11/02 7

8. CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (OUTPUT)
During the period under review, 28 new complaints were received, 11 were from members of the public in terms of S17L (4)(a) of SAPS Act and 17 complaints fell outside the scope of our mandate.
All complaints were registered within 48 hours upon receipt in compliance with the Annual Performance Plan. Files were opened and allocated to the investigators. The target is 80% and the output is 100%.
Graph 3 depicts complaints received
16/11/02 8

9. PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS (OUTPUT)
With regard to the awareness campaign as required in terms of Section 17L (15) we have conducted 2 public awareness campaigns in Limpopo and North West Provinces. In terms of the Annual Performance Plan we are required to conduct four awareness campaigns per annum. The target is 70% of conducting awareness campaign and we achieved 50% output.
Reasons why the target was not met was firstly, the accounting officer implemented cost cutting and saving measures to avoid overspending on the budget for the financial year under consideration, and secondly, the Communication Unit of Secretariat for Police was not only burdened in marketing our office but also the Ministry of Police.
16/11/02 9

10. MEETING WITH STAKEHOLDERS (OUTPUT)
As far as meetings with stakeholders are concerned, we are required to have 6 meetings per annum with stakeholders in terms of the Annual Performance Plan.
We were able to have 9 meetings with stakeholders. The target is 70% and we exceeded the target. The output exceeded the target.
Graph 4 depicts meetings with Stakeholders
16/11/02 10

11. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (OUTPUT)
The total of 6 Performance Agreements,Bi-annual performance assessment reports for staff employees, operational plan and procurement demand plan were submitted to Secretariat for Police timeously.
12 Monthly Reports, 4 Quarterly Reports, 2 Bi-annual Reports and one Annual Report were submitted to the Head of the Office of the DPCI Judge timeously.
The target is 100% to comply to submit the above reports and the output was 100% in accordance to the Annual Performance Plan.
16/11/02 11

12. INVESTIGATION (OUTPUT)
As far as investigation is concerned, we received 28 complaints and completed 10. The target is to complete 70% of complaints received. The output is 36 %. The target was not met.
Graph 5 depicts complaints received and closed
16/11/02 12

13. INVESTIGATION CONT……………… (OUTPUT) REASONS WHY THE TARGET WAS NOT MET
In some of complaints, the Complainant was charged criminally and we were obliged to wait for the outcome of the court case, as we did not want to pre-empt
or influence the outcome of the criminal case in accordance to the principle of
separation of powers.
In some of complaints, the docket was submitted to the NPA for a decision, and we have to wait for the decision of the Prosecutor before we could finalise the complaint.
Most of the complaints did not fall within the scope of our mandate and to make a definite finding, we had to conduct preliminary investigations and wait for further information to determine whether it fell within our mandate or not.
16/11/02 13

14. INVESTIGATION CONT……………… (OUTPUT)
As far as the investigation of complaints of previous financial year, we are required to complete 50% of such complaints. 7 complaints carried over from previous financial year, we completed 5 complaints and 2 still pending. The output is 70% exceeding the target of 50% as set out in the Annual Performance Plan.
Graph 6 depicts previous complaints closed
16/11/02 14

15. INVESTIGATION CONT……………… (OUTPUT)
REMEDIAL MEASURES TO MEET TARGETS SET FOR CASES WHICH DO NOT FALL UNDER OUR MANDATE
We have requested other complaint units which refer complaints to us to scrutinise such complaints carefully to determine whether they fall under our jurisdiction or not and if not to refer it to the complaints unit which in fact has the mandate to deal with them.
We have introduced a rule of practice that where a complaint on the face of it does not fall within our mandate, we explained to complainant, firstly what our mandate is- if she or he is of the view that it does fall under our mandate, to furnish us with such evidence within 10 days, failing which we will finalise our report without any delay.
16/11/02 15

16. REPORTS TO THE MINISTER (OUTPUT)
As far as Reports to the Minister, Complainants and Respondents are concerned, we submitted 15 Reports of Findings comprised of 10 complaints for the period under review and 5 complaints from previous financial year. The Reports were submitted to the Minister, Complainants and Respondents respectively within 30 days as set out in the Annual Performance Plan. The target is 80% and the output was 100%.
Of the 15 Reports, 10 closed as unsubstatiated,5 Referrals to other institutions. 2 complaints were referred to IPID, 2 referred to the National Commissioner and 1 to DPCI (Anti- Corruption Unit).
16/11/02 16

17. TRENDS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It appears that Complaints Inspectorate of the SAPS does not screen the complaints to determine which complaints structures has jurisdiction to handle the matter. We are receiving a lot of complaints of service delivery against SAPS from Complaints Inspectorate which do not involve members of the HAWKS.
The Complaints structures must properly screen the complaints to determine which complaints structure has authority to investigate such complaints to avoid duplication of work and refer such complaints to appropriate complaints structure.
16/11/02 17

18. END
THANK YOU
16/11/02 18