A call has been made for transparency and for the public to be allowed to view proceedings when national heads of the country’s key criminal justice bodies are appointed.
This was discussed in a recent seminar held by the Institute of Security Studies.
The discussion was attended by Advocate Shamila Batohi, National Director of Public Prosecutions, (NDPP), Advocate Andy Mothibi, head of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) and Professor Christopher Stone, Professor of Practice of Public Integrity, Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford.
Stone said it was important for structures in criminal justice to have their independence.
“We find that even in a country like Malawi the head of the anti-corruption bureau was appointed in a very open process that the public could witness.
The process where National Director of Public Prosecutions Shamila Batohi was appointed was open. You need public confidence as there is a fear from the public of misconduct or maybe even favouritism in the process.”
Batohi said that the National Director of Public Prosecutions needed the confidence of the public.
“We also hope that they would have the support of the executive and overall support. My view is that at lower levels particularly at the Deputy DPP levels the national director should be able to appoint those persons completely.”
Batohi added that if you have the proper processes at the top when the NDPP is appointed then that person should be entrusted with appointing those that will report to her.
“There shouldn’t be any concerns about the NDPP appointing the right people for the job. The appointments of deputy national directors that President Ramaphosa has made, there were all recommendations that I made to the president and minister. That instils a lot of confidence in me that we have the support without the interference.
The president kept to his word when he appointed me when he said that the government would not interfere in the decision-making process of the NPA.”
Mothibi agreed that the head needed to appoint the executives that would report to them.
“So that you can be satisfied that your team can execute their duties. The process of allowing the public to watch live interviews of (candidates) for positions as criminal justice heads is to enhance transparency. Enhancing transparency will increase public confidence.
“When it’s an open process the checks and balances are there. It ensures a rigorous interview process.”
Mothibi added that there has to be integrity checks and a vetting process.
“I feel there are not enough integrity checks and when they are done they are not pursued and that is why we have problems. It’s better when the process is open and the public is able to view the checks and balances.”
KZN violence monitor Mary de Haas agreed with the discussion that there should be far more transparency.
“Parliament has to oversee appointment of Hawks head for example but this Parliament with some exceptions are not doing proper oversight. There is an urgent need for a new government to ensure less political interference and more transparency in the appointment of heads of departments concerned with criminal justice.”
The Mercury