Recommendations - 3rd SAAPAM LIMPOPO CHAPTER Annual Conference

154

not protective of the Executive. The Executive runs roughshod over Parliament. It is common cause that one of the African National Congress Member of Parliament resigned because, in his view, Parliament stalled a thorough investigation into the so-called arms deal. This is an indictment on our Parliament. For this reason, and the fact that our democracy is dominated by one party to which members of Parliament owes allegiance to and serve at its behest, the referral to Parliament of non-compliance with the Public Protector’s remedial action is unlikely to bear fruits if the culprit is a senior member of the ruling party (Feinstein, 2007). The shenanigans involving the ANC in Parliament and the Public Protector bears testimony to this. The Public Protector had written a letter to the President bemoaning the fact that the President’s purported comment on her report was not a comment on her report. The ANC caucus in Parliament registered its disappointment on the Public Protector for having written that letter as the President’s report was before Parliament. It would seem that the ANC Parliamentary caucus is hell bent on protecting the President even before the Parliamentary process has begun. It is beyond the scope of this discussion to consider the appropriateness or otherwise of both the Public Protector’s letter and the responses it solicited.

155

(a) Within 14 days of the receipt of the Public Protector’s report in terms of section 8 (3) of the Public Protector Act 23 of 1998 in writing indicate that he or she or it accepts the Public Protector’s report and proposed remedial action;

(b) If he or she or it does not accepts the Public Protector’s report or remedial action indicate which parts of the report or remedial action he or she or it does accept and the reasons thereof;

(2) The Public Protector may, if the report is accepted in terms of subsection (1) (a), require the person or institution responsible for the implementation of the remedial action to draft and submit, within the time prescribed by the Public Protector, to the Public Protector an implementation plan indicating how the remedial action will be implemented.

(3) The person or institution that does not accept the remedial actions proposed by the Public Protector must, within 30 days of the receipt of the Public Protector’s report make an application or cause an application to be made on his or her or its behalf to the High Court having jurisdiction to set the whole of the report or parts of the report aside or the remedial action or parts of the remedial action he or she or it does accept.

(4) Failure to approach the High Court within the timeframes stipulated in subsection (3) the report shall be binding to all persons it applies and remedial action proposed therein must be complied with.

(5) The court may, on good cause shown, condone the application that does not comply with the timeframes stipulated in subsection (3).

(6) Nothing in this section precludes the Public Protector from issuing remedial action that is declaratory nature.

(7) A person or institution who fails to comply with the remedial action proposed by the Public Protector shall be guilty of an offence and be liable on conviction to a fine or imprisonment.

References

Brynard, DJ. 1999. Supporting Constitutional Democracy in South Africa: An Assessment of the Public Protector (Ombudsman). SAIPA, 34(1): 7-24.

Feinstein, A. 2007. After the Party: A Personal and Political Journey Inside the ANC.

Govender, K. 2013. Power and Constraints in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996. AHRLJ, 13: 82-102.

Madonsela, T.N. 2011. The Role of the Public Protector in Protecting Human Rights and Deepening Democracy. Stell LR: 4-15.

Madonsela, T. 2013. Address by the Public Protector at the SANEF Quarterly Council

Meeting, 1-17.

156

http://www.sanef.org.za/news/entry/address_by_public_protectro_adv._thuli_madonsela_at_th e_sanef_kzn_quarterly Accessed on 23 November 2013.

Ngcobozi, V. & Vanara, N. 2013. Legal Opinion on the Request of the Public Protector to

the National Assembly.

http://www.parliament.gov.za/live/contentpopup.php?Item_ID=5151&Category_ID Accessed on 23 October 2013.

Pienaar, G. 1999. The role of the Ombudsman in fighting corruption. The 9^th International Anti-Corruption Conference, 10-15 October 1999, Durban.

Public Protector, 2010. Rules of Engagement. Volume ll.

Public Protector, 2011. Report of an Investigation into an Alleged Breach of Section 5 of the Executive Ethics Code by President JG Zuma. Public Protector Report No.1. 2010/2011.

Pretoria: Public Protector.

Public Protector, 2014. A Report on an Investigation Into Allegations of Maladministration, Systemic Corporate Governance Deficiencies, Abuse of Power and the Irregular Appointment of Mr Hlaudi Motsoeneng by the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC). Public Protector Report No. 23. 2013/2014. Pretoria: Public Protector.

Shoba, S., Mokone, T. & Ngalwa, S. 2014. Hlaudi: How the Minister Conned the SABC Board. Timeslive, http://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2014/07/13/hlaudi-how-the -minister- conned-the-sabc-board Accessed on 16 July 2014.

Staff Reporter, 2014. Madonsela surprized by SABC decision. Iafrica.com, http://business.ifrica.com/personal-finance/investments/948475.html Accessed on 09 July 2014.

Tabane, R. 2013. Government no longer has my back, says Madonsela. Mail & Guardian, 05 December 2013, http://mg.co.za/article/2013-12-15-government-no-longer-has-my-back- says-madonsela Accessed on 16 July 2014.

Zuma, J.G. 2014. Report to the Speaker of the National Assembly Regarding the Security Upgrades at the Nkandla Private Residence of His Excellency President Jacob G Zuma. 14 August 2014.

Case Law

Public Protector versus Mail & Guardian and Others, 2011 (4) SA(SCA).

Special Investigating Unit versus Ngcinwana and Another [2001] 1 All SA 392 (E).

Statutes

Executive Ethics Act Executive Ethics Code

Public Protector Act 23 of 1994

THE ROLE OF PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION IN IMPLEMENTING CONSTITUTIONAL VALUES AND PRINCIPLES FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE

R. Thakathi Fort-Hare University, South Africa Abstract

The paper revisits the challenges experienced by the Public Service Commission as an agent of transformation and good governance in the Public Service of South Africa through analyzing the results of a desktop study. The Public Service Commission promotes values and principles of the Public Service as enshrined in Chapter 10 of the South Africa Constitution Act, 1996 (Act 108 of 1996). Its primary mandate is to oversee public administration and its custodial responsibility of good governance. The Public Service Commission annually publishes its “state of public service” report where it analyses how the government performed in terms of the 9 values and principles of public administration. The Public Service Commission critically evaluates the 9 values and principles and reports how the public service implemented them. These 9 values and principles from Chapter 10 of the South African Constitution are discussed in detail during the course of this study. Further, the annual reports indicate how the state managed to implement policies through transformation and enforcing good governance principles. The Public Service Commission has an enormous task to drive transformation and good governance in the entire public service. It must ensure that every state organ practices good governance and also deliver services to the people of this country. The practice however shows that most of the Departments find themselves of the wrong side of the law and just ignore the recommendations of the PSC to improve the situation. The Public Service Commission are not given the powers to take actions those transgress the law by rely on the relevant Authorities.

Keywords: Governance; Constitution; Values; Principles; Public Service Commission; South Africa

1. Introduction

An analysis of the South African public service reveals that the reign of the new politically democratic government in 1994 heralded the dawn of a new era which crucified the imbalances and the policies of racial discrimination created by the public service during the apartheid epoch.

The constitution of the Democratic Republic of South Africa (1996) created a fundamental transformation process from an apartheid-driven bureaucracy towards a more democratic public service which put citizens first through the establishment of the Public Service Commission (PSC). The Public Service Commission derives its mandate from section 195 and 196 of the constitution and it is responsible for the performance of the public service as well as the monitoring and evaluation of administrative practices whilst promoting the values and principles governing public administration as stated in Chapter 10 of section 195 (Republic of South Africa, 1996). The Public Service Commission is also tasked with the role of transforming the public

158

service through offering quality services to the citizens of South Africa. Therefore, it is reflective of a democratic government that has shifted from a rule bound culture to that which offers a broader public forum which is signified by people centered ethos of service delivery (Batho Pele Service Delivery Policy) whilst combating the spread of mal-administrative practices such as corruption and fraud so as to uphold the principles of good governance and the rule of law within the public service. Since 2001, the PSC has annually published a State of the Public Service Report in which it evaluates how the nine principles and values were implemented by the government. The PSC has an important role to ensure that the Public Service is delivering services to the people professionally, effectively and efficiently.

Nevertheless, the Public Service Commission is regarded as an agent of transformation and good governance in the public service, but the activities of the Public Service Commission have left many wondering how effective the commission is due to the fact that the absence of adequate basic service delivery, the rise of poverty, poor social service provision, escalating rates of corruption are all contributing factors that have been the sparks that are responsible for setting alight strikes and service delivery protest and yet the Public Service Commission has not been able to fully act out its constitutional mandates. This makes the case that although a new bureaucracy is operating under a democratically elected government, its legitimacy will not only come from popular consent or those supervising it, but also from the manner in which it will satisfactorily address the problems facing South Africans (Kalema, 2009:546). This leaves citizens of South Africa questioning whether the Public Service Commission is just but a ghost reflection of the apartheid era. Therefore this study strives to revisit the role of the Public Service Commission as an agent of transformation and good governance towards quality service delivery system in the Public Service.

Dalam dokumen 3rd SAAPAM LIMPOPO CHAPTER Annual Conference (Halaman 161-165)