Chairperson, maybe Mr Van der Merwe can bring some cake along and see where we go from there.
As stated in our report, because of the short period allocated to the budget process, we didn't have time for an extensive examination of the inputs by the department and the NPA. Koos, you wouldn't know about this, because you weren't there. [Laughter.] We have said that we want to go into this in more detail at a later stage.
One of the issues, though, from the reports that we were given, that was of concern or raised some alarm, was the decline in the number of cases getting to trial. If you look at the figures in the estimates of national expenditure, there is a decline in the National Prosecuting Authority, NPA, figures from 411 414 cases finalised with diversion and 373 995 without diversion to this past year's 388 296 cases. The question we need to be asking ourselves is: Why? Does this mean that fewer crimes are being committed, or is it simply that matters are not getting to court? Reports to the committee are one thing; what's even more important is to get out on the ground and see what is happening - see whether things are working or see the problems that are occurring.
The main area I'm going to be dealing with is the efficiency of the criminal justice system. One of the problems with the criminal justice system is the extensive number of role-players with different lines of responsibility, from different departments even.
A crime is committed and it's the SA Police who have to investigate and prepare the docket for the prosecutor. Once it's in court, it's then the prosecutors who prosecute the case in front of a magistrate or judge. Often evidence is required from experts such as pathologists, handwriting experts and forensic accountants, etc. In the light of the accused person's right to be presumed innocent, the defence lawyers come into the picture; and if the accused is indigent, then it is the Legal Aid Board that is a major role-player. If the accused is found guilty, then there very often have to be probation officers' reports. Lastly, if they are sentenced to a term of imprisonment, then it's something for the Department of Correctional Services - and Correctional Services even come in if the accused is in custody and has to be brought to court from prison.
So there are many actors and many places where things can go wrong. One of the things we need to be asking ourselves, with regard to the efficiency of the criminal justice system, is whether it is improving or not, and if it's not improving, why and what can be done to replace it?
The Minister spoke about the review of the criminal justice system and the recommendations that are arising from that review, and we would hope that that report and those recommendations will make a difference. Whilst policy and implementation are important, as I said earlier, we also need to go to the ground to see what is happening. We need to get to the courts as the portfolio committee and look at the problems that may or may not be occurring.
We need a more people-centred approach that's sensitive to the rights of the accused and the victim and the witnesses. Too often witnesses are called to testify; they are people with busy jobs. They end up waiting around the court without being given any explanation as to when they are going to be called, if the case is even going ahead, and are then told at the end of the day that they just have to come back. And that's something that's easy to solve. The prosecutor in that particular case can simply make a point of keeping the witnesses informed.
In the past, when we conducted oversight visits to courts, we found that those courts where the different role-players spoke to each other on a regular basis were the most successful. And, unfortunately, that often happened to be in the smaller courts. The larger courts with so many different role-players often ended up with the most problems.
We need to have a system that ensures that the role-players are able to talk to each other, that they are people-centred, and that they are given the responsibility to do what needs to be done. One anecdote relates to when we visited the Durban Magistrates' Court. One of the prosecutors complained about a problem of the lock on her door being broken, so she had to walk around court with her dockets. This was now the fault of Public Works. When we asked to look at the door and the lock, we discovered that all that was missing was a small screw, which, if she had put it in, could have solved her problem, but she had to wait for somebody else from another department, Public Works, to do something.
One of the other issues that the committee noted was the question of the vacancy rates. It is in the report. We felt they are inexcusably high and we were not very happy with the explanation given, because although it might be difficult to fill some of the posts, at least they can be advertised. By way of example, it is not part of the criminal justice system that the Master of the High Court in Pietermaritzburg was due to retire. He was a very conscientious fellow and asked that a replacement be appointed before he left so that he could orientate the person. However, the vacancy was only advertised after he left his job, and so that opportunity of orientation was completely lost. I'm not sure why that had to happen.
Lastly, it's not in terms of the topic that I'm specifically speaking on, but I would just like to draw the Minister's attention to the importance of resolving the issue of legal aid representation for farm dwellers. It's a statutory requirement which is being upheld by the courts that farm dwellers need legal representation in their land cases. Attempts have been made in this regard, and the previous portfolio committee made efforts with the then Portfolio Committee on Land and Agriculture to deal with the matter. But I think it's something that hasn't been adequately resolved by the Department of Justice and, now, the Department of Rural Development. So I would like to urge the Minister please to give attention to that issue. I thank you. [Applause.]