Siphokazi Qikani – Paul S. Masumbe
Full Text of Paper
- Source Type: Journal
- Document Type: Study
- Document Language: English
- Published on: 31. 3. 2024
- File Format: PDF
- File Size: 789 kB
In: Societas et iurisprudentia • 2024 • Volume 12 • Issue 1 • Pages 19-39 • ISSN 1339-5467
Abstract: South Africa has had its fair share of allegations of corrupt activities within the public sector. Consequently, numerous commissions of enquiries have been established to investigate matters of public interest. The most recent is the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State (hereinafter the “Zondo Commission”) established in 2018 with investigative powers. R1 billion later, the Commission completed and compiled its findings in 2022/23 which contained a plethora of evidence. Despite the enormous evidence gathered by the Commission as with other Commissions before it, prosecution and conviction have been minimal. However, some of the Commission’s findings have been challenged or subjected to judicial review. The huge costs of these commissions, the sluggish nature of prosecution and convictions, and the high ratio of challenges to their findings invite the question of their effectiveness and necessity. Against this backdrop, the article argues that the government needs to redirect the resources it invests in these commissions of enquiry into strengthening the existing investigating institutions and the prosecuting authority. It is argued that the ultimate effect of any investigation into any wrongdoing should be the vindication of those who have been wronged and the restoration of what has been lost. This can be best achieved when the country has a capacitated prosecuting authority, that can thoroughly investigate and an independent judiciary which is the ultimate guardian of South Africa’s constitutional democracy. It is hoped that this paper will contribute to the advocacy for the strengthening of institutions that are designed to uphold the rule of law in South Africa.
Key Words: Rule of Law; Commission of Enquiry; Prosecuting Authority; Institutional Independence; Political Interference; Judiciary; South Africa.
ORCID: 
https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4647-7393
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9997-4125
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31262/1339-5467/2024/12/1/19-39
Copyright © 2024 Siphokazi Qikani – Paul S. Masumbe
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Bibliographic Citation
QIKANI, S. and P. S. MASUMBE. Between Commissions of Enquiry and Direct Prosecution: Quo Vadis, South Africa?. Societas et iurisprudentia [online]. 2024, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 19-39 [cit. 2020-01-01]. ISSN 1339-5467. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31262/1339-5467/2024/12/1/19-39.
References
Case of Doctors for Life International v. Speaker of the National Assembly and Others [2006-08-17]. Judgement of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, 2006, CCT 12/05.
Case of Glenister v. President of the Republic of South Africa and Others [2011-03-17]. Judgement of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, 2011, CCT 48/10.
Case of Korabie v. Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector, including Organs of State and Others [2022-09-20]. Judgement of the High Court of South Africa, 2022, 9946/2022.
Case of Mncwabe v. President of the Republic of South Africa and Others; Mathenjwa v. President of the Republic of South Africa and Others [2023-08-24]. Judgement of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, 2023, CCT 102/22; CCT 120/22.
Case of Nxasana v. Corruption Watch NPC and Others [2018-08-13]. Judgement of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, 2018, CCT 13/18.
Case of Pikoli v. President of the Republic of South Africa and Others [2009-08-11]. Judgement of the High Court of South Africa, 2009, 8550/09.
Case of President of the Republic of South Africa and Others v. South African Rugby Football Union and Others [1999-09-10]. Judgement of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, 1999, CCT 16/98.
Case of Secretary of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State v. Zuma [2021-01-28]. Judgement of the Constitutional Court of South Africa, 2021, CCT 295/20.
Commissions Act (8/1947): Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State [1947]. Government Gazette of the Republic of South Africa, 2018, No. 41436.
Commissions Act No. 8 [1947].
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa [1996].
HAWKER, D. NPA’s Bungled Matshela Koko Kusile Corruption Case Sounds Alarm Bells over Directorate’s Preparedness to Prosecute. In: Daily Maverick [online]. 2023-11-25 [cit. 2023-12-08]. Available at: https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2023-11-25-npas-bungled-matshela-koko-kusile-corruption-case-sounds-alarm-bells-over-directorates-preparedness-to-prosecute/.
KANYEGIRIRE, A. Investigating the Investigators: A Summary of the Khampepe Commission of Inquiry. SA Crime Quarterly [online]. 2008, no. 24, pp. 35-40 [cit. 2023-12-08]. ISSN 2413-3108. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3108/2008/v0i24a953.
KOHN, L. The National Prosecuting Authority as Part of South Africa’s Integrity and Accountability Branch and the Related Case for an Anti-Corruption Redress System. Constitutional Court Review [online]. 2022, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-58 [cit. 2023-12-08]. ISSN 2521-5183. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2989/ccr.2022.0001.
MONTESH, M. and J. BERNING. A Need for a Single Anti-Corruption Agency in South Africa: A Comparative Study. Acta Criminologica. 2012, vol. 2012, no. 1, pp. 117-137. ISSN 1012-8093.
MOSALA, I. Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector Including Organs of State: Media Statement. In: Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture [online]. 2022-06-18 [cit. 2023-12-08]. Available at: https://www.statecapture.org.za/site/files/announcements/658.
National Prosecuting Authority Act No. 32 [1998].
OMAR, J. The NPA’s Limited Independence and How to Mitigate Political Interference in High-Profile Cases. Southern African Public Law [online]. 2020, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 1-29 [cit. 2023-12-08]. ISSN 2522-6800. Available at: https://doi.org/10.25159/2522-6800/7343.
PETÉ, S. A. Commissions of Inquiry as a Response to Crisis: The Role of the Jali Commission in Creating Public Awareness of Corruption (Part 1). Obiter [online]. 2020, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 903-925 [cit. 2023-12-08]. ISSN 2709-555X. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17159/obiter.v41i4.10493.
PIENAAR, G. and N. BOHLER-MULLER. Implementation of the State Capture Commission Recommendations: An Institutional Perspective on Ethics and Accountability. New Agenda [online]. 2023, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 11-20 [cit. 2023-12-08]. ISSN 1607-2820. Available at: https://www.ajol.info/index.php/na/article/view/257373.
Post Zondo – The Future of Democracy Colloquium. In: HSRC – Human Sciences Research Council [online]. 2023 [cit. 2023-12-08]. Available at: https://hsrc.ac.za/post-zondo-the-future-of-democracy-colloquium/.
SINGH, K. and T. PILLAY. What to Do with the Offenders? Unpacking South Africa’s State Capture Amnesty Debate. New Agenda [online]. 2022, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 20-25 [cit. 2023-12-08]. ISSN 1607-2820. Available at: https://www.ajol.info/index.php/na/article/view/252783.
ZONDO, R. M. M. Judicial Commission of Inquiry into State Capture Report. In: The Presidency [online]. 2022 [cit. 2023-12-08]. Available at: https://www.thepresidency.gov.za/judicial-commission-inquiry-state-capture-report.