AFU Report to Portfolio Committee – 9 March 2006 Presented by: Willie Hofmeyr afu

Overall objectives Increase the volume of cases to build the capacity to do more cases to make a real impact in the fight against crime 2: Developing the law to do test cases and create legal precedents that allow the effective use of the law afu

1: Increasing the volume of cases 2004 / 2005 2005 / 2006 (10 mnths) Indicator Target Actual % of target   Target: Full year & 10 mnths YTD Number of cases Seizures 180 165 92% 210 175 207 118% Cases completed 150 151 101% 160 133 171 128% afu

Continued Indicator 2004 / 2005 2005 / 2006 (10 mnths) Target Actual % of target   Target: Full year & 10 mnths YTD Value of cases Seizures R 250m R 222m 89% R250m R208m R 275m 132% Cases completed R 100m R 173m 173% R100m R83m R 93m 112% Funds into CARA R 60m R 25m 42% R50m R42m R 18m Funds to victims R 20m R 66m 332% afu

Notes on targets New seizures Number of cases: well above target Value of cases: already achieved R267.5m against target of R250m Completed cases Value of cases: above target afu

Provisional targets 06/07 Indicator Number of cases: Monetary targets: New seizures 230 R300m Cases completed 180 R120m Funds into CARA   R40m Funds to victims R30m afu

2: Developing the law Indicator 2004 / 2005 2005 / 2006 (10 mnths) Target Actual % of target   Target: year & for 10 mnths YTD Judgements overall (In CC or SCA) 30 47 (0 + 6) 157% 45 38 34 (1 + 3) 91% Successful 67% 64% (50%) -3% 71% (75%) +4% afu

Continued Judgements to date Success rate to date All cases 165 63% CC/SCA cases 3 +14 100% & 57% afu

Success rate in Judgments Have maintained success rate of more than 85% in all cases Also measure success rate in cases where judgments are obtained In 4 years to April 2003 won only 44% of judgments (21 of 48) Big change in past 3 years in attitude of courts 03/04 won 75% of judgements (23 of 30) 04/05 won 64% of judgements (30 of 47) 05/06 won 71% of judgements (22 of 31) Since Nov 2004, have won 5 of 6 cases in SCA afu

SCA / CC cases SCA cases Seevnarayan judgement on instrumentalities made it almost impossible to act against dirty hotels Recent SCA decisions in Prophet and Prophet adopted a more balanced approach for fixed property SCA cases - other Nel and Du Toit lost – issue of legal expenses CC cases Phillips application for leave to appeal refused afu

Partners Have excellent relations with SAPS – about 90% of cases, 30% value DSO – about 8 % of cases, 67% value Others: NPS, SARS, SARB, FIC Have SAPS task teams in most AFU offices afu

Employment equity All Staff Management Designated groups 82% 76% Black     All Staff Management Designated groups 82% 76% Black 61% 66% African 37% 29% Women 45% 41% afu

Major challenges Major challenge to expand its capacity sufficiently to deal with all the cases that are currently in court and where asset forfeiture can be done Estimate is about R1 to R2 billion, apart from other proceeds that can be targeted through civil forfeiture Prepared a business case to expand capacity sufficiently to deal with this over 5 years Requires expanding the budget almost ten-fold - Securing funding a massive challenge afu

Legislation A number of areas have been identified where the law should be clarified or strengthened Amendments have been prepared and submitted to DOJ We have identified a shorter list of urgent amendments Helpful if they can be processed in in the second half of the year Minister is about to publish regulations to specify the maximum legal expenses that may be paid from assets preserved ito chapter 6 afu

Conclusion Asset forfeiture is an important part of the war against crime ‑ it hits the crime bosses where it hurts most ‑ in the pocket In this way it helps to deter criminals But most importantly, forfeiture is a vital weapon to take the profit out of crime If we are to deal effectively with crime, it must become true “that crime does not pay” afu