Border Management/Coordination Outline the critical challenges in South African Border Environment and solutions to secure the country’s borders. “The future is no longer quite what it used to be…..” Paul Valery – French poet & philosopher

How did we get here? Westphalian System of Nation States Since the 17th century, sovereignty resides in nation states that protect and regulate territorial borders and create national identity. Peace of Westphalia - 1648 How did we get here? Westphalian System of Nation States Borders encompass the flows of goods and people toward the jurisdictional line where national regulatory authorities assert authority and power most aggressively. African Context Colonial borders created 133 years ago when European powers met at the infamous Berlin Conference. Divide Africa into the borders that still exist today.

New Border Paradigm: Global Lines & Flows define Modern Borders Common Security issues world wide in border control: Criminal Acts Technical violations Transnational organised crime Threats to the integrity of border management. Terrorist threats The Beginning and End of Borders

Responses by Governments to the reality of people movement. “Across the globe, insecure borders enable the trafficking of drugs, weapons, contraband, terrorist funding, materials related to weapons of mass destruction, conflict minerals, wildlife and people.” Ban Ki Moon, 2012 “The future is no longer quite what it used to be…..” Paul Valery – French poet & philosopher “Wall in the age of Trump. The Hungarian Border. Right wing politics move to centre stage across Europe (Austria/Italy) to deal with illegal migration.

Border Management in South Africa: - History & Failure-

Border Law Enforcement Environment – South Africa Ports of Entry: 72 Land Borderline: 4471km Coastal Borderline: 3924km

Trajectory of Border Management in South Africa Pre-1994: Exclusionary & race-based border control Militaristic/Hard border Sanctions busting Restrictive land Port of Entry designs 1994-2016: Conventional border control Silo-based border management Progressive immigration system Trade facilitation 2017 and Beyond: Balancing security, development & human rights Single Integrated Border Entity Demilitarisation Equitable global trade Greater African & regional integration Apartheid Border Management Coordinated Border Management Integrated Border Management

1. Since 1994 SA made gallant strides in demilitarising and deracialising the management of the country’s borders by introducing various capabilities to give effect to border management. 2. The consequence of establishing these various organs of state, e.g. immigration control, customs control, border policing etc., resulted in the emergence of a silo approach to border control, border law enforcement and border protection. 3. Various structures were subsequently put in place to attempt to coordinate the mandates and actions of these distinct organs of state in the border environment: Border Affairs Committee Coordinating Committee (1996) National Inter-Departmental Structure (NIDS) (1997) Border Control Operational Coordinating Committee (BCOCC) (2001) Inter-Agency Clearing Forum (IACF) (2010)

4. From at least the mid-2000 various studies and reports have pointed to the failure of these structures to address the systemic and structural problems of coordination model associated with fragmented border management. Immigration service Specialised law enforcement / intelligence agencies Immigration Control Custom control and VAT services Customs law enforcement Customs Control Armed forces (army, navy, air force) Border Safeguarding & Surveillance Plant health & phytosanitary inspection service Plant quarantine service Inspection of Plants and Plant Products Cross-border policing & law enforcement Border Policing Veterinary , animal, fish & food inspection service Quarantine service Inspection of Animals, Fish, Animal Products & Foodstuff Public health & sanitary inspection service Human Health Inspection INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE

Key features of Border Management Approach About 8891 state officials from at least 5 organs of state (DHA, SARS, DAFF, SAPS, DoH) are working at the country’s 72 Ports of Entry, With different conditions of service and remuneration. Implementing distinct Departmental mandates in at least 58 pieces of legislation; With competing priorities and deliverables; Having dissimilar tools of trade and equipment; With some systems that are not automated, e.g. DOH and DAFF; Engaging in limited sharing of information; and Lacking a single management, command and control structure.

Key features of Border Management Approach The consequences of the above fragmentation are: Non-aligned and often poor border control-related service delivery ; Ineffective facilitation of the movement of persons and goods (unnecessary delays and cost to clients) Compromised joint efforts and outcomes resulting from different risk management tools and approaches; The ineffective utilisaton of public resources due to limited information sharing; Inability to enforce a standard approach in dealing with border law enforcement transgressions; A higher volume of Illegal goods entering the country; Corruption and organised crime thriving in a fragmented management environment; An increase of undocumented foreign nationals within the country; and Siloism with agencies focusing on their own mandates.

Summary of BCOCC Review findings Lack of an Enabling Regulatory Authority: Contradicting and overlapping legislation and mandates is the single biggest inhibiting factor Lack of accountability Poor strategic alignment across stakeholders with national priorities. Poor alignment of strategies within Government Non alignment of the BCOCC strategy and that of business partners (Landlord and service providers – Aviation and Maritime) which is profit orientated.

Summary of BCOCC Review findings Sub-optimal organisation design and structure of the BCOCC and CBM. The organisational design and structure need to be re-looked in order to ensure it is still fit to deliver on the changed environment. The focus for the BCOCC during the transition phase will be to move from the previous BCOCC role as a coordinating structure towards a primary role of integration, which will support the objectives of the new BMA concept. Centralised Management and Inadequate Resourcing of the BCOCC and Collaborative Border Management Both Provincial and Port Coordinators did not have their own ring fenced budget Lack of centralised budget to address operational needs at a Port of Entry level Lack of understanding and incorrect implementation of the fiscal process to support operational requirements Inadequate resource deployment by departments No enough focus on integrated and multi discipline skills development

The Solution Establishment of a Border Management Authority. In 2013 Cabinet resolved that a BMA should be established. Cabinet endorsed the following guiding principles for the BMA Responsible for the entire border environment. Ensure coordination, collaboration, oversight, control, and effective management. Establishment to be achieved through integrated systems and cooperation within an appropriate legal framework that specifies roles and responsibilities.

Key Government Decisions 3 June 2009 In the State of the Nation Address: Former President JG Zuma stated that government “will start the process of setting up a Border Management Agency” in South Africa. 26 June 2013 Cabinet resolved: To establish a BMA that would include the ceding of functions from relevant organs of state. Implementation steps. Department of Home Affairs (DHA) designated as the lead department for the BMA

Key Government Decisions 10 December 2014 Cabinet endorsed: BMA Vision Key priorities for the Transitional Period (2015-2016). BMA should be established by December 2016 23 September 2015 Cabinet endorsed the BMA Bill, 2015 should be introduced into Parliament .

BMA VISION BMA will be outcomes focused: Balance facilitation of legitimate trade and travel functions, while simultaneously addressing security risks BMA will be established as a single body BMA will assume control of Ports of Entry and borderline functions Establishment of a National Border Risk Management and Targeting Centre BMA will continue current service delivery improvement initiatives BMA will assume operational responsibility for Port of Entry infrastructure and maintenance: BMA will establish its own organisational culture, identity and conditions of service

Overview of envisaged BMA Legal Form & Status BMA National Public Entity Jurisdiction: Ports of Entry & Border Law Enforcement Area Functions: border law enforcement Implement 58 pieces of legislation Armed Service in terms of S199 Constitution Border Guard Commissioner: CEO & Commander National Targeting Centre Intelligence-driven organisation Geographical Jurisdiction Head of BMA Primary Mandate Legal Implementation Functions Provision to limit rights Constitution allows for an armed service

BMA BLUEPRINT VISION - 2032 Indicative headcount: Facilitate and manage the legitimate movement of persons within the Border Law Enforcement Area and at Ports of Entry. Facilitate and manage the legitimate movement of goods within the Border Law Enforcement Area and at Ports of Entry. Facilitate the collection of revenue within the Border Law Enforcement Area and at Ports of Entry. Co-operate and coordinate its Border Law Enforcement functions with other Organs of State, border communities or any other persons. Functions of the BMA (Bill 2016) Establishment of the BMA Schedule 3A Public Entity Armed service Border Law Enforcement Functions at Ports of Entry and within the land & maritime Border Law Enforcement Area are performed exclusively by the officers of the BMA Vision of the Ideal State The BMA Blueprint document serves as the vision and ideal end state for the operationalisation of the entity. This spans a 15 year view for a fully established and integrated BMA including the Ports of Entry and Land and Maritime Border Law Enforcement Area (Border Guard and introduction of the Coast Guard). Indicative headcount: 9756 for Border Guard and Operational Support at Ports of Entry 11220 Land Border Guards Coast Guard to be determined in the medium to long term Projected Operational Cost Indicative annualised cost for the ideal end state (FY 2032) is R10, 378, 881, 917. This excludes costs relating to the Coast Guard.

Intended Border Management Outcomes More cost effective services Enhance security and management of the border environment Improvement in shared information between organs of state Optimisation of Port of Entry operations and processes to enhance efficiencies through maximum compliance and minimum administrative costs and delays Effective utilisation of financial, human, infrastructure and accommodation resources at a Port of Entry Improved sterility and integrity of Port of Entry and borderline areas Improvement in management, discipline and transparency with single command and control organizational environment Creation of customer service efficiencies through streamlined, integrated operations at the Ports of Entry.

Thank you for listening