DETERMINATION OF REMUNERATION OF JUDGES AND MAGISTRATES FOR (RECONMMENDATION FOR 2014/15 FINANCIAL YEAR) PRESENTATION TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE 18 FEBRUARY 2015

2 An outline of the presentation 1.Purpose and legislative authority 2.Recommendation of the Independent Commission for the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers (IRC) 3.Legislative authority 4.The determination of remuneration of judges and magistrates by the President 5.General views and comments on the determination 6.Recommended approach to the matter

3 Purpose and legislative authority  The purpose of the presentation is to submit to the Select Committee on Security and Justice, the determination of the remuneration of magistrates and judges for the 2014/15 financial year  In terms of the Magistrates Act, 1944 (section 2(1) and the Judges Remuneration and Conditions of Employment Act, 2001 (s2) the salaries, allowances and benefits of magistrates and judges respectively are determined by the President by notice in the gazette after taking into considerations the recommendations of the IRC. the remuneration of judges and magistrates must be approved by Parliament

4 Purpose and legislative authority  In terms of the Independent Commission for the Remuneration of Public Office-Bearers Act, 1997: The remuneration, benefits and allowances of public office bearers are determined by the President after considering the recommendations of the Independent Commission on the Remuneration of Public-Office Bearers (IRC). Following the amendment of the Act in 2003, magistrates and judges were included in the definition of public office bearers requiring that the salaries be determined by the IRC  Unlike that of other categories of public office-bearers, it the requirement of both the Magistrates Act and Judges Remuneration Act that Parliament must approve the determination made by the President. This is viewed as a measure to safeguard the independence of the judiciary (Van Rooyen judgment)

5 The remuneration package of judges and magistrates  Current and recommended remuneration of Magistrate who are 1, 097 Other allowances and benefits of magistrates:  Magistrates get a car allowance as part of the package which may be structured  Are members of the pension fund (GPEF)  Medical aid LevelCurrentRecommended Regional Court President1, , Regional Mag /Chief Mag , Senior Magistrate Magistrate

6 The remuneration package of judges and magistrates  That of judges (who are 240) is as follows: Other benefits and allowances of judges:  Continuing salary as a form of pension  Gratuity  Car owned by the State PositionCurrentRecommended Chief Justice2, , Deputy Chief Justice2, , President of SCA2, , Deputy President of SCA2, , Judge of CC and SCA1, , Judge President1, , Deputy Judge President1, , Judge of the High Court1, ,

7 Constitutional, and legislative imperatives  Constitutional and legislative imperatives:  The remuneration of judicial offices is a direct charge against National Revenue Fund, and not part of DOJ CD/OCJ vote allocation  The salary, benefits and allowances of judges may not be reduced (similar in respect of Magistrate, safe that the latter is a safeguarded by an Act of Parliament)  On-going measures to improve economical efficiency:  Magistrates’ pension and medical benefits have been a matter of discussion for some time. Government’ will provide a policy view during the comprehensive review by the IRC  A legislative framework for remuneration in respect of judges discharged who perform service who perform service  Measures under way to revise the regulatory framework regarding the allocation of State-owned vehicles for judges

8 Consultation as required by law  The establishment of a Lower Courts Remuneration Committee in respect of magistrates: The Lower Courts Remuneration Committee (LCRC) was establishing a vehicle through which the Chief Justice will be able to make submissions to the IRC for purposes of the remuneration of magistrates as he or she is required to do so by law.  The LCRC comprises members from the Judicial Officers Association of South Africa (JOASA) and Association of Regional Magistrates (ARMSA). Despite their representation in the LCRC JOASA and ARMSA have made individual representations, both to IRC and Parliament. There were also litigation challenging the determination made in the courts of law, which is not an ideal situation  At the Superior Courts the Heads of Courts used as a forum to canvass views from the judges

9 Concluding remarks Committee to take note the following in considering the determination by the President: (a)That Parliament’s power in terms of the applicable legislation: The law requires Parliament to approve or reject the determination by the President. There is no clear guidance in the applicable legislation of the process that must be followed where Parliament rejects the determination save that the determination lapses – thereby necessitating another determination by the President. The situation becomes complex in particular where the two Houses arrives at different decisions. This may require strengthening of the legislation overtime

10 Concluding remarks (b)The timeframe for the determination The determination of the remuneration of judicial officers lends itself to a lengthy process due to the legislative requirements. By the time Parliament receives and considers the determination of the President all other categories of public office-bearers including members of Parliament would have their salary adjustments effected. After the approval the Department (and now the OCJ must implement the determination on the system which takes time. This is due to the manual calculations that are necessitated by peculiar circumstances of each judicial officer). This causes resentment which are understandable It is necessary that a time table be worked between the all involved to improve time efficiency

11 Recommendation It is recommended that the Committee approves the President determination as per the Notice addressed to Parliament by the President, namely: (a)6% increase in respect of judicial officers earning less than R1, (a)5% in respect of judicial officers earning more than R1,

12 END Q & A