1. NPS Report to Portfolio Committee
20 February 2008
Comprise the performance during the financial year Apr 2006 – March 2007

2. Report comprises: Mission Statement Case Overview
Service Delivery: Objectives / Indicators
Projects and Initiatives
The Way Forward in 2007/2008

3. 1. Mission Statement Our mission is to:
Prosecute criminal cases, efficiently and effectively
Contribute to better crime investigations
Contribute to crime prevention and community justice
Ensure joint problem-solving and co-operation with partners and stakeholders

4. 2. Case Overview 2.1 High Courts 2.2 Regional Courts
2.3 District Courts
2.4 Monitoring Mechanisms:
2.4.1 Withdrawal Rate Audit
2.4.2 Annual Audit on Outstanding Cases

5. 2.1 High Courts Output: Indicator: Actual:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
New Cases
Trials Finalised
Minimum Sentences
Outstanding
Actual:
High Court Performance
This slide gives an indication of the workload of all High Courts. The pie chart indicates the ratio between the inflow of work and the disposal thereof.
It is evident that the inflow is higher than the output..

6. 2.2 Regional Courts Output: Indicator: Actual:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
New Cases
Trials Finalised
ADR’s
Removed from Roll
Outstanding
Actual:
Regional Court Performance
This slide gives an indication of the workload of all Regional Courts. More cases have been removed from the roll than finalized. However the total number of cases removed from the roll includes Withdrawals, Struck of roll, Warrants and those cases transferred to other courts. Due to the serious nature of these cases, only a few matters were appropriate for alternative dispute resolution processes.

7. 2.3 District Courts Output: Indicator: Actual:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
New Cases
Trials Finalised
ADR’s
Removed from Roll
Outstanding
Actual:
District Court Performance
This slide gives an indication of the workload of all District Courts. Fewer cases are being carried over and lead times of cases are shorter than in the Regional Courts. To reduce the number of trial cases, frequent use of ADR processes take place.

8. 2.4.1 Monitoring Mechanisms: Withdrawal Rate Audit
Indicator:
Cases Withdrawn and reasons for such withdrawals
Actual:
1.7% reduction
Monitoring Tool
Audit on cases withdrawn conducted to determine the main reasons for withdrawals and identify areas in need of intervention
Two main monitoring mechanisms are in place to verify data and investigate emerging trends. Although a reduction of 1.7% has been achieved in the overall withdrawal rate, an increase in certain areas necessitated further investigation. An audit was therefore conducted to determine the main reasons for withdrawals during a specific month. The main aim was to identify areas in need of some intervention. The audit results showed that the three main reasons for withdrawals are ‘On request of the complainant’, ‘No prima facie case’ and ‘Witnesses absent’.

9. Monitoring Mechanisms: Withdrawal Rate Audit cntd
Indicator:
Reasons for cases withdrawn
Actual:
Main Offences of cases withdrawn
Monitoring Tool
Indicate the offences where Restorative Justice approach can be used more effectively
The main offences of cases withdrawn include assault common, GBH and theft. The results derived from this audit indicated areas where a restorative justice approach could be applied more effectively.

10. 2.4.2 Audit on Outstanding Cases Case Overview: Incl. SCCU
Year:
2003
2004
2005
2006
Cases
42 766
42 159
43 918
43 112
Counts
95 517
87 684
Accused
64 324
62 804
66 519
65 840
Acc. in custody
23 954
23 084
20 301
The annual audit on outstanding cases have been used to monitor the status of cases on the court rolls of the Regional and High courts. The audit aims to: Determine the prevalence rate of crime in our courts, the cycle times of cases, the main reasons for multiple postponements which are causing delays in the finalizations of cases, and the status of awaiting trial detainees. These audits have indicated a steady rise in the number of accused and counts per case. A delay in finalization is inevitable when there are multiple accused and counts per case. The increased figure on the number of counts during the 2005 audit could be ascribed to one case in FSD with counts of fraud.

11. National Prevalence Rate: Excl SCCU
NPS AUDIT
National Prevalence Rate: Excl SCCU
Cases:
Counts:
Accused:
Acc in Custody: / 31.2%
Acc younger 18y: 904 / 4.5%
The audit shows that violent crimes are still the most prevalent with 52% of the counts comprising violent offences which include sexual offences. However, a significant increase in economic crimes is noted - even when cases from SCCU are excluded. Economic Crimes have increased from 34% (29021 counts) to 40.5% ( counts). Another increase is also noted in Robbery with aggravating circumstances and a similar decrease in common robbery which confirms the notion that violent robbery is increasingly more prevalent than in the previous years.

12. Audit on Outstanding Cases Main Reasons: Regional Courts
Fewer postponements for further investigation could be ascribed to better screening procedures which resulted in an increased number of trial ready cases. Multiple postponements still due to request of legal representatives, absence of accused and or complainant/witness.

13. 3. Service Delivery Objectives / Indicators
3.1 Conviction Rate
3.2 Finalised Cases
3.3 ADR: Diversion
3.4 Average Court Hours
3.5 Lead Time of Cases
National Backlog Project
Annual Audit on Outstanding cases

14. 3.1 Service Delivery Objectives / Indicators
Output:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
Conviction Rate
Target:
High Court (H/c): 85%
Regional Court (R/c): 70%
District Court (D/c): 85%
Actual:
High Court: 87.8%
Regional Court: 72%
District Court: 87.4%
A high conviction rate has once again been achieved by all courts. The target has been exceeded with 2% by District, Regional and High Courts.

15. Highlights: Community Courts achieved conviction rate of 95 %
Tax Units achieved a conviction rate of above 95%
Convicted cases referred for sentence to High Courts i.t.o Sect % confirmed
Give emphasis to the effectiveness of Regional Courts

16. 3.2 Service Delivery Objectives / Indicators
Output:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
Finalised Cases (verdict)
Target: + 5%
High Court (H/c): 2 865
Regional Court (R/c):
District Court (D/c):
Actual:
High Court: 2 394
(16.4% decline)
Regional Court:
(5.8% decline)
District Court:
(11% decline)
A decline is noted in the finalization of cases with a verdict. The High Courts finalized 471 fewer cases, the Regional courts 2586, and the District courts a total of cases. The number of cases diverted is excluded from these figures. A total of cases were diverted in the District courts only.

17. Highlights: Constraints
Focussed approach on Alternative Dispute Resolution methods
Constraints
Various role-players impact on effective Case Flow Management process
Vacancy rate of 24% impact negatively
Court session declined from an average of pm to pm

18. 3.3 Service Delivery Objectives / Indicators
Output:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
ADR - Diversions
Target:
All Courts: 10% increase
Actual:
All Courts: 18.8% increase
ADR methods are successful alternatives to trial cases. An increase from during the previous financial year to a total of during this reporting period. Compared to the cases diverted during 04/05, a significant improvement has been achieved.

19. Highlights:
Vaalrand Cluster diverted 33% of total number of cases diverted
Increase made possible with more programs available as DSD is expanding to areas in need
Not calculated as convicted cases although regarded as a successful finalisation
A case is only diverted where accused admits guilt

20. 3.4 Service Delivery Objectives / Indicators
Output:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
Average Court Hours
Target:
High Court (H/c): 4:00
Regional Court (R/c): 4:30
District Court (D/c): 4:45
Actual:
High Court: 3:20
Regional Court: 3:55
District Court: 4:02
A decline in utilization of court time is noted during the reporting period. Court hours are very difficult to maintain as all parties represented in court have to be committed – including administrative personnel from DOJ supplying infrastructure. The one person however who has the ability to take control is the presiding officers. Although many of the problems can and should be addressed during case flow management meetings it is obvious from the similar situation in the High Courts that the hours are mainly influenced by the lack of control and commitment from the Bench.

21. Constraints: Highlights:
Case Flow Management has teething problems and various role-players impact
Alternative Dispute Resolution methods also take up court time but is not accounted for
Shortage of Legal Aid attorneys in some regions also impact negatively on court sessions
In the High Courts, court hours are also utilised for appeals, reviews, motion applications but are excluded from recorded court hours
Highlights:
A positive step was the appointment of 64 Court Preparation Officers to prepare witnesses which saves prosecutor’s time
Appointment of two PP’s per court will enhance the optimum utilization of court time

22. 3.5 Service Delivery Objectives / Indicators
Output:
Prosecution of criminal cases
Indicator:
Lead Time of Cases
Target:
H/c: 75% not more than 12 m on roll
R/c: 75% not more than 6 m on roll
D/c: 90% not more than 6 m on roll
Actual:
H/c: 85% not more than 12 m on roll
R/c: 57% not more than 6 m on roll
It can be noted that there is a decline in the backlog cases in the Lower Courts but an increase in the High Courts. This might probably change with the jurisdiction of the Regional Courts that have been adjusted by the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Amendment Act and also depending on the further extension in civil jurisdiction of Regional Courts. The decrease in Regional courts have been the direct result of the National Backlog Project.

23. Highlights:
Lower Courts reduced their number of backlog cases with 3% from to
The National Backlog Project contributed to reduction of backlog cases
Annual audit on outstanding cases identified blockages in system
New target of 9 months for Regional Courts from April 2007

24. National Backlog Project
The Backlog Reduction Project assisted courts where demand exceeded supply and focussed on:
Regional court priority areas since Nov ’06 where the biggest problems are being experienced
Backlogs were reduced by 14.8% at end of March ‘07
Outstanding rolls decreased by 9.7% at these sites
Certain High courts regarding outstanding appeals since March ’07 - an additional 593 appeals were enrolled
Since March ’07 a further roll out to additional sites has taken place

25. 4. Project / Initiatives 4.1 Community Courts:
Achieved conviction rate of 95 %
12 Courts in operation
Courts with integrated approach, improving access to justice and promote community participation
4.2 Community Prosecutions:
9 Pilot sites established
9 Community prosecutors been appointed
Prosecutor’s roll to assist in crime prevention

26. 4. Project / Initiatives 4.3 Organised Crime Initiative:
68 posts for specialised prosecutors created;
Co-ordinating with SAPS Organised Crime Units in combating organised crime;
Close working relationship with AFU and STU
4.4 Specialist Tax Unit:
Established in 2003;
458 cases finalised in 2006/2007 with conviction rate of more than 95%;
Partnership with SARS

27. 4. Project / Initiatives 4.5 Project Clean-up:
Mandated prosecutors to work on Saturdays from November 06 to March 07;
Purpose to prepare cases and administrative tasks that prevented cases from proceeding in time;
Results (1 998 staff members participated):
3 447 dockets screened and prepared for Court;
2 957 inquest dealt with;
839 outstanding files finalised;
decision dockets dealt with;
131 consultation with witnesses

28. 4. Project / Initiatives 4.6 Restorative Justice:
National Conference was hosted
Regional awareness sessions started in March 07
Promoting increase in ADR’s
4.7 Awaiting Trial Detainees:
Guidelines were developed and distributed in April 2007
Awaiting trial detainees have decreased by 1.3% at the end of March 07
Reduction also shown in audit conducted on outstanding cases in Regional Courts at end of November – from 34.7% to 30.8%

29. Audit on Outstanding Cases Ratio: Accused /Detainees
5.47%
4.5%
34.7%
30.8%
It is clear from the Annual Audit on Outstanding Cases in the Regional and High Courts that even though the number of accused only slightly decreased from the previous year, a remarkable reduction in awaiting trial detainees were attained (from to ) as well as the number of juveniles in detention declined from 1263 to 904. This was brought about by more appropriate use of Section 63(1) of the CPA where bail amounts and/or conditions are being altered, Section 63A – where Heads of Prisons request reconsideration of bail due to overcrowding and section 62(f) – release of accused in supervision of correctional service officials or probation officers. Restorative justice also contributed to this success.

30. 5. The Way Forward:
NPS has key role to play in society and must fulfill its responsibilities in making the CJS work in the face of the resulting and unacceptable crime levels
This task is getting bigger and is demanding more resources
A lot of good work has been achieved although hampered by a lack of skilled personnel and resources which are now reaching critical proportions
Given the resources, the people and stakeholder co-operation, the NPS can raise the execution of its duties to new levels of excellence and effectiveness

31. QUESTIONS?