Willem Heath’s former unit is to prioritise serious corruption investigations and dump small cases
Evidence wa ka Ngobeni
The Special Investigative Unit (SIU), the state’s premier investigation authority, is to shut down a string of long-standing probes into alleged fraudulent activities involving government officials and private individuals as part of a plan to overhaul its operations.
The unit, which has been struggling to cope with its “unmanageable” workload, confirmed this week that some of its corruption investigations would be stopped following recommendations from an internal audit report.
The audit spearheaded by Jan Henning, special director of court management at the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions was ordered by Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development Penuell Maduna following the departure of advocate Willem Heath as head of the unit.
The Henning report, which has been adopted by new unit head Willie Hofmeyr, calls for the closure of, among others, the investigation into Sarafina II, the Department of Health’s R14-million Aids education project.
The unit has been investigating the misappropriation of R10-million by members of the Sarafina II project. It has recovered only R4-million in assets.
The report has also proposed the closure of the unit’s three-year probe into alleged fraudulent claims by 14 Eastern Cape part-time district surgeons. Of the total provincial part-time district surgeons’ expenditure of R16,6-million, about R10,2-million was paid to district surgeons in 14 districts. It was found that the cost, volume and time the district surgeons were claiming payment for was beyond what the population of the district would warrant.
The Henning report says: “It would appear that the possibility of any substantial recovery is remote and is by far outweighed by the logistical problems the SIU will have to face in proving these claims. From this point onwards further investigation would be a futile exercise.”
However, the report suggests work done on the investigations that are closed should be submitted to relevant state institutions to enable them to tighten their financial controls.
Hofmeyr, who visited the unit’s East London headquarters this week, said his team has been scrutinising the unit’s corruption cases with a view to determine the availability or lack of reasonable grounds to justify further investigations.
Hofmeyr says the unit has decided to prioritise serious pending corruption cases and will dump small cases that are unlikely to lead to the recovery of state money.
“We believe we should focus on bigger cases but we are still deciding on whether to proceed or not with some of the cases. However in most cases, which is about 95%, we agree with the recommendations of the audit report.”
The report, which has recommended that some of the unit’s proclamation applications be ceded, also calls for the radical shake-up of government-sponsored crime fighting units. Although the report recognises the role played by the SIU, it suggests that the unit be streamlined to ensure that it effectively responds to corruption in the public sector.
The unit’s work has been hampered by the fact that it has to apply for a proclamation before it can conduct an investigation. The report adds that the unit would need to assess the cases it receives for investigation in order to avoid huge backlogs.
The report says the SIU should also stop “undertaking more work than it could handle within a reasonable time”.
“The taking on of an overload of work, often of a less serious nature and often requiring a time-consuming ‘fishing expedition’ to identify the alleged irregularities has, in our view, impaired the SIU’s ability to act swiftly. A revision of the purpose and aims of the unit is necessary,” the report reads.
The report says in order for the SIU to deal with matters that are still relatively new and to address the problems of having to apply for a proclamation the government should consider “utilising the SIU as a forensic unit for the auditor general”.
At this stage, the auditor general does not have the forensic capacity or powers to investigate irregularities in depth.
“Having gone through the auditing process, the auditor general would be in the best position to identify and prioritise matters which should be dealt with by the SIU. It should not be bogged down with trivialities; it should, furthermore, given the cumbersome process and stifling results, not be dependent on a proclamation for its jurisdictional operational basis,” the report reads.
The report said the proposal, which would require the amendment of the law to be successful, has been approved by the SIU staff and the auditor general is prepared to consider it.