/ 8 July 2011

Chapters nine and 10 still trying to get their stories straight

The workings of a unit inside Parliament, set up to support chapter nine institutions, are still unclear, despite its having been established almost a year ago.

The office on institutions supporting democracy (OISD), set up in August last year, is part of an effort to beef up the oversight of independent bodies created under chapters nine and 10 of the Constitution. It was one of the recommendations made in the 2007 report to Parliament’s ad-hoc committee on the review of chapter nine and associated institutions, led by the late Kader Asmal.

The chapter nine institutions, established to protect constitutional democracy, include the Public Protector, the Human Rights Commission, the Auditor General and — under chapter 10 — the Public Service Commission.

Asmal’s review examined the challenges facing these organisations, including their independence and accountability, their relationship with Parliament and its oversight role over them.

But Parliament has yet to provide clarity on the unit’s work, its interactions with constitutional bodies and various parliamentary portfolio committees.

In accordance with the Asmal report, the OISD was housed in the office of the speaker to the National Assembly, Max Sisulu, and is under the direct authority of deputy speaker Nomaindia Mfeketo.

During his budget speech last month Sisulu told the National Assembly that money from Parliament’s budget had been set aside for the OISD.

But despite detailed questions sent to Parliament, the Mail & Guardian received no responses clarifying the role of the unit or its workings.

The M&G‘s questions included how much money the unit received from Parliament’s budget, how many staff members it had, their designations, how much they earned and what their work output has been thus far. Parliament also failed to answer questions regarding the transparency surrounding the appointments to the unit and whether these were made in a multiparty forum.

The unit is headed by advocate Nonkusi Cetywayo, who was formerly executive director in the office of the speaker under Baleka Mbete from 2006 to 2008. She then followed Mbete to the presidency as a special adviser after Mbete took over as deputy president in 2009.

Prior to her move to Parliament she worked in the department of justice as provincial head for both the North West and the Eastern Cape, reporting to then-director general and current head of the National Prosecuting Authority Menzi Simelane.

In a brochure released after the launch of the OISD, the unit said it was in the process of conducting an audit of special reports submitted to Parliament by chapter nine institutions “to determine their status, tabling, referral dates and to assess which reports need Parliament’s urgent attention”. But the progress of the audit is unclear.

Other objectives for the unit include meeting the relevant portfolio committees to agree upon ways of working and their respective mandates regarding the chapter nine institutions.

Nonhlanhla Chanza, political researcher at Idasa, said its establishment was long overdue, given that many of the problems plaguing chapter nine institutions were still evident. She said these included huge capacity constraints and high vacancy rates, as well as ongoing complaints of underfunding. The unit’s support from Parliament has also been patchy, with complaints that recommendations in chapter nine reports have been ignored, resulting in failed oversight of the executive.

“This is a welcome initiative but there needs to be an update on what is going on as the chapter nines have immediate challenges,” she said.

Joyce Moloi-Moropa, who chairs the portfolio committee on public service and administration, which oversees the Public Service Commission, said the unit was important to ensure that important matters relating to chapter nines don’t keep “falling off” Parliament’s agenda.

She said work still needed to be done to ensure that the mandates of portfolio committees did not overlap with those of the unit, but emphasised that committees were ultimately responsible for the constitutional oversight of these institutions.