DVA Reports ICD Jan – Dec 2007

1. independent complaints directorate Department: Independent Complaints Directorate REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA DVA Reports ICDJan – Dec 2007 Presentation to Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security 18 June 2008

2. Legislative Mandate • In terms of the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998, failure by a member of the South African Police Service to comply with an obligation imposed in terms of this Act or the National Instructions referred to in subsection (3), constitutes misconduct as contemplated in the South African Police Service Act 68 of 1995; and the Independent Complaints Directorate, established in terms of the said Act must forthwith be informed of any such failure reported to the South African Police Service. • Furthermore, the ICD must, every six months, submit a report to Parliament regarding the number and particulars of matters reported to it in terms of subsection (4)(a), setting out the recommendations made in respect of such matters.

3. Types of non-compliance The DVA Report presents a factual analysis of cases of non–compliance with the Domestic Violence Act (DVA) by members of the South African Police Service (SAPS) and the recommendations made to address same. The type of cases of non–compliance with the DVA addressed in these reports include: • failure to effect warrants of arrest • failure to advise complainants of options (e.g. failure to advise complainant to lay a criminal charge, or apply for a protection order, or both) • failure to assist complainants to open cases, • failure to issue or furnish a subpoena, • failure to refer the victim to a place of safety, • failure to seize firearms, and • failure to serve protection orders.

4. What the ICD does • Investigation of non-compliance or • Referral for investigation/disciplinary action • Conducting DVA audits • Processing applications for exemption • Awareness campaigns, and • Conducting workshops with SAPS members

5. National DVA Intake Jan-Dec 2007

6. Comparison between 2006 and 2007 - Intake

7. Failure to serve protection order

8. Failure to advise complainant of options, such as applying for a protection order, laying charges ,etc

9. Failure to effect warrant of arrest

10. Failure to open a criminal docket or refer the matter for prosecution

11. Failure to serve a subpoena to the respondent

12. Applications for exemption

13. Comparison of Intake vs Applications for exemption

14. Overview of ComplianceJan-Dec 2007 • Gauteng – out of 37 cases of non-compliance received by Gauteng , there were 4 applications for exemption from internal prosecutions. 2 cases were exempted, and in 1 case the disciplinary steps are pending against the member • Western Cape – also, 37 cases received by WC, there were 4 applications for exemption from internal prosecution, 1 case exemption was granted • KZN-out of 8 cases of non-compliance with the DVA, there were no applications for exemption • EC- out of 6 cases, no application for exemption was received • Limpopo – out of 6 cases, there was 2 application for exemption • Mpumalanga- out of 2 cases of non-compliance received, there were no application • North West – out of 14 cases of non-compliance, there were 3 applications for exemption • Free State – out of 10 cases received, there were 3 applications for exemption • Northern Cape – received 1 case, there was no applications for exemption

15. Areas looked at during audit

16. Areas looked at during audit (cont...)

17. Proactive Oversight Activities –Station Audits 2007

18. Level of Compliance -Station Audits • Eastern Cape – Out of 34 stations that were visited, only 5 stations that complied Bityi, Butterworths, Aliwal North, NU 1 Madantsane, Port St Johns • Western Cape – conducted 26 station audits- 12 stations complied - Caledon, Darling, Malmesbury, Philladelphia, Melkbostrand, Sea Point, Campas Bay, Ladysmith, Montagu, Ashton, Bridgeton, Oudshoorn • Gauteng- out of 41 stations audits that were conducted, during Jan-Dec 2007, only 5 stations complied, viz PTA-West, Atteridgeville, Kagiso, Randfontein, Westonaria, Laudium • KZN – Out of 13 stations visited, 1 station complied - Mpungamhlophe • Limpopo –conducted 34 station audits, and only 6 stations complied - Motetema, Nebo, Mecklenburg, Senwabarwana,Letsitele, Sekgosese • North West – Out of 11 stations visited, there were only 3 stations thatcomplied – Zeerust, Lethlabile, Britz • Mpumalanga – visited 12 stations, and 5 stations complied - Lydenburg, White River, Mhluzi, Nelspruit, Volksrust • Northern Cape – visited 12 stations, and none of the stations complied • Free State – conducted a special project, where they visited all stations, out of 102 stations that were visited, 60 stations complied

19. Proactive Oversight - Findings • Lack of understanding of the obligations to DVA • No feedback from police management regarding disciplinary action • Reluctance to take disciplinary action • Record keeping still a concern :- • The 508(b) is not completed properly, as crucial information is not recorded • 508(a) forms not filed and some copies were not found in the file but registered in the 508(b) • No copies of station orders • Domestic Violence Act and National Instruction not available • The copy of service provider list not available or updated • Copies of Protection Orders and warrants of arrest were not filed properly • No file of Domestic Violence warrants kept

20. Challenges • Failure to take disciplinary action against members • Failure by SAPS to notify ICD of non-compliance • Lack of understanding of the DVA by SAPS members and also trying to break the barriers of the culture of silence around domestic violence • Lengthy period taken to discipline SAPS members • Shortage of staff to do DVA station audits ,there are 9 monitors (1 monitor per province) • Inaccessibility of ICD to the public especially in rural communities • Due to inaccessibility ICD is getting fraction of DVA complaints

21. THANK YOU