The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) is grappling with serious challenges that threaten its effectiveness in combating corruption. 

These challenges include ensuring the safety of its personnel and whistle-blowers, a financial squeeze due to an increasing caseload, an inadequate funding model, and an ineffectual debt collection process.

The issues are highlighted in a new research by the Institute for Security Studies (ISS), conducted in partnership with the SIU, examining the unit’s successes and its challenges in combating crime.

At a seminar hosted by the ISS in Pretoria on Wednesday, SIU head, Advocate Andy Mothibi, talked about the unit’s funding woes, citing an unsustainable model due to state institutions owing over R1 billion.

 The SIU’s funding consists of a 47% grant from Parliament and 53% from fees for services rendered. 

However, Mothibi noted that some state institutions are reluctant to settle the resulting invoices, often because senior officials are implicated in investigations.

“As we sit today, the debt from state institutions is well over R1 billion. It is really not acceptable.” 

He said that occasionally, the institution would arrange for ministers to intervene, resulting in some payments being made, but this approach “is not sustainable”.

He insisted, however, that the unit is currently financially sound.

Mothibi emphasised the importance of whistle-blower protection, citing an incident during the Life Esidimeni investigation, where a witness received death threats and was subsequently protected under the National Prosecuting Authority’s witness protection programme. 

He said from a whistle-blower protection standpoint, there is an opportunity for improvement, and the Department of Justice and Development is leading a project to enhance the legislation.

He mentioned that the current legislation primarily focuses on employment-related protections, but they aim to broaden it to provide comprehensive whistle-blower protection, including witness protection.

David Bruce, a researcher on policing and corruption, suggested a system is needed to prevent government officials implicated in wrongdoing from resigning and landing jobs in other institutions. 

“To me, the important thing is that people who are implicated in corruption should not be permitted to continue working for the government,” he said.

Colette Ashton, an anti-corruption lawyer, noted that corruption cases are often challenging to prosecute due to witnesses’ reluctance to testify and alleged perpetrators using legal and financial secrecy, aided by professional enablers, to conceal evidence. 

David Lewis from the National Anti-Corruption Advisory Commission stated that the burden of proof in corruption cases can be a significant hurdle, rendering prosecution challenging. 

“People weigh up the risk and the potential benefits of engaging in corruption, and eight times out of 10, they conclude that the risk is worth taking because the incidence of successful prosecution is low in every jurisdiction of the world, and that is just a fact we have to face up to,” he said.

The ISS investigation into the SIU’s work highlighted other key findings, including inadequate systems to enforce recommendations and unnecessary delays in the administrative processing of Presidential proclamations.

rapula.moatshe@inl.co.za

Source link