Issued by African National Congress - Parliament
17 February 2003
The concept of Oversight and Accountability in Governance
In the last three major Presidential speeches delivered on December 16 last year, January 8 and on the 14th of February, reference was made to responsibility the state to be accountable in all of its individual components.
In the address delivered in the North West Province on January 8th last year, emphasis was laid on individuals in elected positions discharging their responsibilities with regard to the functioning of the system of governance.
In Stellenbosch the highest constitutional structure of the ANC heard the following call:
"Led by the executive authorities we have to ensure that these administrators discharge their responsibilities fo serving the people through the effective and efficient implinentation of the policies decided by our by our legislatures and executive authorities.
"The truth however is that during the period since our 50th National Conference there has been a number of instances of the failure of our administrations under our leadership with regard to the implementation of these policies.
"The firm message this communicates to us is that we have to strengthen the accountability…of all members of our leadership …"
The Executive
The Executive arm of government is enjoined by our Constitution to be accountable to Parliament, within the broader design of our democracy that hinges on Accountable, Responsive and Transparent governement.
The delicate balance between the big three mechanisms that make up the state is maintained equally by the Executive as it is by Parliament and our courts. Moreover, initiatives of the Executive both in this Parliament and without points to an adherence to the values and spirit of the Constituion that goes beyond the letter of the law.
Imbizos
In the State of the Nation address reference is made to the importance of maintaining contact with the people of our country who elected us. This is true so that government and governance is informed by the people who "more than any consultants, know what their needs are and how these needs can best be met,"
Imbizos are traditional democratic mechanisms that have been adapted to modern times. Drawn from the wisdom of our common African ancestors, it brings into the democratic fold the most marginalized and vulnerable of our people.
The Imbizo at Bekkersdal to which specific reference was made was indeed a special occasion. The impact of a presidential and governmental imbizo in this living daily without basic necessities such as readily accessible water and no prospect of a housing programme due to the dolomatic conditon of the land on which the township is located cannot be overstated. Not only did it result in a sudden burst of moral in the township, which some have described as a permanent transit camp, but it brought the prospect of real delivery through a direct shift in government policy and spending priorities. It brought to the people of Bekkersdale a promise of a better life.
Imbizos are in this way a very real and very effective initiative of the ANC led government and are to be applauded and hopefully will be sustained as part of the Institution of the Presidency into perpetuity.
That the Executive arm of government subjects itself to the scrutiny of the people in this direct manners accords with the spirit of our Constitution which encapsulates the very essence of our new democracy.
Parliament
However, Imibizos iniated by the Executive do have their limitations, most of which relates to the demands of time on the executive branch of government, they can further only get to certain identified areas, and often not all of the issues that require addressing are articulated. This is where Parliaments oversight capability is of great import to the Executive.
The representatives of the people by their very nature often have intimate knowledge of policy deficiencies or implementation lapses, which is obtained either through constituency work or through Parliamentary oversight visits or Public Hearings. A more effective interface between MPs both Nationally and Provincially and the relevant Executive authority inevitably enriches the process of policy formulation or implementation by the relevant government Departments and immediately leads to more responsive and effective government.
There are vast areas for improvement in the manner in which Parliament conducts oversight function. Up to now much of Parliaments focus has been on its law-making function. Parliament has now through a process initiated by the Presiding Officers, begun to introspect and plan around its Oversight function. To this end the Joint Ad Hoc Sub-Committee on Oversight and Accountability has tabled its final report before the Rules Committee for adoption in the next few weeks.
Recommedations include inter-alia structured programming of meaningful debates on oversight reports compiled by Committees. This would entail a re-prioritisation by Parliament of oversight work done and enable more effective engagement with the Executive on matters such implementation glitches. It is envisaged that these meaningful engagements between the representatives of the people and members of the executive will begin to develop into early warning systems of potential pitfalls which in turn will result in direct savings.
For Parliament to effectively monitor implementation of government programmes and exercise its constitutional oversight role, it is imperative that Parliamentarians have an indepth understanding of their constitutional mandate, particularly in light of the sometimes blatantly unconstitutional tendencies that emerged from certain quarters arising from the arms procurement.
That there is a constructive reason and point to oversight other than scoring political points seems to have been lost on some in this House.
The report of the Joint Ad Hoc Committee begins by recommending that attention be paid to developing among ourselves as MP an understanding of our constituional mandates and their purpose in the broader achitecture of our system of democracy.
Which is not to say that quality Oversight work doesn't already get done in Parliament. On the contrary, many best practices have developed within Parliament particularly within Committees.That these should be harnessed and become the standard practice is also recommended.
Synergy between the two Houses on matters of common interest and the expansion and improvement of the Committee Section, which is the administrative support section of committees is further recommended. This particular aspect in Parliament is particularly dire, and will require more resources to be allocated to Parliament.
The support of the Executive in the overall review of its oversight capabilities that Parliament is currently engaged in, is particularly important when considering that it is governance itself that is enhanced, enriched, made more responsive and more transparent. Ideals that Government has long committed itself to.
Institutions Supporting Democracy
The relationship between the Institutions supporting democracy, and Parliament have to be informed by the common goal to improve the lives of all our people and to foster sound principles of governance.
In the spirit of mutual co-operation Parliament and the Legislatures must engage in a process of establishing links with relevant chapter 9 institutions. The concept of the independence of these institutions and their ultimate accountability to Parliament has led to sometimes bizarre consequences. Independence cannot and doesn't mean that a body exists in a vacuum. That these institutions are subject to sometimes vigourous scrutiny by Parliament should not be confused with their unrestrained, and unencumbered power of inquiry. This is a rather simple concept in our constitution but one that for some reason has been misunderstood and become obfuscated. The sub-committee in its report suggests that Parliament initiates a process of consultation with the institutions supporting democracy on these and other pertinent issues.
The Judiciary
The troika of the state machinery remains incomplete without the Judiciary. What of accountability in this vital element of governement?
Again the issue of independence arises, with good cause. Our new democracy has deliberately embraced the concept of Judicial independence to rebuild a pivotal element that was deliberately and systematically eroded in our not so distant past. Our constituion goes further and addresses the long standing debate around judicial defference and judicial activisim. The Constituion clearly enjoins judicial officers toward activism in the furtherance of fundamental human rights.
Independence relates to the constitutional guarantee of independence of mind or put another way, the guarantee of impartiality in the dispensing of Justice. Judicial Independence does not mean freedom from accountability.
There is general agreement that effective proper disciplinary and grieviance procedures must be constructed to deal with those members of our judiciary who fall short of our expectations and who bring indignity to our courts.
The Justice PC has before it currently a bill that seeks to introduce such a disciplinary mechanism. Key issues such as who sits in judgment of our judges arise, but so does the question of accountability
So that when Judges begin, by their unreasonable conduct, to thwart or defeat the purpose of laws that have been found to be constitutional by the Constitutional Court, they may be held to account.
Together with like-minded members of the judiciary Parliament and the Executive should engage over the idea that is espoused in our constitution- that the different elements that make up the state should be accountable transparent and responsive. That our judiciary should find itself firmly within this loop is mere compliance with the values and spirit underpinning our democracy and will go a long way toward restoring utmost faith in our courts.