Non-Compliance with Domestic Violence Act: ICD Report 2011-2012

1. INDEPENDENT POLICE INVESTIGATIVE DIRECTORATE Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Police Domestic Violence Act Report January 2011 – March 2012 Committee Room M46, Ground Floor, Marks Building, 7 August 2012 09:30

2. TABLE OF CONTENT Slide • LEGISLATIVE MANDATE 3 • TYPES OF NON-COMPLIANCE 4 • WHAT THE ICD DOES 7 • DVA NATIONAL INTAKE 8 • NON-COMPLIANCE WITH DVA BY DESCRIPTION 9 • APPLICATIONS FOR EXEMPTIONS 13 • OVERVIEW-INTAKE VS APPLICATIONS 14 • OVERVIEW OF DISPOSAL 15 • MATTERS CONSIDERED DURING AUDIT 17 • PROACTIVE OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES 19 • OVERALL COMPLIANCE 20 • AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS 22 • WORKSHOPS CONDUCTED 23 • HANDING OVER OF DVA TO SECRETARIAT 24 • CHALLENGES 27

3. LEGISLATIVE MANDATE Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 - Section 18 • Failure by a member of the South African Police Service (SAPS) to comply with an obligation imposed in terms of the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 (DVA) or the National Instructions referred to in subsection (3), constitutes misconduct as contemplated in the South African Police Service Act, 1995 • The ICD must forthwith be informed of any such failure reported to the SAPS • Unless the ICD directs otherwise in any specific case, the SAPS must institute disciplinary proceedings against any member who allegedly failed to comply with an obligation • The ICD must, every 6 months, submit a report to Parliament regarding: • the number and particulars of matters reportedto it, and • set out the recommendations made in respect of such matters The National Commissioner of the SAPS must, every 6 months, submit a report to Parliament regarding steps taken as a result of recommendations made by the ICD.

4. 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 arrest the abuser if an offence of violence has been committed, • failure to arrest the alleged transgressor where a warrant has been issued, • failure to dispatch a police vehicle to a scene of domestic violence, • failure to establish whether the person has a valid license to possess the firearm, • failure to inform a victim on where and how to access alternative shelter, if available, • failure to inform the victim of their options,

5. TYPES OF NON-COMPLIANCE-CONTINUED • failure to inform victim on where and how to access counseling services, where required, • failure to inform victim on where and how to obtain a protection order, • failure to keep a copy of the protection order after it has been obtained from court, • failure to locate victim and establish whether they are safe, • failure to note reason why no charge or arrest was made, • failure to note the incident in a domestic violence register (SAPS508), • failure to open a docket and refer the matter to the National Prosecuting Authority for decision to prosecute,

6. TYPES OF NON-COMPLIANCE-CONTINUED • failure to search and seize arms (firearms) and ammunition, • failure to seize a dangerous weapon and/or firearm, • failure to take a witness statement, • failure to inform the victim on where and how to access medical assistance, • failure to issue a notice against the alleged transgressor to appear in court, • failure to complete the J88 (medical report) and other relevant information.

7. MANDATE IN TERMS IF THE DVA • Referral for investigation/disciplinary action; • Conducting DVA audits; • Processing applications for exemption; • Awareness campaigns; and • Conducting workshops with SAPS members.

8. NATIONAL DVA INTAKE JAN 2011- MARCH 2012

9. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH DVA BY DESCRIPTIONJAN 2011 – MARCH 2012

10. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH DVA BY DESCRIPTION cont.

11. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH DVA BY DESCRIPTION cont.

12. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH DVA BY DESCRIPTION cont.

13. APPLICATIONS FOR EXEMPTION

14. OVERVIEW :Intake versus Applications for Exemption

15. OVERVIEW: DISPOSAL JAN 2011 – JUN 2011 • EASTERN CAPE - out of the 6 cases received, 2 cases were closed as substantiated, and in 1 case pending closure as substantiated. In 2 matters exemption was granted. One matter is still under investigation by the ICD. • FREE STATE - out of the 6 cases received, the ICD awaits response from SAPS in all 6 cases. • GAUTENG - out of the 9 cases received, 1 case was closed as substantiated, and, in 8 cases the ICD awaits response from SAPS. • KZN - out of the 3 cases received, and in all 3 cases the ICD awaits response from SAPS. • LIMPOPO - out of the 4 cases received and the ICD awaits response from SAPS in all 4 cases. • MPUMALANGA – received no cases • NORTH WEST - out of 2 the cases received the ICD awaits response from SAPS in both cases. • NORTHERN CAPE - out of the 1 case received the ICD awaits response from SAPS. • WESTERN CAPE - out of the 6 cases received, the ICD awaits response from SAPS in all 6 cases.

16. OVERVIEW: DISPOSAL JULY 2011 – MARCH 2012 • EASTERN CAPE - out of 8 cases received, 3 cases IPID awaits response from SAPS, 1 substantiated, 2 cases were handed over to the Secretariat of Police and 1 case the suspect passed away before the finalisation of the disciplinary hearing by SAPS. • FREE STATE - out of 8 cases received. IPID awaits response from SAPS. • GAUTENG - out of the 10 cases received, 8 cases IPID awaits response from SAPS and 2 was closed as substantiated. • KZN - out of the 3 cases received cases the IPID awaits response from SAPS in all 3 cases. • LIMPOPO – Received no cases in this period. • MPUMALANGA- out of the 3 case received, 3 cases were closed as unsubstantiated. • NORTH WEST - out of 5 the cases received the IPID awaits response from SAPS in all 5 cases. • NORTHERN CAPE - out of the 6 cases received, 1 case was closed as substantiated and in 5 cases the ICD awaits response from SAPS. • WESTERN CAPE- out of the 28 cases received, 15 cases were closed as substantiated and 13 cases the IPID awaits response from SAPS.

17. MATTERS CONSIDERED DURING AUDIT

18. MATTERS CONSIDERED DURING AUDIT cont.

19. PROACTIVE OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIESStation Audits Jan 2011 - March 2012

20. OVERALL LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE Station Audits • The ICD conducted 101 police station audits during Jan - June 2011, and found that: • 18 stations were complying on a level of Non-Compliant (0-49%). • 29 stations were complying on a level of Fairly Compliant (50-79%) • 42 stations were on a level of Substantially Compliant (80-99%) • 12 stations were Fully Complaint (100%) with the DVA prescripts. • The ICD conducted 162 police station audits during July 2011 – March 2012, and found that: • 11 stations were complying on a level of Non-Compliant (0-49%) • 51 were complying on a level of Fairly Compliant (50-79%) • 73 stations were on a level of Substantially Compliant (80-99%) • 27 stations were Fully Complaint (100%) with the DVA prescripts.

21. PROACTIVE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS • Failure to apply for exemption • Lack of understanding of the obligations to DVA • Record keeping is still a concern - • The 508(a) forms are not filed properly • The 508(b) registers are not completed properly • Some copies of the 508(a) forms were not filed although the matters pertaining thereto were registered in the 508(b) register • Domestic Violence Act and National Instruction not readily available • A list of service providers is not available or updated • Copies of protection orders and warrants of arrest were not filed properly • No file of domestic violence warrants kept

22. AWARENESS CAMPAIGNS CONDUCTED

23. WORKSHOPS CONDUCTED

24. HANDING OVER OF DVA FUNCTIONS TO CIVILIAN SECRETARIAT FOR POLICE

25. Training provincial officials of the Civilian Secretariat for Police • As part of the handing over of the DVA function, the IPID assisted in the training of staff of the Civilian Secretariat for Police by conducting workshops within the provinces. • The following group workshops were conducted: • 11 June 2012 in Pretoria (Secretariat National Office staff) • 15 June 2012 in Johannesburg (Gauteng, Mpumalanga and Limpopo staff) • 19 June 2012 in Rustenburg (North West, Northern Cape and Free State staff) • 22 June 2012 in East London (Eastern Cape and Western Cape staff) • 3 July 2012 in Pietermaritzburg (Kwa-Zulu Natal staff)

26. Training provincial officials of the Civilian Secretariat for Police • Future group workshops scheduled to be conducted: • 8 August 2012 in Cape Town (Western Cape staff) • 24 August 2012 in Polokwane (Limpopo staff) • 7 September 2012 in Nelspruit (Mpumalanga staff) In addition to the training, the staff of the Civilian Secretariat of Police was also asked to accompany IPID officials in the various provinces to gain exposure in conducting station audits and evaluating the SAPS stations attended. During these audits the IPID officials indicated to the members that accompanied them how to conduct a station audit, which files to inspect, what is considered to be the best practice in completing the registers used in DVA cases and what the SAPS stations are required to have in the Community Service Centre (CSC) in terms of the National Instructions and the Act.

27. CHALLENGES • Some SAPS management did not take disciplinary action against members • Some SAPS members did not apply for exemptions • Lack of understanding of the DVA by SAPS members • Existence of a culture of silence around domestic violence • Lengthy period taken to discipline SAPS members

28. THANK YOU