BackThe Public Protector South Africa (PPSA) on 30 September 2024 issued its reports based on investigations conducted in the second quarter of the 2024/25 financial year.
During this period, the PPSA received 1,489 new complaints, of which 756 were early resolution, 641 related to a lack of service delivery, while 92 were in respect of allegations of maladministration and related improprieties in the conduct of state affairs.
The reports of the Public Protector are issued in terms of section 182(1)(b) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution), which empowers the Public Protector to report on any conduct in state affairs that is suspected to be improper or to result in any impropriety or prejudice and section 8(1) of the Public Protector Act, 1994 (the Public Protector Act). The Public Protector Act provides that the Public Protector may make known the findings, point of view or recommendation of any matter investigated by her. Furthermore, the Public Protector is empowered in terms of section 182(1)(c) of the Constitution to take appropriate remedial action with a view of redressing the conduct referred to in this report upon the conclusion of an investigation where adverse findings are made.
The Public Protector hereby publishes findings in respect of five investigations, amongst no less than 652 investigations concluded by the institution during the second quarter of the 2024/2025 financial year. The institution has also finalised 1,094 investigations by means of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms.
These can be classified under the following areas:
- Undue Delay;
- Maladministration;
- Abuse of Power;
- Conduct Failure;
- Corruption related in procurement; and
- Irregular appointments.
The PPSA’s reports communicate the results of the Public Protector’s investigations and provide accountability and transparency to the people of South Africa. The goal is to communicate the manner in which the PPSA has dealt with the various complaints brought before it.
The institution's investigations are approached using an enquiry process that seeks to determine what happened, what should have happened, is there a discrepancy between what happened and what should have happened, and does that deviation amount to improper conduct and/or undue delay? The question regarding what happened is resolved through a factual enquiry relying on the evidence provided by the parties and independently sourced during the investigation.
Kindy click here to read the full article.
Source: The Public Protector South Africa
