The Public Service Commission (PSC) releases a Report on
Profiling and Analysis of the Most Common Manifestations
of Corruption and its Related Risks in the Public
Service
20 April 2011
A. BACKGROUND
Corruption is a global concern that seriously hampers
development and diverts resources from where they are
needed most. South Africa has responded actively to the
fight against corruption. As part of monitoring the
anti-corruption initiatives, the PSC assessed the most
common manifestations of corruption and their related
risks in the Public Service. The PSC based its
assessment on the total number of cases (7766) that have
been reported to the National Anti-Corruption Hotline (NACH)
since its inception in September 2004 to 31 June 2010.
The assessment was aimed at raising awareness on the
common manifestations of corruption and to determine
high risk corruption areas and to propose solutions to
manage them.
B. KEY FINDINGS
a. The PSC found that the common forms in which
corruption manifests itself are fraud and bribery
(1511), mismanagement of Government funds (870),
procurement irregularities (720) and appointment
irregularities (627).
b. The PSC also found that the current anti-corruption
infrastructure tends to focus mainly on the
investigations of cases of alleged corruption instead of
focusing on a multi-pronged approach, namely prevention,
detection and investigation.
c. The Report notes the encouraging trend of the
establishment of dedicated centralised anti-corruption
units in the Offices of the Premiers and national
departments to assist government in its effort to fight
corruption in the Public Service.
d. While government’s National Anti-Corruption Strategy
considers risk management as a strategic consideration
in the fight against corruption, the Report contends
that risk management is not being adequately
implemented, managed or coordinated in the Public
Service by the relevant anti-corruption units of
departments where they exist. While some departments may
perform regular risk assessments and risk analyses as
part of their ongoing activities, the PSC found that
there is an insufficient interface between risk
management functions on the one hand, and
anti-corruption units on the other hand. This in turn
results in an inadequate extraction and analysis of
fraud and corruption risks.
e. The PSC also found that forty percent (40%) of the
sampled departments have anti-corruption policies of
reasonable quality, with evidence of implementation. The
remaining 60% either have no policies or have very basic
policies of poor quality.
f. The PSC found that the areas of utmost concern to
departments are those where officials can use their
discretion to decide whether or not to investigate cases
of alleged corruption. In this regard, the officials
tend to request the closure of cases even before these
have been investigated. This has resulted in queries
from whistleblowers who are concerned about cases of
alleged corruption not being investigated and the
necessary feedback not being provided.
g. The Report shows that departments are often lenient
in imposing disciplinary sanctions against officials
found guilty of fraud and corruption. It is common to
find written or final written warning to officials found
guilty of fraud and corruption. The PSC also found that
disciplinary enquiries are very time consuming, and that
departments take too long to finalise enquiries against
officials suspected of fraud and corruption. Section 7.2
( c) of the Disciplinary Code and Procedures provides
that “if an employee is suspended or transferred as a
precautionary measure, the employer must hold a
disciplinary hearing within a month or 60 days,
depending on the complexity of the matter and the length
of the investigation. However, the PSC found that
departments take more than 60 days to finalise
disciplinary enquiries even in minor offences. This is
too costly for Government as the officials are being
suspended from duty with full pay.
h. The Report shows that fifteen percent (15%) of the
sampled departments have advanced investigative capacity
whilst twenty-five percent (25%) have basic capacity.
The remaining sixty percent (60%) of the sampled
departments have no basic investigative capacity. In
this regard, it needs to be noted that these departments
have no forensic investigative plans and protocol
documents for investigating cases of corruption and this
resulted in departments outsourcing investigations to
forensic firms.
C. RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Given the volume of fraud and bribery cases received
through the National Anti-Corruption Hotline which is
being managed by the PSC, it is recommended that
internal controls in areas of procurement and financial
management should be strengthened. Likewise, departments
should periodically conduct surprise procurement audits
of selected projects to identify weaknesses and
malpractices in procurement processes. The risk
management plans and fraud prevention plans of
departments must also be updated to address the risks
identified.
b. The PSC recommends that the internal controls and
management of risks in departments must be strengthened
further. The fact that 30% of the sampled departments
did not conduct risk assessments is a cause for concern
as this is a basic requirement for the successful
implementation of risk assessment and fraud prevention
plans as provided in section 38 of the Public Finance
Management Act (PFMA). Furthermore, each Accounting
Officer must integrate an analysis of corruption risk
management strategy required in terms of the PFMA.
c. The PSC also recommend that departments report all
fraud and corruption related activities to the SAPS, in
order for criminal action to be taken against
perpetrators.
d. The Executive Authorities and Accounting Officers
must be held accountable if they do not ensure that
disciplinary enquiries are resolved within 60 days.
Furthermore, guidelines on minimum sanctions for
specific offences of fraud and corruption must be issued
by the Minister for Public Service and Administration.
The guidelines should make provisions for minimum
sanction to be imposed by departments in acts of
misconduct.
In relation to the enhancement of investigative capacity
in the Public Service, the PSC recommends the following:
e. Provinces must establish centralised Anti-Corruption
Investigative Units as failure to do so will impact
negatively on the success of the NACH and will erode
efforts to build integrity within the Public Service.
The centralised Anti-Corruption Investigative Unit will
also ensure that there is proper coordination of cases
in provincial departments. It will also ensure that
evidence is not tampered with and cases are thoroughly
investigated.
f. The Offices of the Premiers in the Provinces must
commit adequate resources to prevention, detection and
investigation of corruption. Integrity Management units
should be created through the appointment of
appropriately skilled persons and through the training
of officials in the discipline of forensic
investigations.
g. The investigative capacities in the local sphere of
government, which is currently fragmented needs
coordination and integration. The PSC is of the view
that more attention should be devoted to the prevention
of corruption and to identifying and eliminating
systematic regulative and organisational gaps that
create corruption-prone environment.
h. Departments and public entities must conduct an
in-depth assessment of fraud risk management frameworks
and strategies. The outcome of such assessment could
prevent over-investment in sub-optimal anti-fraud areas.
D. CONCLUSION
The assessment of the PSC on the most common
manifestations of corruption and its related risks in
the Public Service points to the fact that more could be
done in prevention, detection and investigation of
corruption if strategies, structures and anti-corruption
capabilities are well co-ordinated. The improvement of
investigative capacity inevitably means that government
must commit as much resources as possible to address
capacity constraints in relation to the investigation of
cases of alleged corruption. Improving investigative
capacity would result in a higher rate of feedback and,
therefore, enhance government’s resolve to combat and
prevent corruption.
Issued by the Public Service Commission
For enquiries, please contact:
Mr Humphrey Ramafoko;
Director: Communication and Information Services;
Tel: 012- 352 1196; Cell: 082 782 1730;
Email:
humpreyr@opsc.gov.za;
Or
Mr Ricardo Mahlakanya;
Deputy Director: External Communication;
Tel: 012 352 1070; Cell: 079 769 7955;
Email:
RicardoM@opsc.gov.za
|
