Assessing the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Assessing the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Complexities and PossibilitiesComplexities and Possibilities

Tuesday 20 Nov. 2012Tuesday 20 Nov. 2012

ADV N JIBAADV N JIBAActing National Director of Public ProsecutionsActing National Director of Public Prosecutions

1

General Prosecution PerformanceGeneral Prosecution Performance

2

Vision & Mission Statement Vision & Mission Statement

3

4

Source Documents

5

NPA Strategic OverviewNPA Strategic Overview

Government Performance Management Government Performance Management FrameworkFramework

• The South African government to performance measurement shifted from Output Based to Outcomes Based

• Outcome for the JCPS is that “People Must Be and Feel Safer”

6

NPA ENE IndicatorsNPA ENE Indicators

7

The NPA performance in respect of the ENE indicators is set out in the table below:

Conviction rates are:Conviction rates are: A percentage of cases finalised with a guilty verdict (including Sec 57 of the CPA) divided by the number of cases finalised (i.e. excluding

ADRM). Conviction rate is measured at the date of sentencing or verdict of not-guilty irrespective of the date when the plea was first entered.

• Only verdict cases are considered when conviction rate is calculated. Convictions in the mere sense are judgments by a court of law that a person is guilty as charged.

• Regarded as a quality indicator for NPA to indicate the number of trial cases in which a conviction was achieved.

• NPA has since inception of the current measuring system maintained a uniform approach to conviction rates. The achievements for all criminal courts are indicated below:

8

Conviction rates are not:Conviction rates are not: Successful prosecutions in relation to the number of crimes reported to the police.

• Successful prosecutions relates also to matters finalised through ADRM, matters dealt with ito CJA, decision dockets finalised without enrollment in a criminal court and admission of guilt payments.

• The core mandate of prosecutions is not to seek convictions at all cost but to ensure justice is done.

• SAPS measures CHARGES as reported crime and NPA measures CASES after enrollment which include multiple CHARGES. The comparison below extracted from the case audit conducted in Regional and High courts indicate the difference clearly:

9

CONVICTION RATES:

10

Cases Finalised / Disposed• Cases finalised with ADRM include:

– Cases finalised through ADRM (Diversion, Informal Mediation);– Cases finalised with verdict (Sec 57A Admission of guilt, Convictions and Acquittals) Cases are finalised and prosecution cannot be reinstituted

• Cases disposed include:– Cases finalised and cases removed from the roll– Cases removed from the roll include:

• Withdrawals, • Warrants issued, • External Transfers, • Mental Referrals; and • Struck off roll Cases are not finalised when removed from the roll and prosecution can be

reinstituted

11

Finalisation of casesFinalisation of cases

12

Additional work done:Additional work done:• In order to better reflect the efforts of the NPA it is necessary to include a wider range of matters

finalised in addition to the cases finalised through ADR and verdict cases.

• Criminal matters finalised in the reporting period include:

– Decision dockets which resulted in a decision not to prosecute (Nolle Prosequi),

– Matters where admission of guilt was determined by the prosecutor and it was paid (did not result

in a court case);

– Cases finalised through ADR (informal mediation, diversions etc),

– Cases finalised through verdict and appeals finalised in the High courts.

13

Performance Overview of Public Prosecutions

1414

15

Performance Overview of Public Prosecutions

15

16

Cases removed from the roll: 2011/12

16

Plea Agreements Sec 105A Plea and Sentence Agreements are measured on the number of agreements and

counts involved.

17

Workload analysis: Lower Courts

• 6.9% (70 630) increase in formal bail applications during FY 2011/12 compared to the 66 046 applications dealt with during 2010/11. Valuable court time is spent on bail applications, which could have been used for trial-ready matters.

18

Workload analysis:

The following is disregarded by ISS:

•Work done outside the court – decision dockets etc

•Complexity of a case – organised crime

•Multiple dockets per case and multiple charges and accused per case

19

NPA Data on Input and Output

20

NPA Data on Cases Finalised

21

NPA Data on Court Utilisation

22

Performance Overview

Compared to the previous year:

High conviction rates maintained in all courts: overall conviction rate

was 88.8%

Increase in number of cases finalised through ADRM by 2.2%, from

129 846 in 2010/11 to 132 695 in 2011/12

All courts maintained a positive clearance ratio – disposing of more

cases than enrolled

12.2% reduction in number of cases withdrawn

23

Performance Overview (Cont.)

The courts on the Backlog Court Project finalised 15 886 backlog cases

which contributed to the reduction in backlog of cases – at the end of the

year the backlog was 34 926, 5.7% less than the 37 034 in 2010/11

6.4% more dockets were received for decision. 650 677 dockets were

dealt with which is a 5.4% increase

6.9% (70 630) increase in formal bail applications compared to the

66 046 applications dealt with during 2010/11

2424

25

Thank you!