Abstract

Accountability and oversight are constitutional requirements in all the spheres of government in the Republic of South Africa and their foundation is in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa of 1996. All spheres of government are charged with the constitutional mandate of providing public services. The level of responsibility and public services provision also goes with the level of capacity of a particular sphere. However, most of the direct and visible services that the public receives are at the local sphere of government. As such, enormous resources are channelled towards this sphere of government so that the said public services could be provided. It is imperative that the three spheres of government account for the huge expenditures during the public service provision processes. The parliaments of national and provincial governments exercise oversight and accountability over their executives and administrations through the Public Accounts Committees, while the local sphere of government relies on the Municipal Public Accounts Committees. This article is theoretical in nature, and it seeks to explore the current state of public accountability in South Africa and to evaluate possible measures so as to enhance public accountability. The article argues that the current public accountability mechanisms are not efficient and effective. It is recommended that these mechanisms ought to be enhanced by inter alia capacitating the legislative bodies at national, provincial and local spheres of the government.

Highlights

  • The South African government has devoted much attention and its limited resources to the local sphere of government so as to perform its constitutional obligations. Mogale (2003:229) and Mfene (2013:17) posit that to capacitate municipalities to meet developmental requirements and speed up service delivery, extensive human and financial resources acquisition is necessary

  • It has since been replaced by the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation which has been put under the authority of the South African Police Service (SAPS)

  • The Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU) applies a multidisciplinary approach to its investigations by combining both the expertise of forensic investigators, forensic lawyers, forensic accountants, cyber forensic specialists and data analysts supported by specific law enforcement powers as provided for by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) and Special Tribunals Act, 1996 (Act 74 of 1996)

Read more

Summary

Original Research

Fostering public accountability in South Africa: A reflection on challenges and successes. All spheres of government are charged with the constitutional mandate of providing public services. Most of the direct and visible services that the public receives are at the local sphere of government. Enormous resources are channelled towards this sphere of government so that the said public services could be provided. It is imperative that the three spheres of government account for the huge expenditures during the public service provision processes. The parliaments of national and provincial governments exercise oversight and accountability over their executives and administrations through the Public Accounts Committees, while the local sphere of government relies on the Municipal Public Accounts Committees. It is recommended that these mechanisms ought to be enhanced by inter alia capacitating the legislative bodies at national, provincial and local spheres of the government

Introduction
Conceptualising public accountability
Open Access
Mechanisms of ensuring accountability
Public Protector
Public Service Commission
National Prosecuting Authority
Special Investigating Unit
Judicial institutions
Reflection on current state of accountability in South Africa
Conclusion and recommendations
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call