Shape South Africa’s Anti-Corruption Future – Have Your Say on the Proposed Constitutional Amendment

The proposed Constitution Twenty-First Amendment Bill, introduced by MP Adv. G. Breytenbach, proposes to establish an independent Anti-Corruption Commission as a Chapter 9 institution in South Africa’s Constitution. This Commission would focus on combating serious corruption and high-level organised crime to strengthen South Africa’s democracy and reduce the burden on the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).
As the bill progresses, it’s critical that the public’s voice helps shape its development to ensure it truly meets the needs of all South Africans. Although formal public participation is not yet open, DearSA is collecting early feedback to gauge public views on this amendment. Your feedback will help us convey public sentiments on this critical proposal, advocating for a powerful, effective Commission to tackle corruption at its roots. Together, let’s ensure that the laws built today foster accountability, transparency, and a fair future for all.

Potential Benefits and Concerns of the Constitution Twenty-First Amendment Bill (Anti-Corruption Commission)

Potential Benefits:

1. Focused Anti-Corruption Efforts  
The establishment of an independent Anti-Corruption Commission dedicated to handling serious corruption and high-level organized crime would strengthen South Africa’s approach to fighting corruption. By alleviating the workload of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), this Commission could lead to faster, more efficient handling of grand corruption cases, allowing the NPA to focus on broader criminal prosecution.

2. Enhanced Transparency and Accountability  
As a Chapter 9 institution, the Anti-Corruption Commission would be designed to operate independently, reporting directly to Parliament and the public. This transparency could enhance public trust by showing clear progress in the fight against corruption, while the Commission’s annual reporting obligations would hold it accountable for its actions and achievements.

3. Strengthened Constitutional Democracy  
The Commission would join other key institutions, like the Public Protector and the Auditor-General, as part of South Africa's checks and balances on power. A dedicated anti-corruption body can reinforce democratic values by protecting public interests and reducing instances of power abuse by high-level officials.

4. Relieving the Burden on the NPA
The NPA has faced significant challenges due to resource constraints and a heavy workload, especially as it tries to recover from the effects of state capture. By transferring responsibility for complex corruption cases and high-level organized crime to the Anti-Corruption Commission, the NPA can better focus on its broader prosecutorial mandate, improving efficiency and effectiveness in both institutions.

Potential Concerns:

1. Potential for Overlapping Roles and Jurisdiction Conflicts  
As both the NPA and the proposed Anti-Corruption Commission would have prosecutorial powers, questions arise about how their roles would intersect, particularly in high-profile cases. If not clearly defined, this overlap could lead to jurisdictional conflicts, slowing down proceedings and potentially compromising case integrity.

2. Risk of Political Influence  
Although designed to be independent, any government institution is potentially susceptible to political pressure. The selection and tenure of the Commissioners may raise concerns if appointments are influenced by political factors, potentially affecting the Commission’s impartiality and independence.

3. Financial and Logistical Implications  
Establishing and maintaining the Commission will require significant resources, including funds for salaries, operations, and administrative support. Concerns may arise regarding whether this financial burden will strain the national budget, especially if the Commission’s costs exceed initial estimates.

4. Effectiveness in Combating Root Causes of Corruption  
While a dedicated Anti-Corruption Commission can address corruption cases, some may argue that it does not tackle the systemic issues that enable corruption, such as lack of transparency in government procurement or insufficient public sector reforms. Addressing these root causes may require complementary policies beyond the Commission’s prosecutorial mandate.

By considering both the potential benefits and concerns, South Africans can weigh the likely impact of this Bill on the fight against corruption, helping to ensure that the final legislation aligns with public needs and strengthens the country's democratic institutions.