Download
1 / 78
800 likes | 1.16k Vues
PRESENTATION OF THE NPA STRATEGIC PLAN FOR 2013/18 AND ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN 2013/14 ADV NOMGCOBO JIBA 23 APRIL 2013. CONTENTS. Introduction Mission, Vision and Values Mandate Constitutional, Legislative and Policy Changes made in current plans Strategic Objectives and Targets
E N D
PRESENTATION OF THE NPA STRATEGIC PLAN FOR 2013/18 AND ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN 2013/14 ADV NOMGCOBO JIBA 23 APRIL 2013
CONTENTS • Introduction Mission, Vision and Values • MandateConstitutional, Legislative and Policy • Changes made in current plans • Strategic Objectives and Targets • Resourcing
AMENDMENT TO PLANS • Severe budget constraints have necessitated a scrutiny of the indicators and targets limiting the scope on high impact indicators and realistic targets • The NPA remains committed to the strategic direction embarked on over the past three years and the plans in essence remain unchanged
Strategic Plan 2013-2018 • The Strategic Plan 2013/18 is premised on the refined JCPS Delivery Agreement and the contribution of the NPA to achieving its objectives and targets • The strategic objectives have been streamlined and the performance indicators revised on review • The percentage improvement per year has been maintained
Structure • There have been no structural changes in the NPA • The current structure ensures tight high level oversight over all sub-programmes (DNDPPs and CEO) • General prosecutions and specialisation are adequately catered for in the structure of sub-programmes
NPA Strategic Objectives • The following are the strategic objectives of the NPA: • Increased prosecution of serious and priority crime • Improved collaboration with JCPS partners • Reduced corruption • Improved justice services for the victims of crime
Amendments to Strategic Objectives and Indicators • The strategic plan has been streamlined and has fewer strategic objectives (previously 5, now 4) • The strategic objective for cybercrime has been removed and the strategies relating to output 5 of the JCPS Delivery Agreement have been incorporated under the first strategic objective as cyber crime is a serious crime • Indicators have been streamlined to ensure a better focus with limited resources
Strategic Objective 1: Reasons for review of indicators • Previous indicators did not adequately reflect efforts of prosecutors to address all types of serious and priority crimes. • All matters prosecuted in the regional and high courts fall within the category of serious crime (strategic objective indicator). • The method of calculation of the previous conviction indicator caused confusion. • The prosecutors prosecute cases and a sentence is the prerogative of the presiding officer, the prosecutor addresses the court on aggravating factors but the desertion remains that of the presiding officer • Sentences for serious offences will be tracked internally
Strategic Objective 2: Reasons for review of indicators • Reduced from 2 to 1 strategic objective indicator • Less indicators at high level ensure clear focus of strategy • The indicator for overall conviction rate removed • Indicator for convictions in all forums is retained in the APP
Strategic Objective 3: Reasons for review of indicators • There is no change to the indicators
Strategic Objective 4: Reasons for review of indicators • There is no change to the strategic objective indicators
Risk Management • The NPA identified the following top five risk: • Emerging crime trends • Resource capacity • Stakeholder management • Information and knowledge management • Public perception and reputation of NPA • Mitigation plans will be developed and implementation monitored
NPA ANNUAL PERFORMANCE PLAN 2013/14 27
Reasons for review of indicators • The backlog figure for the regional and high courts is already contained in the backlog indicator under strategic objective 2 • Cybercrime has been moved from sixth strategic objective to the first
Reasons for review of indicators • The following programme performance indicators were moved to NPS APP • Number of appeals finalised in the high court • Number of appeal backlogs • Clearance ratio on decision dockets • Indicator for prosecutions for vacancy rate removed • Moved to Support Services APP, for better alignment and ownership of plan
Strategic Objective 3: Reasons for review of indicators • Strategic objective indicators reduced for better focus • Indicators removed were moved to relevant business unit APPs • Number of freezing orders relating to corruption where the amount involved is more than R5m • Changed to value of freezing orders. Focus is more on the value than the quantity • Focus on R5m involved rather than R5m assets restrained captures corruption activities even though assets are dissipated • Time to finalise internal disciplinary cases relating to corruption was moved to Support Services Annual Plan
Strategic Objective 4: Reasons for review of indicators • Indicator relating to percentage of cases reported at TCCs referred to court for prosecution was moved to SOCA’s APP • Value of compensation orders obtained is a better indicator which the NPA has control over rather than paid to victims of crime
RESOURCING 2013/14 45
BUDGET STATUS 2012/13
NPA Overall Budget & Expenditure as at the 31st of March 2013 (Preliminary - UNAUDITED)
Background on projected overspending on Compensation of Employees • Leave to appeal was denied by the Constitutional Court in November 2012 in respect of the implementation of the 2005/2006 JE’s for Prosecutors. • The NPA implemented the Job Evaluation (JE) award and payments have already been made amounting to over R 53 m. • Interest on the backdated JE’s was also payable but a settlement agreement was reached with organised labour to forfeit the interest so that funds be made available for the payment of performance bonuses. • AENE request for JE unforeseen in 2012/13 was not supported by DoJ&CD • MTEF request for additional funding not approved • This was highlighted in previous Portfolio Committee meeting.
Occupation Specific Dispensation for Legally Qualified Professionals • Phase 1 of the OSD for Legally Qualified Professionals for the NPA was implemented during October/November 2008 which led to an increase in the COE for prosecutors. This was backdated to 1 July 2007. • NT allocated a once off amount for the implementation of Phase 2 during the 2010/2011 financial year however the approval for implementation was only received at the end of November 2010. This led to part implementation by the end of the financial year and funds had to be surrendered to NT. This therefore led to the NPA to carry the balance of the cost for implementation of Phase 2. The amount was about R 30m. • The effect of Phase 2 implementation which was the recognition of relevant legal experience placed salaries at higher levels with a run through effect on the COE.
Cost savings implemented • The NPA implemented the following cost saving measures: • Filling of posts and contract extensions only if approved by EXCO. • All overtime approved by CEO. Expenditure reduced with 31%. • Procurement of all furniture, equipment and other assets limited to critical needs. • Training sessions and workshops. Expenditure iro Venues and Facilities reduced with 39%. • Outsourcing of services, section 38 appointments and temporary appointments. Expenditure reduced with 41%. • Travelling and Subsistence's (accommodation and use of private motor transport). Expenditure increased with 2% which is significantly below inflation. • Communications – decrease in landline limits resulted in 4% decrease in expenditure. • No new additional accommodation and parking.
