President Cyril Ramaphosa signed the Independent Police Investigative Directorate Amendment Bill into law on Wednesday, 31 July 2024, and while many hailed the new bill, others argued it did not address the core issues facing the organisation.
The Bill is intended to enable IPID to investigate alleged offences regardless of whether officers were or were not on duty at the time. The Presidency noted “the new law entrenches the institutional and operational independence of IPID and makes it clear that the directorate must be independent, impartial and must exercise its powers and functions without fear, favour or prejudice.”
Since inception, the Bill has been publicly opposed by the Democratic Alliance (DA), with their core complaint being the inadequate provision for Parliamentary oversight and independence in the appointment of the Executive Director, which the DA states is contrary to the directive of a Constitutional Court directive.
“Our laws must guarantee the highest degree of independence for the Executive Director so that he or she may exercise their functions without fear, favour, or prejudice,” the DA said, adding that it believes the Bill fails to guarantee the necessary independence and mechanisms for appointing the Executive Director, and does not ensure robust Parliamentary oversight and a watertight selection process. The DA argues the recent amendments “simply retain the status quo.”
“It allows the Minister to constitute his own internal panel to interview and shortlist candidates but does not make express provision to guarantee that the panel members are both experienced in law enforcement and politically unaligned. The candidate eventually nominated by the Minister, following the panel’s assistance, is then presented to the Portfolio Committee on Police for consideration for the first time.”
Previously, the DA proposed establishing an independent panel of experts, chaired by a retired judge. This panel would interview and shortlist potential candidates for the Executive Directorship, then recommending a candidate to the Minister for appointment.
According to the DA, this would have ensured the panel tasked with recruiting the national police watchdog’s top job was both independent and well-versed in law enforcement.
Action Society spokesperson Juanita du Preez stated, “for IPID to be a genuinely independent institution as an effective watchdog over the police, it should also be a Chapter 9 Institution. Without that type of authority, IPID is more of a bouncer than a watchdog,”
Du Preez noted “the increased parliamentary oversight will bring a measure of independence and that our elected parliamentarians will act responsibly in their role as watchdog over the watchdog.” She further added however, “as the Act now stands, there is still too much room for political misuse within IPID.”
