IPID should be independent to perform task without ministerial interference: Concourt

It is necessary that the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) is seen as independent to ensure it undertakes its task as a police watchdog without any interference by the police minister.

The Constitutional Court made this remark as it confirmed an earlier high court order that some sections of the IPID Act were invalid to the extent that they authorised the police minister to suspend‚ take any disciplinary steps or remove from the office the IPID head.

The Constitution provides for the establishment of an independent police complaints body.

IPID executive director Robert McBride was suspended by Police Minister Nkosinathi Nhleko in March last year on allegations that he had covered up the alleged involvement of senior Hawks officials in the unlawful renditions of four Zimbabweans during 2010 and 2011.

McBride went to court seeking an order declaring 6(3)(a) and 6(6) of the IPID Act invalid.

The high court agreed with McBride‚ and said the sections did not provide for parliamentary oversight in relation to the suspension‚ discipline or removal of the executive director of IPID.

In a unanimous judgment written by Acting Judge Lebotsang Bosielo on Tuesday‚ the Constitutional Court agreed with the high court that section 6 of the IPID Act gave the minister enormous political powers and control over the executive director of IPID.

“It gives the Minister the power to remove the Executive Director of IPID from his office without parliamentary oversight.

“This is antithetical to the entrenched independence of IPID envisaged by the Constitution as it is tantamount to impermissible political management of IPID by the Minister.”

Bosielo said without adequate independence‚ it would be easy for the police minister to take over the power of the executive director of IPID under the guise of political accountability or oversight.

“In this case‚ acting unilaterally‚ the Minister invoked the provisions of … the Public Service Act‚ placed Mr McBride on suspension and instituted disciplinary proceedings against him.

“Undoubtedly‚ such conduct has the potential to expose IPID to constitutionally impermissible executive or political control. That action is not consonant with the notion of the operational autonomy of IPID as an institution. “

Bosielo said the IPID had extensive powers to investigate a variety of matters involving the police and complaints of assault‚ torture‚ rape‚ discharge of firearms‚ death while in police custody and as a result of police action.

He said the public had a direct interest in seeing these matters being vigorously pursued and properly investigated.

“It is therefore necessary to its credibility and the public confidence that it be not only independent but that it must also be seen to be independent to undertake this daunting task without any interference‚ actual or perceived‚ by the Minister.”

TMG Digital