SAPS Amendment Act Judgement (The Hawks)
13 December 2013
The Helen Suzman Foundation ("HSF") notes the unanimous judgment of the Full Bench of the Western Cape Division of the High Court ("the High Court") in the matter of the Helen Suzman Foundation v the President of the Republic of South Africa and Others.
Background
In the landmark decision in Glenister v President of the Republic of South Africa and Others 2011 (3) SA 347 (CC), the HSF intervened as a friend of the court in challenging the constitutionality of various sections of the SAPS Act 68 of 1995 ("the SAPS Act") for its failure to secure the independence of the unit charged with investigating and combating corruption and organised crime. The Constitutional Court found Chapter 6A of the SAPS Act to be inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid to the extent that it failed to secure an adequate degree of structural and operational autonomy for the Directorate of Priority Crime Investigation ("the Hawks"). The issue in this case, therefore, was not the location of the Hawks within the South African Police Service, but whether the SAPS Act ensured sufficient insulation from, among others, undue political interference.
The Constitutional Court found that the Hawks did not enjoy sufficient structural and operational autonomy for the following key reasons: