Speeches

Input by the Hon Andries Nel, MP, Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development to the Joint Meeting of the Regional Court Presidents' Forum and Chief Magistrates' Forum held on 13 August 2026

Chairpersons,
Regional Court Presidents,
Chief Magistrates,
Chairperson and members of the Magistrates Commission,
Officials of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development,
Colleagues attending in person and online,

Good morning.

Before I begin, let me wish us all, women and men, a belated happy Women's Day. Women's Month is an important opportunity not only to celebrate the contribution of women to our society and our justice system, but also to reflect on the work that remains for us to achieve substantive gender equality.

This has been very much part of my programme over the past few days. On 8 August, I participated in the meeting of the South African Chapter of the International Association of Women Judges under the theme: "From Policy to Protection: Advancing Accountability, Justice and Systemic Reform to End Gender-Based Violence in South Africa".

Yesterday, I participated in the Symposium on Gender Inequality and Anti-Corruption under the theme: "Advancing Gender-Responsive Governance, Accountability and Institutional Reform".

I am joining you virtually this morning because I am now on my way to Thulamahashe in Mpumalanga for an Access to Justice Week event focussing on issues that have a direct impact on access to justice for women.

In different ways, these engagements speak to the same fundamental question that confronts us here today: how do we ensure that the constitutional promise of justice becomes a lived reality for everyone?

Gender equality, judicial transformation, the integrity of our institutions and access to justice are not separate projects. They are different dimensions of building a justice system that serves all the people of South Africa.

I also convey the good wishes of Minister Kubayi, who joined us at our previous meeting in KwaZulu-Natal on 10 June.

At that meeting I encouraged the leadership of the District and Regional Court Judiciary to make the Preamble to our Constitution a living part of our institutional practice during this year in which we commemorate the 30th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution under the theme: "One Constitution. One Nation: Reflect. Renew. Recommit."

It was also a privilege for me to participate in the seminar hosted by the South African Judicial Education Institute at Freedom Park on 26 June under the theme "From Struggle to Supremacy: 30 Years of the Constitution as a Living Memory".

These commemorations must, however, be connected to the everyday functioning of our justice system.

Constitutionalism is experienced by the public not only through judgments and constitutional doctrine, but through whether courts are accessible, safe and functional; whether matters commence on time; whether records are available; whether interpreters can be secured; whether judicial officers have the tools required to perform their functions; and whether people can obtain justice without unreasonable delay.

Only two months have passed since our last meeting, with Parliament also having been in recess during July. We should therefore not pretend that every longstanding problem can show dramatic progress within this period. But neither should the short interval become a reason not to account for progress.

One of the purposes of these regular engagements is precisely to establish continuity: to identify problems, agree on interventions, report back, and determine what still requires attention.

A number of matters on which I will touch will be dealt with in greater operational detail by senior officials of the Department later today. I am joined by Mr Charles Mohalaba, DDG Court Services; Ms Rhulani Ngwenya, DDG Corporate Services; Ms Rofhiwa Singo, Chief Financial Officer; Adv Steven Ralekwa, Acting DDG Legislative Development; Ms Tumelo Zwane, Acting DDF: ICT and her team; Mr Tsietsi Malema, Provincial Head Gauteng, and other provincial heads; and Ms Corlia Kok and Mr Kingsley Boutlwanye from the Court Administration Branch.

I will therefore concentrate on the broader developments and on matters requiring our continuing joint attention.

Acting Magistrates

Let me begin with the appointment of Acting Magistrates. At our previous engagements I indicated that the Policy Guidelines for Acting Magistrates were being finalised.

I had also requested that, where appropriate and feasible, we consider alignment with relevant aspects of the Policy Guidelines for Acting Judges gazetted on 17 June 2026. That work is being completed.

I intend submitting the draft guidelines to the Magistrates Commission, the Regional Court Presidents Forum (RCPF) and the Chief Magistrates Forum (CMF) for final input before they are placed before the Minister, with a view to bringing them into operation as soon as possible thereafter.

Internally, I have also introduced a new system intended to improve the turnaround time for processing acting appointments, particularly where applications are submitted sufficiently in advance.

There are, however, difficulties which we need to address together. Applications are sometimes received with annexures missing, incomplete or unclear scans, incomplete information on the prescribed forms, outdated or absent certificates of good standing, or without reports required in respect of persons who have acted for extended periods. Applications are also, on occasion, submitted only a day or two before the proposed appointment is to take effect.

I would therefore appeal to Judicial Heads to assist us by ensuring that applications are complete and submitted timeously.

There is a second and more substantive issue. Acting appointments are not simply an administrative mechanism for filling a temporary vacancy. They are also an important part of developing the future magistracy.

We therefore need adequate quality assurance, appropriate feedback on performance, and better communication between Judicial Heads where a person has acted in different provinces or regions. We should know how an acting magistrate has performed and whether there are outstanding part-heard matters before further acting appointments are made. The credibility of acting appointments ultimately affects the credibility of the Regional and District Judiciary itself.

Legislative programme

I have directed my Office to provide the Forums with the Department's legislative programme on an ongoing basis. It should be understood as a living programme which we can update at our quarterly engagements.

Among the matters presently being advanced are the Judicial Matters Amendment Bill, the Extradition Bill, the General (Mining) Laws Amendment Bill, the Legal Practice Amendment Bill, the Regulation of Trusts Bill and the Conspiracy, Instigation and Incitement to Commit Offence Bill.

The Judicial Matters Amendment Bill contains amendments across a number of statutes, including amendments relating to the Judicial Conduct Committee; amendments to PAIA arising from the Constitutional Court's judgment in Arena Holdings; amendments to PRECCA; provisions affecting children in conflict with the law following the Cannabis for Private Purposes Act; and amendments concerning rights of appearance under the Legal Practice Act.

The Extradition Bill was introduced in Parliament on 19 May 2026.

The General (Mining) Laws Amendment Bill, Legal Practice Amendment Bill and Regulation of Trusts Bill have been approved by Cabinet for publication for public comment, while work is continuing towards the introduction of the Conspiracy, Instigation and Incitement to Commit Offence Bill.

I will not go through the entire legislative programme this morning. What is important is that the Forums should increasingly have visibility of legislation that may affect the functioning of the District and Regional Courts and should have an opportunity to make appropriate input.

Traditional Courts Act Regulations

The draft Regulations under the Traditional Courts Act have been revised following the comments received. But I want to emphasise that bringing the Traditional Courts Act fully into operation involves considerably more than promulgating regulations.

Implementation also requires the appointment and preparation of the necessary personnel, including Provincial Registrars and Clerks of Traditional Courts; appropriate administrative systems; and training of traditional leaders and other role-players, including through SAJEI. We therefore have to approach implementation as an integrated institutional programme rather than simply as a legislative event. Officials will provide further detail.

Single Judiciary and judiciary-led court administration

I also want to return briefly to the question of a single judiciary and judiciary-led court administration. At our June meeting both the Minister and I stressed that the District and Regional Court Judiciary cannot be peripheral to this process. The Regional and District Judiciary constitutes the part of the judiciary through which the overwhelming majority of South Africans encounter the justice system. Any future model of court administration must therefore take proper account of the experience, institutional requirements and constitutional position of the lower courts.

I would welcome feedback from the RCPF and CMF on any further engagement that has taken place with the Chief Justice and her team following the Heads of Court meeting of 10 April. From the Department's side, DDG Mohalaba and the relevant officials are scheduled to meet tomorrow to take the process forward.

Our approach remains that this must be an inclusive process.

The form and content of a single judiciary cannot simply be determined at the top and subsequently extended to the District and Regional Courts. The Regional and District Judiciary must participate meaningfully in shaping the model.

We are very pleased that the 2026 Judiciary Conference, convened in Umhlanga, Durban, from 13 to 16 July 2026, under the theme "Towards a Single, Institutionally Independent, and Accountable Judiciary" declared unambiguously:

"The Judiciary's commitment to the establishment of a single, unified Judiciary as a constitutionally independent and an equal branch of the State which is inclusive of the Magistracy."

Security and protection of judicial officers

Security remains one of our most serious concerns. Threats, intimidation and attacks directed at judicial officers are not merely occupational risks. They go directly to judicial independence and the ability of judicial officers to perform their constitutional functions without fear or favour.

The Department is therefore developing a comprehensive Protection Services Policy to provide a more structured and consistent framework for threat assessment and the provision of protection. A multidisciplinary Task Team involving relevant institutions in the Justice Cluster has been established to take this work forward, and the current programme envisages finalisation of its report by the end of August.

I am informed that 21 Magistrates are currently receiving close protection services. The broader security picture is also concerning. The information before us classifies 161 courts as low risk, 220 as moderate risk, 289 as high risk and 90 as maximum risk.

This illustrates why we need to move beyond responding to incidents after they occur towards a more integrated and intelligence-informed approach to court security and the protection of judicial officers.

The officials will provide greater detail on the Protection Services Policy, the security classification of courts, court guarding and the measures being considered to modernise physical security infrastructure.

Foreign-language interpreters and virtual interpretation

Language and interpretation services remain another important area of work. The amendment of the Foreign Language Interpreters Procurement Policy has been finalised following consultation with stakeholders, including the Legal Practice Council and the Office of the Chief Justice. The memorandum was signed by the Acting Director-General on 10 July and it is currently receiving attention from the Ministry.

Work is also progressing on a central electronic diary and database for interpreters. The project is intended to commence in the third quarter. ICT and Language Services held their second meeting on 6 August and a project charter and possible implementation schedule have been drafted.

Importantly, the project brings together the electronic diary and virtual interpretation. This should enable us to use a scarce pool of interpreters much more efficiently across geographical boundaries.

Courts are already using virtual interpretation, particularly for postponements and other matters where this is appropriate. I would encourage Regional Court Presidents and Chief Magistrates, working with the NPA and other role-players, to continue expanding appropriate use of virtual interpretation.

Technology will not solve every interpreter shortage. But geography should no longer automatically determine whether a suitably qualified interpreter is available to a particular court.

Audio-visual testimony

There has also been progress since our June meeting on the Standard Operating Procedure governing audio-visual testimony. I am advised that the SOP has now been finalised and approved by the DDG: Court Administration and submitted for circulation.

There remain related practical questions, including arrangements concerning witness fees and the provision of data to witnesses participating virtually. These matters are being considered further, including by Finance.

The objective must be to make virtual testimony a practical instrument for the administration of justice rather than to create a system in which the technology technically exists but witnesses cannot realistically use it.

Legal Aid South Africa

I also want to return briefly to Legal Aid South Africa. At our previous meeting we discussed the effect that financial constraints at Legal Aid SA can have throughout the criminal justice value chain.

The Minister and I met the Minister of Finance on 30 July and raised, amongst other matters, the implications of Legal Aid SA's reduced budget. This is not simply an institutional concern of Legal Aid SA. If accused persons cannot obtain representation, courts cannot proceed. The result is postponements, longer case cycles, greater pressure on prosecutors and judicial officers, and potentially longer periods of detention.

It demonstrates again why criminal justice resources cannot sensibly be planned institution by institution, without considering the capacity of the system as a whole.

The Minister and I are due to engage the Portfolio Committee next week following correspondence from the South African Lawyers and Allied Workers Union.

Immigration matters

I also want to convey the appreciation of the Minister and myself to members of the judiciary who have assisted, sometimes at extremely short notice, with matters relating to immigration and deportation.

Whatever pressures exist within the immigration system, the Constitution and the rule of law remain applicable. The necessary judicial processes ensure that state action takes place lawfully and with respect for human dignity. We appreciate the role that members of the Regional and District Judiciary continue to play in this regard.

Matters on which officials will brief the Forums

Chairpersons,

Officials will shortly engage you in considerably greater detail. I do not want to pre-empt those presentations, but let me identify several matters which I regard as particularly important.

First, ICT and digital court administration.

At our June meeting the deterioration of CRT and SOS equipment was raised as a serious operational problem. The Forums were informed then that functionality had fallen to approximately 88% for CRT and 78% for SOS, largely because of ageing equipment.

This is not a peripheral IT matter. When court recording technology fails, the administration of justice itself is affected.

Officials will therefore update you on CRT, SOS, the development of the Leave Tool and progress with online portals and broader digitalisation.

Second, laptops and the basic tools of judicial work.

The concerns raised in June about ageing laptops and replacement cycles are understood. Court Administration, supported by Finance, is presently procuring 222 laptops for the Judiciary, including newly appointed Magistrates. This will not resolve every outstanding requirement, but it represents concrete movement on a matter repeatedly raised by the Forums.

Third, virtual courts.

Forty-five additional sites have been identified in consultation with the RCPs. The estimated requirement for these sites is approximately R6.818 million, and the funding question must now be resolved before procurement can proceed.

We should view virtual courts not as a substitute for properly functioning physical courts, but as another instrument for increasing resilience, reducing unnecessary movement and using scarce resources more intelligently.

Fourth, infrastructure and facilities.

Here I think we must be candid. The Department's own assessment is that infrastructure project performance remains below the planned trajectory. The causes include delays involving external implementing agents, particularly DPWI; procurement delays; and insufficient internal project-management capacity.

The Department has 152 capital projects at planning stage and 26 under construction. There is progress at individual sites, but the overall system remains slower than any of us would wish. The financial position also requires prioritisation. The allocation for minor capital works for 2026/27 is approximately R54.5 million against a requested R95.6 million.

Officials will take the Forums through the individual projects and priorities.

Fifth, security at court buildings.

Protection of individual judicial officers and security of court facilities are related but distinct issues. The Department is considering the modernisation of physical security infrastructure, including CCTV and other security systems, together with a more effective threat and incident reporting mechanism.

This work must increasingly move us from fragmented and reactive security arrangements towards an integrated security architecture for the courts.

Sixth, the Financial Policy for Judicial Officers in the Lower Courts.

I am pleased that the concerns raised at the June meeting are now being translated into concrete proposals.

These include a proposed hybrid system for cellular phones, allowing a choice between the RT15 contract and a reimbursement mechanism; increases in meal and accommodation limits; and clarification of the meaning of "official business" in relation to attendance at memorial and funeral services.

The latter responds directly to the matter raised by the Forums at our previous meeting.

Officials will take you through the proposals, and I would encourage the Forums to scrutinise them carefully so that we can arrive at arrangements which are practical, reasonable and financially sustainable.

From reporting to implementation

Chairpersons and colleagues,

Perhaps the most important point I want to leave with you is that these quarterly engagements should increasingly operate as a mechanism of joint implementation and accountability.

At each meeting we should be able to ask three simple questions: What did we agree at the previous meeting? What has happened since then? And where progress has not occurred, what is preventing it and what must be done before we meet again?

The minutes of our June meeting demonstrate how interconnected these matters are.

A court cannot function efficiently if it has a judicial officer but no interpreter; an interpreter but no working recording equipment; working equipment but no Legal Aid practitioner; a functioning courtroom but inadequate security; or a virtual platform without connectivity or the financial arrangements necessary for witnesses to use it.

The justice system is a system. A blockage at one point becomes a blockage for everyone else.

That is why the relationship between the political executive, the Department, the Magistrates Commission and the leadership of the District and Regional Court Judiciary must be based on regular engagement, frank identification of problems and, above all, follow-through.

There will inevitably be matters on which we have different institutional responsibilities and different perspectives. That is both normal and constitutionally appropriate.

But we share an overriding objective: a District and Regional Courts system that is independent, properly resourced, secure, technologically capable and accessible to the people whom it exists to serve.

I thank the Regional Court Presidents and Chief Magistrates for the constructive manner in which these engagements continue to take place, and I look forward to receiving the Forums' views on the matters I have raised.

Let me also take this opportunity to show our appreciation to the Chief Magistrate for Durban and Cluster Head, Mr Edmund Ngubane, who is retiring at the end of September. Mr Ngubane, we pay tribute to your unwavering commitment to our justice system, to the rule of law and to constitutional democracy in our country and we wish you all the very best in this new chapter.

Thank you.