protection functions”. In terms of clause 3, the object of the Bill is to establish and empower the BMA to achieve— (a) integrated border law enforcement within the border law enforcement area and at ports of entry; and (b) co-operation on and co-ordination of border management matters in general. It appears that “border management” in the definition is limited, but that the concept is broadened in clause 3 to include matters other than law enforcement functions and the border protection functions performed by the Defence Force. The provision on the object of the Act cannot be the same as a definition, as it is more substantive whilst a definition gives clarity to a word or expression. DOJ “border protection functions” It is suggested that the expression “of the Republic of Africa, 1996” be deleted as the Constitution is defined in the Bill Agreed, the expression “of the Republic of South Africa, 1996” should be deleted. DOJ “commissioned officer”: The question arises whether it will be clear to ordinary members of the public as to what is meant by a “commissioned” officer? Clause 14 details what a commissioned officer is and sets out the requirements thereof. Therefore, from this clause it is clear what a commissioned officer is. DOJ “Defence Force”: It is suggested that the definition reads ““Defence Force” has the meaning ascribed to it in section 1 of the Defence Act, 2002 (Act No. 42 of 2002);” Agreed, the definition of “Defence Force” should be amended as suggested.
the Defence Force in respect of the airspace of the Republic. It is suggested that either the definition or clause 2(3)(b) should contain a provision excluding the border law enforcement functions of either the Border Management Authority (“BMA”) or the Defence Force to avoid any possible confusion. 3 Object of Act DOJ In terms of the definition, “border management” means the execution of border law enforcement functions and includes co-operation with the Defence Force on the implementation of border protection functions”. In terms of clause 3, the object of the Bill is to establish and empower the BMA to achieve— (a) integrated border law enforcement within the border law enforcement area and at of entry; and (b) co-operation on and co-ordination of border management matters in general. It appears that “border management” in the definition is limited, but that the concept is broadened in clause 3 to include matters than law enforcement functions and the border protection functions performed by the Defence Force. The provision on the object of the Act cannot be the same as a definition, as it is more substantive whilst a definition clarity to a word or expression. 4 Establishment of Authority COSATU (and NEHAWU) COSATU’s remaining areas of concern are the location of the BMA and the call to ban all outsourcing. COSATU’s position has been that the The BMA is an entity that is to implement border law enforcement functions emanating from several pieces of legislation administered by other Departments and has
billion for the 2013- 14 fiscal year, approximately 19% of total revenue collected. Therefore, it is important to consider the timing of the Bill, especially at this critical time in South Africa’s economy. The focus on the fundamentals of the economy namely employment and creation and maintenance of an environment conducive to successfully conducting business are imperative. Distorting the tax system may be costly and uncomfortable for business as many of their operations are already in line with specifications of SARS. It is important that the South African Tax system does not lose credibility as this will primarily impact the business environment resulting in uncertainty and doubt among businesses. It is imperative that the mandate of the African Police Services is not ignored. The current Bill has the potential to impact the performance and duties of the SAPS. The preamble does not mention the constitutional mandate of the SAPS in the border environment and fails to mention the fact that the SAPS is a single service and law enforcement is a SAPS primary function. Legitimate movement may be interrupted an illegal movement if not undertaken by experienced authority. Furthermore, the Bill mentions cooperation and coordination with other state organs in border law enforcement but once again does not mention the SAPS. The Bill indicates after an arrest has been made the person should be handed over to SAPS, however a procedure is not outlined. The Chamber acknowledges that the primary responsibility in the prevention and prosecution lies with the SAPS together with the Metropolitan Police. It is important to note that SAPS and Metropolitan Police are mandated and have the necessary expertise to carry out “zero tolerance policing strategies”. It is law enforcement authorities that ensure a safe and livable City. Furthermore, law enforcement agencies ensure full coverage for