After Glenister: The case for a new dedicated agency
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3108/2012/i39a849Keywords:
constitution, SAPS, Hawks, Directorate of Priority Crime Investigation, independance, corruption,Abstract
Last year, the Constitutional Court held that the state has an obligation to establish and maintain an independent anti-corruption entity and that the Directorate of Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), which is located within the South African Police Service (SAPS), does not have an adequate degree of independence. A Bill has recently been introduced in the National Assembly to address the issues raised in the judgment. In accordance with the proposed amendments, the DPCI would remain part of the SAPS. This article argues that this is a mistake and that a wholly separate anti-corruption entity should be established. It also examines the legal and institutional framework required to establish an effective, specialised anti-corruption entity through a comparative analysis of other anti-corruption agencies.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2012 Author and Institute for Security Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
SACQ is licenced under a creative commons licence (CC BY) that allows others to distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long a they give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. They may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
Copyright for articles published is vested equally between the author/s, the Institute for Security Studies and the Centre of Criminology (UCT).