The National Prosecuting Authority in South Africa is Under Siege.

Abstract

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) of South Africa is facing increasing criticism for its inability to effectively prosecute high-profile corruption cases and gender-based violence (GBV) crimes, leading to severe consequences for the country’s criminal justice system. This article explores the systemic inefficiencies within the NPA, particularly its failure to address GBV and high-level corruption. Notable cases, such as the Omotoso Trial, highlight the NPA’s mishandling of complex cases, which have been marred by delays, procedural errors, and a lack of resources. This lack of action has contributed to a growing culture of impunity, where victims of GBV and violent crimes are denied justice. Furthermore, the NPA’s poor prosecution rates, particularly in violent crime cases, have eroded public trust in the justice system, leading to a rise in vigilantism and informal justice mechanisms. The low conviction rates, coupled with the NPA’s failure to prosecute effectively, are not only undermining the rule of law but also destabilizing South Africa’s social fabric. This article argues for comprehensive reforms within the NPA to address these issues, emphasizing the need for greater political independence, resource allocation, and an overall increase in the capacity to tackle violent and high-profile crimes

Introduction

The blatant dismemberment of the National Prosecution Authority (NPA) has led to a spiralling justice system, correctional facilities that are not functioning efficiently, a lacklustre prosecution rate and has led to the loss of many lives of victims, suspects and convicts alike in South Africa. The purpose of the article is to spread awareness regarding the failures and inefficiencies of the NPA as an organ of the state as well subsequent repercussions that could lead compromised constitutional democracy. The main issue this article seeks to address is why lawmakers in South Africa are purposefully running the NPA inefficiently. This issue will be addressed by evaluating the support the NPA receives from the state, the prosecution issues the NPA struggles with as well as the consequences of these two issues.

Background

Established in 1998 under the National Prosecuting Authority Act 32 of 1998 and section 178 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and replacing the Attorney General Act 92 of 1992, the NPA was established as a result of the need for a prosecuting body in South Africa free of political interference from executive powers and to rid the country of discriminatory statutes that were aimed at centralising power and targeting persecuted people of colour.(Sibande, 2014)

Its establishment was met with criticism by provincial attorney generals it was replacing. Several of these attorney-generals raised concerns that it negatively influenced the separation of power between the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary powers in the country. This notion was rejected by the Constitutional Court, arguing that the prosecuting authority should not be a part of the judiciary, and that the power the president holds over appointing a head does not contravene the doctrine of the separation of powers.

The NPA’s fears over being free from political interference mainly revolved over one, the fact that the Minister of Justice had the power to influence the functions of the chief prosecutor and the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP). Secondly the structure and hierarchy of the NPA allowed the NDPP to effectively influence the powers and functions of all prosecutors in the country.

In spite of all the challenges the authority faced during its inception, with Bulelani Ngcuka at the helm, the NPA swiftly established three high profile Investigative Directorates: for organised crime, serious economic offences and corruption. The establishment of several specialized units during the first five years of the NPA’s existence allowed prosecutors to acquire the knowledge and strategies necessary to tackle extremely difficult and heinous types of crime.

The Financial backing and leadership structure of the NPA

How is the NPA Backed?

In terms of financial backing, the NPA primarily coordinate with the Department of Justice and Constitutional development to determine the necessary expenditure and revenue estimates. One this has been determined, it is then voted in parliament as a part of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development portfolio. The budget allocated is the managed by the NPA’s Deputy General

Other sources of funding for the NPA include donations, The NPA does accept contributions from a variety of sources, both monetary and in-kind. Certain laws and guidelines, especially those pertaining to protecting the NPA’s independence and guaranteeing accountability and openness, apply to these donations. In 2023 Minister of Justice Ronald Lamola stated that the authority has received up R30 million in funding from private donors. (ENCA, 2023)

The structure of the NPA Executive

Currently the NPA leadership comprises of four offices, the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) held by Advocate (adv) Shamila Batohi, the Deputy National Director of Public Prosecutions (DNDPP) held by adv. Ouma Rabaji-Rasethaba, the Deputy National Director of National Prosecutios: National Prosecutions Service, held by adv. Sibongile Mzinyathi and the Deputy National Director of National Prosecutios: Strategy, Operations and Compliance, held by adv. Anton Du Plessis.

While the authority is helmed by seasoned and experienced advocates, it has faced harsh criticism for its inability to successfully prosecute cases involving gender-based violence (GBV) and high-profile corruption. The credibility of the NPA and the rule of law in South Africa are threatened by these failings, which are not just procedural but rather suggest deeper structural inefficiencies.

Gender Based Violence: Inaction in the Face of a Crisis.

The NPA’s shortcomings are especially prevalent when examining its ability to pursuing cases involving Gender Based Violence (GBV). Although GBV was declared a national crisis by the South African Government in 2020, prosecution rates for such instances still remain worryingly low. Prominent cases such as the Omotoso Trial have highlighted the fact the the NPA lacks the necessary firepower and urgency to successfully handle complex and sensitive cases.

The Omotoso case, in which Nigerian pastor Timothy Omotoso faced multiple charges of sexual exploitation, trafficking, and abuse of minors, is emblematic of the NPA’s failure to address GBV with the seriousness it deserves. Despite extensive media coverage and significant public interest, the trial has faced numerous delays, with key witnesses failing to testify, evidence being mishandled, and procedural errors impeding progress. The result has been not only a prolonged trial but a significant loss of public trust in the NPA’s ability to deliver justice to the victims of GBV (Vadi, 2021).

Furthermore, the NPA’s failure to act in these cases is exacerbated by societal factors, including the underreporting of GBV cases and police inefficiencies. This lack of progress has, in turn, contributed to a growing culture of impunity for perpetrators of GBV. Research has shown that the NPA’s inability to prosecute such cases effectively has a detrimental impact on survivors, who often feel disillusioned and unwilling to engage with the justice system (Schonteich, 2022).

How the NPA’s Shortcomings, Could Lead to the Erosion of Trust.

Research indicates that the NPA’s inefficiency in prosecuting violent crimes is contributing to the erosion of public trust in the justice system. According to a 2021 report by the Institute for Security Studies (ISS), South Africa’s conviction rates for violent crimes have plummeted in recent years, with only 14% of violent crime cases reaching a conviction (Kinnes, 2021). This low rate of prosecution has a direct impact on public perception, with citizens increasingly viewing the NPA as either unable or unwilling to hold offenders accountable.

One of the most severe consequences of the low prosecution rate is the deepening sense of insecurity in South African communities. Public opinion surveys reveal that South Africans are increasingly distrustful of the justice system, as evidenced by the growing popularity of vigilantism in certain parts of the country (Schneider, 2020). When citizens perceive that the legal system is failing to act on their behalf, they may resort to informal means of justice, which can lead to further violence and instability.

Crime Deterence and the Social Fabric.

The consequences of this low prosecution rate extend beyond public perceptions of the justice system and directly affect crime deterrence. A high conviction rate is widely regarded as a key factor in deterring would-be offenders from committing violent crimes. However, the NPA’s failure to secure convictions sends a message to criminals that there is little chance of facing serious consequences for their actions. This, in turn, perpetuates a cycle of violence and lawlessness, contributing to South Africa’s reputation as one of the most violent countries in the world (Dandara, 2021).

The failure to prosecute violent crimes also has a negative impact on the social fabric of communities. Victims and survivors of violent crimes, particularly those from marginalized communities, often feel as though they have no recourse to justice. This can lead to further alienation, disillusionment, and a general lack of faith in state institutions. In cases of gender-based violence and violent assault, the failure to prosecute offenders has led to a normalization of violence, where perpetrators are emboldened and survivors are left without justice (Masuku, 2019).

The low prosecution rate for violent crimes is a significant factor contributing to South Africa’s crisis of crime and violence. The NPA’s failure to effectively prosecute both high-profile corruption cases and GBV matters has undermined public trust in the justice system and has allowed a culture of impunity to thrive. Addressing these issues requires a comprehensive overhaul of the NPA, including reforms aimed at ensuring better resource allocation, political independence, and enhanced capacity to address the full spectrum of criminal behavior in South Africa.

Conclusion.

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) in South Africa stands at a crossroads, its failures to effectively prosecute high-profile corruption and gender-based violence (GBV) cases undermining the entire criminal justice system. The systemic inefficiencies within the NPA have eroded public trust, perpetuated a culture of impunity, and fostered societal instability, all of which threaten the integrity of South Africa’s democracy. The Omotoso Trial and the NPA’s inability to prosecute corruption cases effectively serve as stark reminders of the institution’s fragility and the resultant harm to victims and the public alike.

A lack of political independence, coupled with insufficient resources and an inadequate commitment to prioritizing high-impact cases, has led to an alarming 14% prosecution rate for violent crimes, further exacerbating the sense of insecurity across South African communities. The resulting public disillusionment and the rise of vigilantism are direct consequences of an institution that is increasingly perceived as failing in its duty to uphold justice.

To restore public confidence and ensure justice is served, it is imperative that the NPA undergoes comprehensive reforms. These reforms should focus on enhancing the political independence of the NPA, improving its operational capacity, ensuring better resource allocation, and establishing clearer frameworks for accountability. Until these issues are addressed, South Africa’s justice system will remain crippled, allowing crime and impunity to thrive unchecked, while the most vulnerable segments of society bear the brunt of this institutional failure. Without decisive action, the NPA will continue to play a detrimental role in the erosion of the rule of law, threatening not only the safety of individuals but also the long-term stability of the democratic state itself.

Reference(S):

Dandara, C. (2021). Violent Crime and Lawlessness in South Africa: The Failure of the National Prosecuting Authority to Prosecute Violent Crimes. South African Journal of Criminology, 23(2), 112-130.

Kinnes, I. (2021). Conviction Rates and the Failure of the Criminal Justice System in South Africa. Institute for Security Studies. Available at: https://www.issafrica.org

Masuku, S. (2019). The Impact of Low Prosecution Rates on Crime Deterrence in South Africa. Journal of Law and Society, 32(4), 48-64.

Schneider, C. (2020). Public Trust and the Rise of Vigilantism in South Africa. South African Journal of Political Studies, 43(1), 89-106.

Schonteich, M. (2022). Gender-Based Violence and the Justice System: An Analysis of the National Prosecuting Authority’s Response to GBV. Crime and Justice in South Africa, 17(3), 22-37.

Vadi, V. (2021). The Omotoso Trial and the Role of the NPA in Prosecuting High-Profile GBV Cases. South African Law Review, 38(1), 65-84.

Mkhwanazi’s War on Criminals in KZN May Win Public Approval, But at What Cost to Our Constitutional Democracy? (June 9, 2025). Eyewitness News. Available at: https://www.ewn.co.za/2025/06/09/mkhwanazi-s-war-on-criminals-in-kzn-may-win-public-approval-but-at-what-cost-to-our-constitutional-democracy

NPA Receives Nearly R30M from Private Donors While Amendments to Funding Policy in Final Stages (March 24, 2023). News24. Available at: https://www.news24.com/politics/npa-gets-nearly-r30m-from-private-donors-while-amendments-to-funding-policy-in-final-stages-20230324

Sibanda, M. (2014). The Role of the National Prosecuting Authority in Ensuring Accountability in South Africa’s Justice System. South African Journal of Criminal Justice, 26(1), 99-114. Available at: https://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1991-38772014000100002#back7