CLAUDIA PIZZOCRI: Parliament should not play Horatio — digitisation is not the only answer

In his opening statement before the portfolio committee on home affairs sitting in parliament on August 20 the minister, Leon Schreiber, showcased his PR skills once again as he touched on “hot” topics while trying to maintain a balance to appease all sides. 

In strongly promoting digitisation he said: “For as long as we fail to use technology to make up for the capacity shortfall and close the gaps for human discretion, it is not a question of ‘if’ abuses will be exposed. It is only a matter of ‘when’.”    

It is true that digitisation is central to economic development across the globe, in line with the so-called fourth industrial revolution. Digitisation in public administration is undoubtedly beneficial as it reduces handling times and streamlines administrative processes, while favouring the synchronisation of efforts and enhancing public management operations’ transparency.

These factors all strengthen trust in government among the general public, which the department of home affairs dearly needs. However, digitisation is not necessarily key to the resolution of immigration related matters and issues relating to national security.

The intrinsic complexity of the processing of applications made in terms of the Immigration Act, and the weight the adjudication process carries in each decision, cannot be simply resolved through digitisation in the SA landscape, with its inherited shortfalls.   

The risks of unlawful discretion can only be managed with appropriate legal training. The failure to adequately train bureaucrats in the values and principles of constitutional governance remains central to all internal displacements within the department, and this cannot be magically resolved by digitisation.   

Capacity shortfalls within the department have been a long-standing issue that was aggravated by the Covid lockdown and can only be resolved through a careful recruitment and upskilling plan, which needs to have long-term objectives and not be aimed at instant gratification or to fulfil personal political ambitions. 

Security issues, leaks of personal data and corruption are not going to be rooted out by digitisation, and believing they will be is naive to say the least. Unless Schreiber intends handing the department over to artificial intelligence (AI) adaptive learning systems in its entirety, throwing in the towel on South Africans’ integrity, skills and education as a non-achievable goal.   

Assuming this is not his intention, the creation, access and use of digitised systems would still predominantly rely on the human factor, which when corrupt or faulty can spread its negative ripple effect even wider. Even the most advanced AI adaptive systems rely on high-quality human-produced data on which AI models can be trained. 

Considering the xenophobic sentiment across the nation, perhaps this vision of a possible future will force South Africans to revisit their position on foreign labour and skills as less threatening and damaging than being replaced by AI systems probably trained abroad. 

Schreiber’s statement to parliament is not unwelcome, and was necessary in light of the recent scandals that have made international headlines, yet it remains inadequate if we are in search of real accountability.   

According to the minister the study visas found in the possession of the recently deported Libyan militants were handwritten, and “frankly, even a child could forge [them ... and they] were processed even if they did not contain all the requisite documentation”.

Schreiber’s emphasis on the handwritten aspect, while being beneficial to his digitisation campaign, fails to address the fact that visa labels are the end-product of the Government Printing Works. Whether, following the legitimate processing of an application, these visas are completed by pen, crayon or typed, should make no difference at all.   

The printing works prints labels in batches, identified by serial numbers and followed by a sequence control number unique to each label, and a unique machine-readable barcode. The batches are printed on highly securitised feature paper and thereafter are released to home affairs and the department of international relations & co-operation through equally securitised systems and a strict chain of custody.

These security features are visible under blue light exposure and the labels’ barcodes are scanned at ports of entry. Shifting Schreiber’s perspective — distinguishing between a forged visa label and a printing works-issued label should be child’s play.

In the same sitting of the portfolio committee, director-general Tommy Makhode confirmed that — as we suspected —   international relations department officials in Tunis were responsible for issuing the 95 study visas, and that a failure of due process occurred. This admission should remain the real point of concern, and the focus of any further investigation.   

Breach of the chain of custody of Government Printing Works visa label batches within home affairs has been a recurring problem over the years. Foreigners have been declared “prohibited persons” on the basis of being found in possession of visas deemed fraudulent but later identified — through the judicial process — to be legitimate visa labels that were derailed once received by home affairs.

In court papers we have in the past directed the minister’s office to investigate the possible existence of a criminal enterprise within the department’s institutional ranks that may be unlawfully alienating visa labels into the public domain for the very purposes of fraud.    

In other words the rot in Tunis is not unique to that office. The underlying issue that needs to be rooted out remains institutional in nature, and parliament should press for answers rather than giving complacent Horatian ears to each succeeding minister who inherits these mountains to climb and laments the same issues with no tangible progress over time. 

Schreiber has a mammoth task ahead of him and will need determination, coupled with knowledge, to make real progress. 

• Pizzocri is CEO at Eisenberg & Associates.