an assessment of probono.org’s maintenance project at four courts in gauteng: findings

An Assessment of ProBono.Org’s

Maintenance Projectat Four Courts in Gauteng:

FINDINGS

Community Agency for Social Enquiry

SELECTED FINDINGS FROM STAFF

Where we want to be

Our theory of change rests on the fact that we want to increase access to maintenance courts, increase access to justice by providing free legal services and also for the courts to become self-sufficient and run at their optimal level.

Activities undertaken

Between February and July 2011 497 women were assisted by the maintenance help desk.

Interns mainly:o provided legal advice to the womeno assisted them with the completion of formso directed them to the relevant maintenance

officials at the courts.

Activities 2Only 6 women got legal representation. o ProBono does not assist with criminal caseso Legal representation mainly needed when

other party representedo Means test (of Law Society) excludes some.

Legal advice far more commonly needed than representationo Some women also approached with other

issues where legal representation needed.Some differences in profile of cases:o Alberton & Roodepoort: domestic violenceo VdBijlpark and Vereeniging: defaulting

Activities 3

Both interns did informal enquiries. This is work that should be done by government officials o But interns gain practical experienceo It saves time of government officialso Courts can assist more people, including

because women are better informed.

TrainingBoth interns said their law studies did not give sufficient preparation for their duties. Training provided by ProBono:o May 2011: training on Maintenance Act at all

four courts. o August-September 2011: workshops on

mediation as a form of ADR at Alberton and Vanderbijlpark

o Workshop on customary law and maintenance at Roodepoort court.

Common problemso Assistance with completion of maintenance

application forms (including calculating costs)o Applications for increases in amounto Reporting defaulting fatherso Garnishee orderso Difficulties in determining whereabouts of

fatherso Evictions from RDP houses in cases of divorce

in Vereenigingo Women reporting domestic violence (at

Alberton because family court?) likely to apply for maintenance simultaneously

SELECTED FINDINGS FROM COURT OFFICIALS

Staff shortagesThis problem echoed in all methods:o Includes staff we did not cover directly, such

as interpreters and stenographers.

o Maintenance investigators are a particular problem:

• None at Vereeniging & Vanderbijlpark• Women are expected to do this work

themselves• but they don’t have the skills, access to

information, money or time• and there are personal dangers.

Training

o Almost no maintenance-specific training reported apart from ProBono.Org:

• Latter not reported by many: Only longer training ‘recognised’?

o Justice College training was said to cover only general principles and procedures.

o Justice College was not prepared to provide schedule of their training to us.

o Clerks and officers are not required to have legal qualifications.

o Magistrates report having to train and mentor other officials.

Functioning of courtsMost officials said that all maintenance courts are applying the same law o But there are differences in how it is

organised e.g. queues, dedicated court, days + magistrate preferences.

Very few criminal cases. o Officials avoid it as they fear offender will

lose job and then not be able to pay.Most women are now paid through bank.o Definite improvement but still problems e.g.

• Cash hall officials can’t check queries• Employers submit wrong or late info.

Staff-reported challengesUsers have limited knowledge:o Differences in perception or responsibilities

Inadequate knowledge of clerks & officersShortage of human resources:o exacerbated by low status of maintenance

Shortage of other resourceso Printers, computers, internet, cellphones for

investigators, GPS, spaceLack of cooperation between courtsBehaviour and attitude of users

Overall assessmentCourts are “trying their best” with limited resources available and in situation of high unemployment.New Act had assisted, although it has taken time for users to understand it.Differences between courts:o Roodepoort: No longer receive complaints via

presidential helplineo Vanderbijlpark: Functioning so well that users

come from other areaso Alberton: Least optimistic (although it is

family court)

Assessing ProBonoAmong those that knew about ProBono:o Possibility of free legal representation valuedo Problem that interns are not there every day.

Comparing interns and clerks:o Interns cannot locate files, check arrears,

sign off on consent orderso Clerks cannot arrange free lawyero Interns may give better advice because of

legal training and more timeo Interns can assist with form completion and

officials are not allowed to do this

FINDINGS FROM USERS

Common themesWomen were asked to tell their stories.

Repeated themes:o Most only referred to application forms, not to

other documentso Several said that they were expected to

deliver the “letter” (subpoena) to the father.o Some were advised to ask police to assist.o Delays of months between delivery of

subpoenas and court date.o Alberton: 3 women arrived on court date but

name was not on list and told to re-apply

The sub-poenaIn Mankweng police station the police told me that they have their duty of arresting criminals, the court had its own mandate and they must finish their job on their own. They … feared they may be needed to come to Johannesburg for some reason. (ProBono.Org client, Alberton).

They gave me two options, it is either I deliver the summons myself to him or post them. I said the alternative is for me to deliver them to make sure that he got them so that it would not prolong the process. (ProBono.Org client, Roodepoort)

How is amount determined?

Women felt forced to accept less than they felt was needed to support the child:o Generally granted half of what they asked foro Is this misinterpretation by court officials that

costs should be split equally regardless of ability of pay?

o Seemingly arbitrary decisions by court officials

o Repeated instances of court (incorrectly) taking CSG into account.

The quantumThe person who was assessing us was taking his side because she said what should she do if he did not bring the pay slip. I said to her if you speak like this it means you are encouraging him not to bring the pay slip… (ProBono.Org client, Roodepoort) I completed [the forms] and requested R1000 for the child. [The father] said I must no longer use the Pampers, I must use the cloth nappies. The magistrate said he should pay R300 because I receive a grant for a child, so it ended up there. (ProBono.Org client, Roodepoort)

Default

The main reasons provided by women for why respondents defaulted were:o The mother was living with another mano The respondent reportedly lost his job.

 In some cases women doubted the proof provided that men had lost their jobs.In other cases men threatened to resign from work to evade paying maintenance

Monitoring of default

There should be a follow up that this man is paying every month. And if he didn’t pay they should check the reason why he didn’t pay. So there should be a follow up because they (men) start relaxing if they see or notice that there is nothing done by the court (ProBono.Org client, Vereeniging)

Perceptions of officialsAt all 4 courts, there were women who felt strongly that court officials – including women officials – were favouring men.

Several women at Alberton court suspected men were bribing officials, resulting in “lost” files and low amounts.In Alberton & Vereeniging officials were said to be unprofessional, rude and uncaring.

Corruption

The court officials should stop asking for cold drinks and lunch from us because our partners are giving them the money already. They always tell us that they are hungry and we should buy lunch for them. They follow us when we leave. Sometimes before they help you they ask you to go and buy lunch for them because they are hungry. (ProBono.Org client, Alberton)

CONCLUDING THOUGHT

What is DoJCD doing?Three-year service turnaround in maintenance project:o possible use of Saturday courts to deal with

large caseloadso improved skills for frontline maintenance staffo appointment of more investigatorso introduction of complaints managerso production of guidelines on maintenance

 Has anyone heard of or seen this?