Permits returned to fishermen after bungle

FRIDAY MAY 13 2016 FISHING rights have been returned to a number of fishermen who lost out during the bungled 2013 fishing rights allocation process.

On Wednesday, Minister of Forestry, Agriculture and Fisheries Senzeni Zokwana said final decisions on appeals lodged in the controversial 2013 allocation process had been made.

He said of the 567 appeals considered and evaluated, 210 appellants had been granted rights and 59 percent of successful new entrants were black.

Wally Croome, chairman of the SA Commercial Linefish Association (Sacla), said he was relieved the process had been finalised and had been impressed by the way which Zokwana had handled the matter.

“I am very relieved that the people who deserved to be there are now there.”

In 2013, when the allocations were awarded in eight sectors, hundreds of small commercial fishermen found they had lost their rights. Sacla interdicted the DAFF (Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries) to allow people to continue fishing until there was a settlement.

At the time, then fisheries minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson said she intended to scrap the entire fishing rights allocation process of 2013 after a legal audit which found the process was flawed and would not stand up to a court challenge.

But Croome said this did not happen, and when Zokwana took over, another team of legal experts looked into what had happened.

“They also found irregularities and appointed an appeals committee.”

He said people submitted appeals and comments, which were taken into consideration by the appeals committee.

Zokwana said 127 comments and complaints had been received and evaluated. “Of these, 16 complaints were determined by the appeals advisory team as raising allegations that warranted further investigation by the forensic audit firm, Sizwe, Ntsaluba and Gobodo Inc.”

He said of 15 investigations undertaken, only one yielded evidence of fraud and the appellant concerned was not granted rights.

Zokwana said he had looked at whether the appellants had complied with the Marine Living Resources Act. He noted one appellant was refused rights because he had been convicted of abalone poaching and was under house arrest.

Zokwana had also instructed his department to institute criminal proceedings against an applicant who had allegedly presented a falsified permit to compliance officials. – Helen Bamford