Report slams 2013 allocation of fishing rights

FISHERIES staff revealed in a forensic audit that there had been several cases of political interference during the department’s controversial 2013 allocation of fishing quotas, with officials being “instructed” to allocate fishing rights to some people who had failed to meet the required criteria.

This emerged in a report commissioned by the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), carried out by Emang Basadi Legal and Forensic Services, to review and assess capacity and work in the fisheries branch.

The report, tabled at the DAFF portfolio committee yesterday, made damning findings about the fishing rights allocation process (FRAP 2013) and sketched a picture of a Fisheries Department under then minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson without proper leadership, riddled with vacant posts and operating on a “skeleton staff”.

“Fisheries managers indicated that during the rolling out of the FRAP 2013, there were several instances of political interference.

“For example, some applicants who failed to meet maximum qualifying criteria were issued rights because FRAP officials were ‘instructed’ to approve their applications. If such allegations are substantiated, it could undoubtedly put the department and its senior officials at political and legal risks,” the report said.

The 2013 allocations caused an outcry when many small fishermen found they had lost their livelihoods when their fishing rights were not renewed.

The forensic report said several fisheries officials had spoken about a lack of leadership, lack of clarity on allocation operations, and of friction and divisions.

“The fisheries management branch spent the entire period of the previous term, 2009 to 2014, without a duly appointed deputy director-general. A close estimate shows that more than 10 officials had acted in the position between January 2010 and March 2014,” the report said.

The investigation found that the 2013 allocation process had been marred by a “haphazard” documentation system, with minutes of meetings relating to the allocation process not recorded or improperly filed.

The application forms did not ask for information on many criteria which the published policy required, such as compliance with maritime safety or with basic conditions of employment, nor was there any “rational justification to deviate from the policies which were the basis for the assessment of applicants”. Other findings were:

The contracting of the service provider Orca to help rights allocations did not fully comply with procurement requirements.

The department’s letters about quota allocations were either sent to the wrong people, or contained incorrect information or incorrect score sheets.

Key positions had been frozen or abolished.

The freezing of posts, some of which had not been filled since 2009, meant several units were operating without full teams.

Because of problems with the research vessels, the department relied on big private fishing companies to enable the scientists to do their required scientific surveys, a crucial part in determining how many tons of fish can be caught.

”Tardy” political decisions contributed to the 2013 fishing rights process stalling.

Because of the problems in the 2013 allocations, the reputation of the fisheries branch had been dented. It had also drawn legal action from stakeholders, the report said.

Several long-term fishing rights expire this year. Because of the time constraints in allocating the 2016 rights, the report advised the minister to extend all these rights for another year, so the department would have time to deal with the next allocations.

Applicants who failed to meet the criteria were issued rights