RETURN TO HOME | DOCUMENTS

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

THE AMERICAN REPORT

LINE FUNCTIONS OF DEPARTMENTS

BORDER CONTROL OPERATIONAL WORKING TEAM

PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

CONCEPT OF THE COLLECTIVE APPROACH

COLLECTIVE FUNCTIONS

PROJECT CHARTER

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. INTRODUCTION

With the advent of a new democracy, South Africa was seen as the land of 'milk and honey' by many global citizens. The number of immigrants and the volume of goods, both legal and illegal, entering the country, increased substantially. The movement of illegal goods crossing our borders is in the order of seventeen billion rand per year. The illegal flow of aliens and goods has an extreme negative impact on our country's economy and increasing crime rate.

On 12 January 1997 the Cabinet instructed the NCPS Ministers Forum to draw up a workable strategy for addressing poor border control and to then implement the strategy with immediate effect

Three departments, namely: Home Affairs, South African Revenue Services and South African Police Service are the three key role players in border control. These department's functions complement each other and a collective approach was seen as the only workable strategy to address the problem of border control.

The first step in this approach was to obtain acceptance of the necessity to function collectively, from the NCPS Ministers Forum and Directors-General of the three departments involved. This was accomplished with the ratification on the 20th March 1997 of the 'Collective Approach' as drawn up by the Border Control Operational Work Group for the NCPS Coordinating Mechanism.

As a result of the ratification of the Collective Approach Report an implementation plan has been formulated which will have an immediate impact on rectifying the present situation pertaining to border control.

The approved Collective Approach Report is attached as Annexure 1 for the readers convenience.

2. THE AMERICAN REPORT

To assist the Border Control Operational Working Team, the American Report was used as a guideline.

An in-depth analysis of the American report concluded that there appeared to be a disjointed border control command structure in South Africa. One of their main recommendations is 'the creation of one unified Border Police Command, with divisions including Immigration, Customs, Internal Investigations and Border Control' (Annexure 2: Summary of the observations and action steps pertaining to the American Report.)

3. LINE FUNCTIONS OF DEPARTMENTS

For the implementation plan to succeed it is of vital importance that each of the responsible departments ensure that their line functions are properly executed as set out below:

3.1 Home Affairs (H A) Functions

• To regulate the Aliens Control Act, inter alia:

• to designate ports of entry
• to provide for the control of the admission of persons to their residence in, and their departure from South Africa and matters connected therewith.

3.2 South African Revenue Service (SARS)(Customs and Excise) Functions

• To regulate the Customs and Excise Act, inter alia:

• to be responsible for collecting duties on imported and locally manufactured goods.
• to control the export and import of goods.
• to give effect to the tariff protection policy of South Africa.
• to ensure correct application of customs and excise directives.
• to administer VAT on the importation/exportation of goods.

3.3 South African Police Service (SAPS) - Border Police Functions

• to investigate, prevent and combat trans-national / cross border crimes;
• to uphold and enforce the law concerning trans-national crimes.

3.4 Collective Approach Functions

To ensure that an effective regulatory mechanism is maintained for efficient border control.

A complete list of all border posts is attached as Annexure 4.

4. BORDER CONTROL,
OPERATIONAL WORKING TEAM

4.1. Constitution of Working Team

The Border Control Operational Working Team was formed consisting of representatives from the Departments of Home Affairs, South African Revenue Services and Border Police and are as follows:

4.1. Mandate

The Working Team's mandate was to compile an implementation plan on the collective approach to border control.

5. PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

The purpose of this report is to compile a structured implementation plan on the collective approach without disrupting the line functions of border control. In order to address this issue, the recommendations of the US Immigration and Naturalization Service's report on border control was used as a benchmark.

The US Assessment Team found consistency in a number of areas identified for improvement and recommended the following:

1. Use automation and technology as force multipliers;
2. Formalize training in all border related disciplines;
3. Develop budget and resource enhancements;
4. Increase staffing and supply appropriate equipment and support;
5. Review the law enforcement aspects of the immigration inspector positions;
6. Aggressively investigate corruption;
7. Segregate exit and exit control;
8. Develop fine proceedings; and
9. Maintain strict security controls over the federal inspection facility.

6. CONCEPT OF THE COLLECTIVE APPROACH

6.1 Goal

To create a unified command structure for border control.

6.2 Structure

6.2.1 The ideal structure will be as follows:

The Inter-Departmental Structure at national level (NIDS), should consist of representatives from each department, at Chief Director level, as well as the necessary human and other resources to achieve the goal of the unified command structure.

Similar structures at regional level and ports of entry will be put in place.

6.2.2 The question of placing all line functionaries involved in border control under one roof was discussed at length and it was decided that the most practical solution, in the short term, is that each department appoint a person in the interim to perform the functions of the Heads of NIDS. (Annexure 3: Correspondence). Departments must second an implementation coordinator on a full time basis to the NIDS, who will be seated under one roof. (par 8.1.3)

The Implementation coordinators will support the appointed representatives until such time as the final structure is implemented.

7. COLLECTIVE FUNCTIONS

The line functions of the key departments are distinctive and specialized and their management policy functions cannot be performed by any other department. Therefore the collective approach should not be seen as interference in each other’s line functioning, but rather as an endeavour to achieve a common goal. The following are the collective functions of NIDS:

7.1. Functions of the Inter Departmental Structure: National Level

Aim and Functions:

Coordinate and advise on operational functions in relation to border control by:

1. Developing recommendations regarding joint operational policy, standards, procedures and future strategic planning. This must include contingency planning.
2. Monitoring implementation and execution of the above.
3. Evaluating the effectiveness of joint operational services of ports of entry. This will include physical inspections by a task team and reports with findings and recommendations.
4. Facilitating inter-departmental communication at all levels.
5. Facilitating and coordinating joint training requirements for border control.
6. Providing orientation and ports of entry management training.
7. Optimizing all available resources for border control.
8. Establishing and maintaining joint management structures on regional and ports of entry levels.
9. Developing the criteria for designation and status of all ports of entry (land, sea and air)
10. Coordinating present and future border control task teams at national level.
11. Promoting and coordinating joint ventures with other role players and stakeholders such as business and international agencies to add value to projects relating to border control.
12. Maintaining and managing a national information centre.

7.2 Functions of the Inter-Departmental Structure: Regional/Provincial Level

Aim and Functions:

Maintain one unified border control command at the regional level to coordinate all border control activities in a region by:

1. Implementing joint operational policies, standards and procedures as adopted at national level.
2. Monitoring and evaluating the function of joint operational policy, standards and procedures in their respective regions.
3. Facilitating inter-departmental communication within their regions and also communication to the agency on national level.
4. Identifying training needs.
5. Optimizing and sharing all available resources within the region for border control.
6. Facilitating joint operations.

7.3 Functions of the Inter-Departmental Structure: Ports of Entry Level

Aim and Functions:

The execution of joint operational standards and procedures by:

1. Jointly managing the day to day affairs of a port of entry.

8. PROJECT CHARTER

As already stated, each Department will identify an executive head, implementation coordinators, and assign personnel for the project teams.

NIDS will convene on Monday, 5 May 1997 to formulate the plans of action to perform the functions set out in paragraph 7.

NIDS will manage the process and obtain approval, where necessary, from the different departments for action steps to be taken to address the issue of border control.

The inter-departmental structures and functions will be implemented by the executive heads of NIDS on the advice and the assistance of the implementation coordinators.

8.1 Functions during implementation

The following groups will be formed during implementation and their functions are designated as follows:

Implementation Coordinators

8.1.1 The implementation coordinators will have three main functions during the implementation phase:

8.1.1.1 Take responsibility for the implementation by:

• appointing and managing Work Study Teams and Task Teams;
• implement the approved work study recommendations;
• audit the implementation process;
• finalize outstanding implementation issues;

8.1.1.2 Ensure that ad hoc issues are being dealt with by the appointed task teams.

8.1.1.3 Ensure sufficient communication throughout the border control structures.

8.1.1.4 The implementation coordinators will be assisted by a secretariat who will represent the key departments.

8.1.2. Work Study Team

The main functions of the work study team will be to:

• conduct work study investigations;
• advise and support the operational coordinators during implementation;

8.1.3 Task Teams

The task team will perform the following functions:

• Conduct investigations to ensure that all existing resources are optimized.
• Make recommendations on improvements at ports of entry.
• By solving ad hoc issues as and when they arise;
• By taking action on the issues as highlighted by the various reports;
• By formulating and implementing uniform standards of operation at ports of entry.

8.2 Implementation Phases

8.2.1 Tasks of the Implementation Coordinators

The implementation coordinators will have dual responsibilities to be addressed concurrently:

• the short term high priority 'quick-fix' for immediate impact;
• the medium and longer term implementation plan

8.2.2. Tasks of the Work Study Team and Other Task Teams

8.3 Implementation Organization Structure

8.4 Command and Control Structures

NIDS is the first step in achieving parallel operational command at regional/provincial level and at all ports of entry. It will address the disjointed standards and procedures to ensure that a uniform collective approach is adhered to by all.

8.5 Resources

The next step is to determine the existing shortages of personnel. These investigations will also address the abilities and training needs which they identify.

8.5.1. Personnel

NIDS will utilize existing staff within the departments. Everybody is aware of the shortages of personnel, especially at ports of entry. By means of pooling staff it will be possible to render a better service in the short term. It is for this reason that no additional staff is required to start the process.

8.5.2. Budget

Every department will be responsible for its own budget.

8.5.3. Accommodation

To achieve the 'under one roof' concept the Heads of NIDS will determine accommodation needs before the end of May 1997 and communicate these requirements to the Department of Public Works to be addressed immediately.

During the investigation phase by the Work Study Team, the accommodation needs of each port of entry will be identified. The implementation coordinators will negotiate accommodation with the applicable authorities.

8.5.4. Other Resources

Other options for the acquisition of specialized resources, will be investigated by the implementation coordinators conjunction with the appointed task teams.

The biggest problem facing NIDS is a lack of technology and technological know-how. The CSIR (Council for Science and Industrial Research) has indicated that Dr Barend Taute will be available to do a Needs Analysis / Gap Analysis to establish technological needs and gaps.

The Business Sector will be approached for those resources which they are able to supply. These needs,will be expressed through Geoff Reich from Business Against Crime. Business Against Crime has also indicated that they are willing to include Border Control in their adoption strategy and will assist in the overseeing of the Collective Approach Project.

Various countries have indicated that they are available to assist this project in so far as training is concerned. These countries include England, France, Germany, America and Canada. This training will be coordinated through a guardian training committee.

8.6. Assumptions

The following assumptions were made in order to achieve the set target dates of the implementation plan:

• That all the required resources are available and committed for the duration of the project;
• That the structures as set out in this report are accepted;
• That the three heads of NIDS are appointed and operational by 5 May 1997
• That the implementation coordinators are seconded and operational by 5 May 1997

8.7 Risks

If the above assumptions are not realized, the target dates will be affected.

9. RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that:

9.1. the Directors-Generals of the three key departments endorse this implementation plan;

9.2. the personnel identified be mandated to perform the functions required for implementation as set out in this report;

9.3. the necessary resources are made available for the project with immediate effect.

COLLECTIVE
APPROACH ON
BORDER CONTROL

15 MARCH 1997

Prepared for

THE NATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION STRATEGY COORDINATING
COMMITTEE

by

THE BORDER CONTROL OPERATIONAL COORDINATING WORKING
TEAM

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.3.1 Key Role Players Identified
1.3.2 Additional Role Players

2. COLLECTIVE APPROACH

3. COMPARATIVE STUDIES

4. CREATING AN OPERATIONAL COORDINATING MECHANISM

5. RECOMMENDATIONS ON CRITERIA

5.1 Current Situation
5.1.2 Envisaged/Proposed Criteria

6. REQUEST REVIEW OF APPLICABLE LEGISLATION

7. RECOMMENDATIONS ON NEW BORDER POSTS

8. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF GROUND LEVEL TEAMS

8.2.1 Role Clarification
8.2.2 Uniform Guidelines and Control Mechanisms
8.2.3 Reduction of Red-Tape
8.2.4 Sharing of facilities

9. ACTION STEPS TO ADDRESS CORRUPTION

9.2 Type of Corruption
9.3 Action Steps

10. A BUSINESS PLAN REGARDING BORDER CONTROL

11. DETENTION FACILITIES FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

12. RECOMMENDATIONS

13. CONCLUSION

 

APPENDIX A
Proposed SANDF/SAPS Cooperation on Border Patrolling

APPENDIX B
Collective or Inter-agency Approach

APPENDIX C
Customs Law Enforcement Task Group
Recommendations to SA Revenue Service

APPENDIX D
US Immigration and Naturalization Service,
Office of Inspections: South Africa Border Assessment

1. INTRODUCTION

The aim of this workgroup is to draw up a document to address different issues concerning ports/places of entry affecting all role players concerned with border control.

1. 1. The NICOC report 'Border Control: Perspective on Problems', this SARS /CLETG report on a Strategic Workshop, the document of Department of Home Affairs: 'Border Control: Perspective on Problems', report of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Services, are important background information to this document.

1.2 As the debate concerning both the creation of a coordinating mechanism for border control and a management team at the different ports/places of entry has evolved, it has become evident that fragmentation and duplication between the different role players involved in border control is taking place.

1.3 The first question that has to be answered is who are the key role players at ports/places of entry and involved in matters related to the movement of persons and goods into or out of South Africa.

1.3.1. Key Role Players Identified

Department of Home Affairs
SA Revenue Services
South African Police Service - Border Police

1.3.1.1. All of the above mentioned role players are operationally involved for approximately 95% of the work at the ground level.

1.3.2. Additional Role Players

South African National Defence Force
National Intelligence Agency
South African Secret Service
Department of Trade and Industry
Department of Health
Department of Agriculture
Department of Foreign Affairs
Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Department of Correctional Service
Department of Transport
Department of Public Works
Department of Justice
Department of Welfare

1.4. At the pilot meeting that was held on 5 March 1997, and after consultation with all the representatives from the different departments concerned with border control, the Operational Coordinating Working Team found that at the different ports/places of entry, approximately ninety five percent (95%) of the operational/functional work is physically performed by Immigration, Customs or Police officials. Out of the 97 ports/places of entry, at 36 all three departments are physically present, at 45 Immigration and Border Police officials perform the functions and at 19 Border Police are solely responsible for these functions. Furthermore, the role of the National Intelligence Agency has not been used to its fullest extent, in fight of its national responsibility regarding domestic and counter intelligence. In addition the National Intelligence Agency has a role in providing advice on information and physical security measures and to provide intelligence. This agency must form part of the policy and ground level activities of a collective approach.

1.5. Other departments do play a role, for example, Department of Health (Port Health Services) and Department of Agriculture are currently physically present at some harbours, airports and land border posts which are ports/places of entry.

1.6. Certain other departments, who have an interest in specific functions being performed at the border, and that are only of an administrative nature, for example, Trade and Industry and Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Their control functions are performed on a basis of mutual agreement (no formal contract) by the first three mentioned role players. This has also been identified as a problem area and open to misunderstanding. Formal agreements will have to be drawn up, accompanied by training to carry out agency functions.

1.7. The role of the SANDF in cooperation with SAPS is presently under discussion with the heads of these two departments (see Annexure A).

2. COLLECTIVE APPROACH

2.1. It was also clear from the consultations that a collective approach must be taken by the three key departments involved.

2.2. This collective approach must be supported by the other departments who are not physically involved at the different ports/places of entry.

2.3. This approach can be drawn together by using three pillars that represent the three key departments. To be successful, this approach must be simplistic and cost effective.

2.4. It must be noted that at ground level the three departments' operational/functional legs work in close proximity to each other. For example, at a port/place of entry they normally work from one building.

2.5. This confined working environment should create group cohesion. Superficially this would appear to be so, however, in actual fact a pull-push situation exists at many of the different ports/places of entry.

2.6. This situation is partly being exacerbated by virtue of the fact that no clear collective guidelines or non fragmented policies have been forthcoming. Without a collective approach, ground level members do not see themselves as one holistic team, striving towards a single goal. Thus departments are fragmented in their approach to functional matters and in many cases duplication of work is taking place.

2.7. From the role clarification it is clear that the line functions of these key departments are distinctive and specialised and their management/policy functions cannot be performed by another department. Therefore, a collective approach should not be seen as interference in each others line functioning, but will result in a common goal being achieved.

2.8. All three departments share a common goal in ensuring that the movement of persons and goods into or out of South Africa are effectively controlled.

2.9. In the case of the Department of Home Affairs and SA Revenue Services, their concern is not only directed at illegal movement of persons and goods, as is the case of the South African Police Service - Border Police (law enforcement), but also the legal movement of persons and goods (regulatory function).

2.10. However, the functioning of each department has a direct influence on the functioning of the other departments. If the regulatory function is not carried out effectively, law enforcement cannot take place and transgressors cannot be brought to book.

2.11. If the present management/policy level of the three departments, who are involved in operational/functional aspects of border control could be placed under one-roof (in one building) to collectively manage and address aspects of a mutual nature, it could contribute to addressing the problem.

3. COMPARATIVE STUDIES

3.1. In the past six months, four comparative studies have been conducted on this same issue:

• National Intelligence Coordinating Committee (NICOC), report to the Cabinet Committee on Safety and Intelligence (CCSI),
• The Customs Law Enforcement Task Group (CLETG) document for the Executive Head for SA Revenue Services, (Annexure C).
• A draft document prepared by Mr I Lambinon for the Department of Home Affairs, and
• The South African Assessment Document by the US Immigration and Naturalization Service: Office of Inspections (Annexure D).

3.2. All the different authors indicate, in one way or another that a collective or joint approach to this issue should be taken.

3.3. It is apparent from these studies that each department will still perform their line functions without interference from the other partners in this core group and will remain accountable to their respective Director-generals/Executive Heads.

4. CREATING AN OPERATIONAL COORDINATING MECHANISM TO LOOK AT FUTURE COOPERATION BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT ROLE PLAYERS CONCERNED WITH BORDER CONTROL

4.1. The proposed operational coordinating mechanism would reproduce at top level the same situation which is at present occurring with ground level personnel of the three departments’ operational/functional sections, which are functioning in close proximity to each other.

4.2. Placing senior management (Chief Director level) (under one roof/in one building) in a similar situation will create group cohesion, better understanding of each others problems, cooperation, coordination, joint projects, standard guidelines, joint planning, sharing of technology and data information and systems.

4.3. This should be seen as a practical approach through which all present problems could be addressed.

4.4. A unified group will be in a much stronger position to jointly address problems, and find solutions thereto, instead of each department trying to go it alone.

4.5. This approach will be cost effective as the present structures will be used and no additional funds need to be budgeted for.

4.6. This concept will allow for inter-departmental task teams to be formed from time to time to investigate and address specific problems as they may arise.

4.7. This collective working situation could be seen as the first step towards the creation of a Border Control Agency. If the heads of line function are seen to be working together, ground level will follow suit.

4.8. This must not be seen as the ultimate solution to all our problems concerning border control, but is the only practical solution at hand that will not disrupt the present working methodology of the departments involved (see Annexure B) of the diagram of the proposed approach).

5. RECOMMENDATIONS ON CRITERIA AND CONDITIONS WITH WHICH ALL PORTS OF ENTRY MUST COMPLY WITH BEFORE DECLARED AS A PORT/PLACE OF ENTRY FOR SOUTH AFRICA

5.1. CURRENT SITUATION

5.1.1. The Working Team first looked at the current situation and found the following:

5.1.1.1. As far as all ports of entry are concerned the Department of Home Affairs is the responsible authority for the designation for such ports of entry for the movement of people. Customs and Excise is the responsible authority for the designation of places of entry for the movement of goods.

5.1.1.2. The criteria that have been set by legislation for designation of ports/places of entry is not sufficient in terms of border control.

5.1.1.3. Legislation set by Home Affairs.

5.1.1.4. SA Revenue Services - Legal and functional criteria as set by law exists, however they do not address border control problems as such.

5.1.1.5. SAPS - The SAPS has no set criteria except that accommodation must be made available from which policing can be performed.

5.1.1.6. Informal Border Crossings (Gate in fence) - It is not prescribed in the Act, however Regulation 19 of the Aliens Control Act makes provision that such land borders can be opened.

5.1.2. ENVISAGED/PROPOSED CRITERIA

5.1.2.1. It is clear to the Working Team that the statutory criteria alone, are not sufficient. It is proposed that additional criteria should be inserted by means of relevant regulations to the 2 Acts, or in amendments to the statutes.

5.1.2.2. General Criteria

• Before the designation of a port of entry all the relevant role players must be in agreement
• Sufficient accommodation of an adequate standard must be available.
• Such ports of entry must be sufficiently staffed before being designated.
• Basic logistical and communication services must be available.
• Physical security e.g. fencing, lighting etc. must be in place.

5.1.2.3. Land Borders

• A security (wings) fence extending out on either side of the border post, where no natural barrier exists, for a short distance, to be determined, must be erected. A security fence must be erected around the controlled area of the border post as well.
• Entry and exit booms must be erected, which must be monitored.
• Rail traffic, pedestrians, commercial vehicles and noncommercial vehicles must be channeled separately as far as possible. (Toll-gate system)
• Incoming and outgoing traffic must be separated.
• Facilities for searching persons and goods must be made available at points where such searching takes place.
• Storage facilities for seized or detained goods must be available. (Warehouse)
• Adequate parking facilities must be made available.

5.1.2.4. Airports

• The legal owner of the airport must erect a proper security fence around a defined controlled area which must be monitored. A controlled area can be defined as that area which includes the terminal building, the runway and apron. Access to the area will be limited to the terminal building by the public. Controlled access points for the movement of goods.
• All passengers and crew must go through the main terminal building. All international passengers must personally report to Immigration and Customs officials on arrival and departure.
• Official hours of the airport will be determined in conjunction with the relevant departments, however officials must be on duty during official hours. Official hours must be publicly displayed.
• No aircraft may take off or land after official hours for international flights.
• The legal owner of the airport must supply suitable facilities for screening people and baggage on all international airports, according to ICAO standards.
• The legal owner of the airport must provide suitable accommodation for Customs, Immigration and Police (Intelligence/policing) officials.
• At internationally designated airports, the control tower must maintain a 24 hour service. Outside of official hours this need not be a trained Air Traffic Control official. The control tower must report all movements to Customs, Immigration and Police official (flight plans).
• No international flights may divert or land at non-designated ports of entry.
• Air Traffic Control must report all unannounced international flights to the SAPS. The South African Air Force also play a role in identifying unannounced cross border flights, but this will be dealt with in the SAPS/SANDF Cooperation document.

5.1.2.5. Sea borders

• The legal owner of the harbour must ensure that suitable accommodation is provided for immigration, Customs and Policing (intelligence/policing) officials.
• Immigration, Customs and Policing must always be housed within the port limits during official working hours.
• No ships may leave or enter the port outside official working hours.
• All air and sea links between ships (platforms) and shore must be cleared prior to departure through Immigration and Customs.
• The harbour authorities must report all shipping movements to Customs, Immigrations and Police.
• No foreign-going vessels may call on non-designated harbours.

5.1.2.5.1 It is recommended that over and above the criteria as set by legislation, all designated ports/places of entry must comply with these additional criteria within 6 months.

5.1.2.6. Informal border crossings

• No provision is made for informal border crossings in the Aliens Control Act, Act 96 of 1 991, but there is provision in Regulation 19.
• Communities are being artificially divided by colonial borders, and provision must be made for estranged families to visit each other.
• Although Section 5(1) of the Act stipulates that no person shall enter the Republic at any place other than a port of entry, an immigration officer may issue from time to time a Border Control Concession to a person which will exempt such person from reporting to an immigration officer within the limits as endorsed in the concession. The issue is totally at the discretion of the Immigration Officer and can therefore be withdrawn when necessary. The Border Control Concession will not be issued at a port of entry for longer than 6 months at a time. If a person does not have citizenship in the RSA, his Border Control Concession may not exceed the period of his temporary residence permit and he must be in possession of a valid re-entry visa unless exempt from visa control (only British citizens).
• A suggestion is made that an ID card system be implemented with Border Control Concessions at informal border crossings where people are not in possession of passports/travel documents as required in terms of section 11 of the Act. This should be implemented as soon as possible. The purpose of the ID card is to limit the people to the area specified on the card. They will then also be easily detected, should they move out of that specified area.

6. REQUEST REVIEW OF ALL APPLICABLE LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO BORDER CONTROL

6.1. The Working Team, in the short space of time at their disposal, found that in general, legislation is adequate. Small problems exist which can be dealt with, however the, biggest problem is that present laws are not being properly enforced. This is born out by the American Assessment Team, the US Immigration and Naturalization Service: Office of Inspection's border assessment report.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE PROCEDURES THAT MUST BE FOLLOWED WHEN NEW BORDER POSTS ARE DESIGNED OR UPGRADING IS EFFECTED. SPECIAL ATTENTION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE NEW PROPOSED BORDER POST AT LEBOMBO

7.1. Concerning Lebombo, this was discussed at length with some of the members of the Technical Committee involved in the planning of the Lebombo Border Post. It is clear from these discussions that such members have already voiced their concerns of inadequacies in the plan. This mainly concerns the layout, and they are also of the opinion that a 'toll-gate' type of border post be built. It is suggested that the criteria previously mentioned, par 5 supra, be considered. This should be drawn to the attention of the Minister of Public Works.

7.2. Concerning the further building of border posts and the upgrading of border posts, the committee has taken the same stance that the criteria mentioned in par 5 supra should be applied.

7.3. It should be noted that the initiative of SA Revenue Services is highly appreciated in their approach to reduce certain border posts for goods. This is especially in line with the 35 airports which have been designated ports of entry to 10. This is in line with international standards and the Working Team recommends that the number of 10 be retained at all costs.

8. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT OPERATIONAL COORDINATING TEAMS AT EACH BORDER POST TO MANAGE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS AT A PORT OF ENTRY

8.1. As stated in par 2 supra, the debate, concerning the creation of a coordinating mechanism for border control and the management teams, at the different ports/places of entry has evolved, it has become evident that fragmentation and duplication exists between the different role players involved at all levels. As explained in par 2 supra, it is seen that a totally collective approach, both at national and local level, must be instituted. The existing management structures at some of the border posts needs to be revitalised in line with the new proposal mentioned above.

8.2. The Working Group committee discussed this matter and all the representatives agreed that the functions of the main role players are as follows:

8.2.1. ROLE CLARIFICATION

8.2.1.1 South African Police Service - Border Police Function:

• To prevent, combat and investigate trans-national/cross border crimes,
• to maintain public order, to protect and secure inhabitants of the Republic and their property,
• and to uphold and enforce the law concerning cross border violations.

8.2.1.2. South African Revenue Service (Customs and Excise) Function:

• Administration of Customs and Excise Act, inter alia:
• responsible for collecting duties on imported and locally manufactured goods.
• control over export and import goods.
• give effect to the tariff protection policy of the Republic.
• ensure the correct application of customs and excise directives

8.2.1.3. Home Affairs functions:

• The designation of a port of entry.
• The administrative control of the admission of persons to, their residence in and departure from South Africa

8.2.1.4. South African National Defence Force Functions:

• The primary object of the Defence Force is to defend and protect the Republic, its territorial integrity and its people, in accordance with the Constitution and the principles of international law regulating the use of force.
• The SANDF has no direct role with respect to border posts.

8.2.2. UNIFORM GUIDELINES AND CONTROL MECHANISMS FOR PORTS OF ENTRY

• Each department must adhere to its role clarification as defined.
• The different legislation concerning border control is clear on most matters and should be used in conjunction with the regulations and rules which have been promulgated as the uniform standard by all involved in regulatory matters at ports/places of entry. It is the responsibility of the departments involved to ensure that their directives and instructions are not in contravention with legislation. All departments are urged to examine their directives and rules and make sure they are in line with their legislation. All departments should also ensure that their members be trained on a continuous basis.
• Cooperative guidelines between the different departments should be developed. Discretionary powers that have been devolved to line functionaries must also be communicated when necessary.

8.2.3. REDUCTION OF "RED-TAPE" AT PORTS OF ENTRY

• At the pilot meeting held on 5 March 1997, the term 'red tape' was seen as confusing, however, in the American report, mention was made of the fact that the different role players should develop 'fine proceedings' concerning the workings at ports/places of entry. After discussion, this was found to be a line function responsibility, and should be addressed in line with he suggestions in par 8.2.2. supra concerning standardization and uniform guidelines, as this was found to be one and the same issue. The refining of systems will take place in the interdepartmental agency suggested. Each department should sort out, investigate and streamline red tape in their own departments.

8.2.4. SHARING OF FACILITIES

8.2.4.1. Once improved Inter-Departmental cooperation has been established, the following gaps, currently existing, will be addressed:

• Sharing of data bases
• Information/intelligence sharing (NICOC must be involved)
• Lines of communication will improve
• Technology can be shared.

8.2.4.2. A major investigation should be launched in order to determine what type of data base and technologies can be shared to protect confidentiality while insuring good coordination of intelligence, regulation and investigation.

9. ACTION STEPS TO ADDRESS CORRUPTION

9.1. The Working Group accepts the Public Service Act's definition of corruption:

9.1.1. Section 20 (n) of the Public Service Act of 1994 - states that "...An officer, other than a member of the services or an educator or a member of the National Intelligence Agency shall be guilty of misconduct and may be dealt with in accordance with section 21 if he or she - (n) accepts, without permission of a relevant executing authority.... or demands in respect of the carrying out of or the failure to carry out his or hers duties any commission, fee or pecuniary or other reward... or fails to report to his or her head of department or, if he or she is a head of department, to such authority, the offer of such a commission, fee or reward;..." Although this is not applicable to certain persons the same prescription is embedded in their respective Acts.

9.1.2. A committee has been established (chaired by SAPS - Border Police) on corruption. All the Role players are involved and must report back by 4 April 1997.

9.1.3. All relevant departments should remain committed to aggressively address corruption.

9.2. What type of corruption pertaining to border control is taking place:

• Officials/police, customs officers, immigration officers receiving bribes to commit a fraudulent act.
• Officials who unlawfully issue official documents/stamps to somebody not entitled to it.
• Any fabricated or falsified permit, certificate, written authority or other document (ID, passport etc) accepted by an official with or without personal gain.
• Any official receiving a favour in line of duty without declaring it.

9.3. Action steps:

• The strict enforcement of existing legislation and codes of conduct as set by the Public Service Act.
• Improvement of management systems and procedures.
• Annual declaration signed by every official in respect of corruption in terms of the first paragraph.
• To develop a joint code of conduct for Border Control departments concerning this issue.
• The establishment of an Inter-departmental Task Team (Immigration, Customs, Police, NIA and SASS) to address this problem under the auspices of the Anti-Corruption Unit of the SAPS. All the members who will be used on this team must undergo a polygraph test and other screening.
• A recommendation to the relevant departments to deal with such individuals speedily and harshly.
• An Anti-corruption Awareness Campaign must immediately be launched by all the departments:
• Distribution of posters and pamphlets to the public and officials on corruption.
• Media campaign on corruption.
• Information/courses sessions on corruption at all levels (emphasis on ethics).

10. A BUSINESS PLAN REGARDING BORDER CONTROL

10.1. The Working Team has decided that the establishment of a business plan must be delayed until the inter-departmental agency concept has been approved.

11. DETENTION FACILITIES FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

11.1. At the pilot meeting held on 5 March 1997, this matter was referred to the Department of Correctional Services which was identified as the key role player in this matter, to address this problem in cooperation with the Department of Home Affairs and to supply the Working Team with a memorandum on what steps could be taken to address this burning issue.

11.2. The Working Team was informed in writing in a memorandum from the Department of Correctional Services that they are unable to address this problem.

11.3. This will need a political decision as the Working Team has no mandate nor the know-how concerning detention facilities.

12. RECOMMENDATIONS

12.1. That an inter-agency structure be established between the three key departments involved (see Annexure A).

12.2. Corruption must be addressed aggressively.

12.3. Uniform procedures in accordance with the set legislation must be put in place at all levels and management system developed.

12.4. A major investigation should be launched in order to determine what type of data basis and technologies can be shared and how this should be done.

12.5. The Inter-agency structure must set up agency agreements with all other departments who have an interest in border control to perform that function which is required for that department, and which of the three partners will be responsible for performing each agency function.

12.6. The inter-agency structure must within one month, draw up a business plan to address all aspects of mutual concern, and this must be submitted to the NCPS for approval.

12.7. The tasking referred to in par. 11.1. with respect to the Department of Home Affairs and the Department of Correctional Services still stands. These two departments to liaise urgently to solve this problem.

13. CONCLUSION

13.1. On 14 March 1997, this document was presented to the Border Control Operational Coordinating Working Team. The Working Team was in agreement with the contents of the document and ratified that it must be forwarded to National Crime Prevention Strategy Coordinating Mechanism Team in its present form.

ANNEXURE 2

US Immigration and Naturalization

Service's Report - Summary

SUMMARY OF THE AMERICAN REPORT:

PROBLEMS AND RECOMMENDED ACTION STEPS

1. Assessment of the Land Borders:

(page 29)

Along the RSA / Lesotho Border the challenge of border control is exacerbated by the motivation of illegal crosses grazing rights, stock theft and drug smuggling.

On the borders adjoining RSA / Mozambique / Zimbabwe / Botswana the challenges facing border control are volumes pertaining to the movement of both cargo and persons, illegal crosses, the smuggling of fire arms, vehicles and drugs. Contraband and 'round tripping' seems to be the order of the day.

2. Assessment of Airports

(page 37)

Different problems were experienced by the assessment team in that different standards exists at, for example, the larger international airports and the smaller airports.

At the major international airports it was found that certain security measures, although not adequate, are in place. Security areas were cited as being one of the biggest challenges, as these are mainly controlled by non-governmental organisations such as the Airports Company and that no standard criteria are enforced.

At smaller airports, (thirty-two in total) virtually no border control systems are in place. Not only is the number far in excess of accepted international standards, but if they must remain open, they should be brought up to some or other acceptable standard.

3. Assessment of Seaports

(page 35)

The biggest challenge facing border control is the actual staffing of these ports with personnel to deal with border control. It was found by the assessment team that except for the Police, the other agencies responsible for border control are not physically situated in the confines of the harbour area. A general lack of security leaves the ports vulnerable to smuggling of people, goods, weapons and drugs.

As at airports, border control have to rely on facilities that are provided for such functions by private companies. (Portnet) This is an unacceptable situation.

4. Summary of specific observations

The assessment team highlighted the fact that the border areas of South Africa lack resources, personnel infra structure and equipment to effectively control the border.

Foremost, the South African Government and its citizens must make control of all movements (legal and illegal) one of its top priorities.

The following specific observations / findings that are relevant to all ports places of entry and which is applicable to all departments involved in border control, were highlighted and is tabled into observations and action steps:

Annexure 3

Departmental Correspondence:

Department of Home Affairs
South African Revenue Services
South African Police Services

Departmental Correspondence:

Department of Home Affairs

UMNYANGO WEZINDABA ZASEKHAYA
DEPARTEMENT VAN BINNELANDSE SAKE
DEPHATEMENTE YA MERERO YA TSA G\SELEGAE

TEL: 314-8911
FAX: 314-8416
REF: 21/5/3

The Facilitator
Ntsu Consulting

Dear Sir

COLLECTIVE APPROACH TO BORDER CONTROL

I would like to thank you and the interdepartmental group for the work done so far in the above regard. I would also like to inform you of the standpoint of the Department of Home Affairs regarding the implementation of the proposals contained in the document which was presented to the Ministers on 20 March 1997.

As far as the aims and functions of a coordinating mechanism, which are set out in the minutes of the meeting of 7 April 1997, are concerned I am in full agreement.

The question of how these aims and conditions should be achieved appears to be in contention. It appears as if the general approach is that an agency be created which will be housed in one building and consisting of all the personnel involved in migration matters, from the three departments, under a Chief Director from each department.

This approach is not how I understood that the proposals in the document will be implemented. It is simply not possible for Home Affairs to consider depriving the department of total representation, with regard to its Home Affairs functions, of the Chief Director of Migration. Interaction between the functionaries of the department cannot be compromised to this extent.

I am of the opinion that the specific function of coordination by the agency can be administered by the minimum of persons, e.g. a representative of each department at the level of Chief Director. Each representative will of course require a core support staff and will be able to coopt staff from his/her department on a needs basis. I am also of the opinion that this component need not exceed approximately five persons. This approach is in line with the recommendations in chapter 4 of the document presented on 20 March 1997 which requires placing senior management under one roof.

It might very likely materialize that the core staff performing the agency function should initially work on a full-time, permanent basis, until it has achieved all its immediate aims, after which the situation can be reconsidered, as it may be quite possible that an Interdepartmental Committee on Border Control focussing on the joint issues will be able to administer the monitoring functions at a future date.

In general terms we wish to draw the attention thereto that we are endeavouring at present toward an extension of the departments establishment, especially with regard to the enforcement responsibilities. Should this be approved the officials involved herewith will specifically be allocated for the co-ordination purposes.

This letter has been seen and agreed to by the Director-General.

I LAMBINON
P.P. DIRECTOR-GENERAL

Departmental Correspondence:

South African Revenue Services

Tirelomatiotio ya Afrika-Borwa
Uphiko lwezimali Ezingenayo eningizimu Afrika
Suid-Afrikaanse lnkornste Diens
South African Revenue Service

ADJUNK KOMMISSARIS: OPERASIONELE BEDRYF, PRIVAATSAK X923, PRETORIA, 0001
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER: OPERATIONS, PRIVATE BAG X923, PRETORIA, 0001

Billy Hazeihurst

18 April 1997

Dear Sir

COLLECTIVE APPROACH TO BORDER CONTROL

1. I wish to thank you on behalf of SARS and to record my sincere appreciation to you and the Working Group for the progress made thus far. On the same note I have to inform you of the standpoint of the Executive Committee of SARS regarding the implementation of the Proposals contained in the document which was presented to the Minister and the D.G.'s on 20 March 1997.
2. The broad functions of the joint co-ordinating mechanism at national, regional and operational level, with the line functions remaining in the hands of each department, are fully acceptable as reflected in your records of proceedings of 8 April 1997.
3. With regard to a fair representation in the National Inter-Departmental Structure on Border Control Mr W.T. Hazelhurst, the Deputy Commissioner: Operations, has been identified to serve the interests of SARS in particular and the interest of the joint command structure in general. The back-up staff will, from time to time, be drawn from the line function when necessary but Mr. M.J. Lourens, Deputy Director on Customs Union Border Posts & Airports, will be made available from time to time to attend the activities of the national office.
4. The collective approach and the optimising of the available resources by the three major role players on border control is of cardinal importance to SARS. It signals the start of a new era for revenue collection on intra SACU imports into the Republic. Abuse of Customs and Excise Concessions at border crossing will, as well, be brought under control. The added advantage will be the accelerated delivery on the long outstanding promise by the RSA customs administration to other SACU partners as far as the staffing of designated border posts is concerned.
5. SARS is also agreeable to 1 May 1997 as commencing date for the implementation of joint and collective approach to border control at head office level. This view is in line with the recommendations in Chapter 4 of the document presented on 20 March 1997 which requires the placing of senior management under one roof.
6. The contents of this letter has been communicated to the Executive Committee of SARS which found it appropriate and acceptable.

Yours faithfully

COMMISSIONER FOR CUSTOMS AND EXCISE

Departmental Correspondence:

South African Police Services

SUID-AFRIKAANSE POLISIEDIENS

Privaatsak/Private Bag X241
Posbus/Pos Office Box

SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE

THE HEAD
BORDER POLICE
PRETORIA
0001

Verwysing 2/28/35
Reference

Navrae Snr Sup Grobler
Enquires

Telefoon (012) 421-8098/8087
Telephone

Faksnommer (012) 421-8108
Fax number

The Border Control Operational Working Group

BORDER CONTROL: INTERNALLY

1. Your progress report on an implementation plan for a collective approach on Border Control on Border Control has reference.
2. After a comprehensive study of above mentioned document this office would like to ensure you of your wholehearted support for your endeavours.
3. The document discusses border control with specific reference to tasks being performed at air, land and sea ports of entry. All the key role players involved in Border Control has also got an internal responsibility as far as the illegal movement of persons and goods are concerned. It would be appreciated if this can also be discussed during your deliberations.
4. Thank you for your assistance.

HEAD: BORDER POLICE
M.B. STRYDOM

INTERNAL FOLLOW-UP (INVESTIGATION)

1. A internal follow-up (Investigation) unit to be included as part of the NBC5 implementation plan as inspection services of SARS, Immigration Officers of Home Affairs and Members of Border Police, Internal Tracing Units are presently tasked with either internal follow-up and or investigation of border related-crimes.

1.1 The function of these units should be:

1.1.1 The execution and liaison between the respective role players and border posts to facilitate proper investigation of border related crimes in order to combat crimes as set out in present legislation.

1.1.2 Liaison and execution of joint operations relating to border control.

1.1.3 Liaison and co-operation between inter-departmental agencies as well as inter-national counterparts to investigate and combat border related crimes.

1.1.4 The gathering and analysis of intelligence of intelligence information related to border control.

1.1.5 Liaison and sharing of information with other agencies and intelligence agencies, national and international.

Annexure 4

List of Border Posts

List of present land border posts with Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland, Zimbabwe and Mozambique that have been designated as Ports/Places of Entry for the movement of persons and goods: Total 52

Ports/Places of Entry

ANNEXURE A

BORDER CONTROL

LOGICAL ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK

Summary

THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS THE ORGANIZATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR INTEGRATED BORDER CONTROL

prepared by

NATIONAL INTERDEPARTMENTAL STRUCTURE FOR BORDER CONTROL

printed

24 April 1998

Table of Contents

Introduction

1.1 A Definition of Border Control
1.2 Definition of the Logical Organizational Framework
1.3 Objectives of the Logical Organizational Framework
1.4 Aims of the Logical Organizational Framework
1.5 Departments Present at Designated Ports of Entry

Departmental Responsibilities

2.1 Introduction
2.2 Immigration (Department of Home Affairs)
2.3 Customs and Excise (South African Revenue Service)
2.4 Border Police (South African Police Service)
2.5 Other Departments

Introduction

The focus of this document is on the setting of ‘rules’ pertaining to the establishment of a border control process pertinent to interdepartmental responsibilities and cooperation and the uniform logical, controlled and processed flow of traffic through a port of entry.

1.1 A Definition of Border Control

Border control includes:

1. the facilitation of legitimate trade and traffic of people across the country's borders.

This is defined as the primary service responsibility.

• the prevention detection and apprehension of the illicit cross border movements of goods and people.
• the apprehension of those involved in the illicit cross border movement of persons and goods.
• the seizure of goods illegitimately being moved cross borders.

This is defined as the service enforcement responsibility.

1.2 Definition of the Logical Organizational Framework

Defined process within which the roles of each department, and the interdepartmental supportive roles are clarified as required to ensure effective and controlled border control service delivery. This is set out to provide a uniform process for all ports of entry in South Africa.

1.3 Objectives of the Logical Organizational Framework

The objectives of the Logical Organizational Framework is to:

1. Define the control area which includes the service and enforcement area.
2. Ensure integrity and sterility of the control area.
3. Create an environment conducive to enhanced service delivery.
4. Create an environment conducive to enhanced enforcement.
5. Ensure a uniform, logical and controlled flow of all traffic (vehicles and persons).

1.4 Aims of the Logical Organizational Framework

The Logical Organizational Framework rules set out in this document have been designed to ensure the following:

1. Inter-service communication
2. Avoiding duplication of tasks
3. Cost effective use of resources
4. Enforcement of laws
5. Joint training involved in border control
6. Expertise in border control related functions
7. Flexibility of functions among the officials at ports of entry
8. Good intelligence, profiling and risk analysis
9. Effective control of goods and people
10. Establishing a balance between service delivery and enforcement on the one hand and the facilitation of trade on the other.
11. User-friendly environment for the public in the control area
12. Coordination between the departmental command structures.
13. To ensure a consistent approach at all ports of entry
14. To facilitate the definition and implementation of interdepartmental support
15. To ensure that all border control tasks are identified and attended to.
16. Specific definition of the perimeter of the port of entry and responsibility for the integrity thereof.

1.5 Departments Present at Designated Ports of Entry

a) The key service providers are as following.

Department of Home Affairs

Immigration - for the control of the admission of persons to, and their departure from South Africa.

Department of SA Revenue Services

Customs and Excise - for the control of importation and exportation of goods and matters relating to the levying of duties.

SA Police Services

Border Police - for such function relating to border control and import and export of goods assigned to the Service by Law.

Department of Agriculture

Agriculture - for the control of plant or plant products and animal or animal products.

Department of Health

Health - for the control of food, pharmaceutical and disease related matters.

Department of Transport

Transport - for the control of matters related to modes of transport and access roads, air space and shipping lane management.

b) Ad Hoc role players:

– the South African National Defence Force (SANDF),
– National Intelligence Agency (NIA), and
– the South African Secret Service (SASS).

c) Other role players:

– Trade and Industry
– Foreign Affairs,
– Environmental Affairs
– Tourism, and
– Shipping.

2. Departmental Responsibilities

2.1 Introduction

1. As set out below, each of the departments is allocated specific

1. Responsibilities and
2. A service/enforcement area or areas in which they are required to execute these responsibilities.

2. Within these service areas the primary service function is supported by that departments service enforcement obligation as defined by legislation governing such activities.
3. The service/enforcement areas are defined within a Logical Organizational Framework model.
4. In the implementation of these service and enforcement responsibilities, consideration must be given to the situation where certain of the departments have no representation at the border posts.

The following is required of the pillar departments.

2.2 Immigration (Department of Home Affairs)

1. The admission of people, both foreigners and citizens, arriving in, and departing from South Africa in terms of the Aliens Control Act. This includes the issuing of emergency travel documents and temporary work permits.
2. Verifying and validating all travel documents, such as passports, and visas, permits, etc.
3. Entering movements on the Movement Control System.
4. Dealing with Refugee related matters at ports of entry.
5. Service enforcement

2.3 Customs and Excise (South African Revenue Service)

1. Control pertaining to the import and export control of goods
2. Collect duties on imported and locally manufactured goods.
3. Administer the collection and refunding of VAT levied on imports and exports
4. Administer South Africa's Tariff Protection Policy
5. Control of the import/export movement of freight (commercial and non commercial). This task includes the management of duty free stores. Good control measures encourage compliance with the law by travellers and traders and enable the detection of fraud.
6. Control of the inward and outward movement of all modes of transport within the designated customs controlled areas at the border post.
7. Control of prohibited and restricted goods by questioning and searching passengers, crew, baggage, cargo, containers and vehicles within the designated Customs area in order to detect concealed goods that are either undeclared or prohibited / restricted.
8. Control and monitoring of the Trade Rebate Schemes (trade permits) and international trade agreements.
9. Collect duties and VAT once goods have been declared an assessed.
10. Carry out structured risk testing exercises at all ports of entry. This involves sampling all sections of the traffic (as opposed to only those most likely to contravene regulations) for questioning and searching.
11. Collect and collate trade statistics.
12. Instigate inquiries on smuggling operations with an international dimension.
13. Administer the standards laid out in the SARS Charter.
14. Service enforcement

2.4 Border Police (South African Police Service)

1. Control and related matters concerning the import and export of firearms and explosive goods.
2. Control of animal markings as prescribed by the Stock Theft Act.
3. Matters related to dependence producing substances (drug control).
4. Control of the illegal importation of Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants.
5. Control of the illegal importation of Hazardous substances.
6. Illegal exportation of precious metals or diamonds
7. Illegal matters related to the Exchange Control Act (counterfeit moneys)
8. Illegal immigrants as instructed by the Criminal Procedure Act
9. The control over the illegal exporting of stolen property;

• vehicles
• goods
• stock or animal products
• etc.

10. The detection of wanted persons exiting South Africa.
11. Border control related to;

• Ensure integrity and sterility of the control area.
• Create an environment conducive to enhance service delivery.
• Create an environment conducive to enhanced enforcement.
• Ensure a uniform, logical and controlled flow of all traffic (vehicles and persons).

12. Prevention, combating, investigation of crime and upholding law and order.

2.5 Other Departments

1. Department of Agriculture responsibilities are with regard to border control is to ensure that all animals/plant and animal/plant products entering and leaving the country have a Import Permit. All plant and plant products and animals and animal products could potentially introduce diseases into the country, and associated economic loses are easily prevented by effective border control.
2. Department of Health is responsible for the control of foodstuffs entering and leaving the country, disease control, and hygiene requirements.
3. Department of Transport has two areas of involvement with border control; cartage, the Directorate of Civil Aviation and Maritime Affairs and maintaining and servicing roads, air corridors and shipping lanes.
4. Where a departments have an interest in specific service functions performed at the border and has no permanent representative such control functions must be performed on the basis of mutual agreement with the one of the three pillar departments.
5. The responsibilities of the other involved departments are not set out in the Logical Organizational Framework at this stage.

RETURN TO HOME | DOCUMENTS