UNJUSTIFIED COP OUTS; S 3(2) PAJA REQUESTS DELIBERATELY IGNORED

W.Cape case officer and his superior blatantly, and deliberately , ignored and did not comply with requests made ( repeatedly ) in terms of Section 3(2) of PAJ Act. On top of this procedural mishandling , the verdict delivered was a cop out which ignored the public interest , the RSA Constitution and compliance with the STSM Act in favour of adhering to a noncompulsory internal CSOS circular which is not law and which should NOT apply in all cases . The complainant's case was not presented properly in the case summary given to Chief Ombud to sign off on .This was a repeat of a similar case a year ago where the same cop out also happened, the real issues were ignored and the case summary was inept and inadequate .It is apparent that case officers can get away with inadequate attention to Section 6(9) applications by just going for a cop out route given by an internal CSOS circular , ignore the real issues and the need to right wrongs and give ******* case summaries to their bosses to sign off on .And the complaining public have their time and money wasted by CSOS and get no justice provided and persons who flout the law are allowed by CSOS to get away with this .The cases in issue concerned providing PERSONAL SAFETY where this was inadequate. This lack mattered not at all to CSOS who has continued ( over 2 separate cases a year part ) to shut their eyes to inadequate personal safety arrangements in a BC where the concerned persons had offered to themselves pay for such at own expense.If persons die or are injured due to lack of what was requested to be put in place , it will be on the bead of CSOS ;but they are likely to ever be held to account ?