DO
Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
Unclaimed Business
Government & Ombudsman Services|1.7|11 Reviews (last 12 months)|This business does not respond to reviews
DO
Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
Unclaimed Business
11 Reviews (last 12 months)
Does not respond to reviews
Performance(last 12 months):
TrustIndex
0
Ranking
#5
in Government & Ombudsman Services
NPS Score
-34
Recommended: Unlikely
Review Distribution
1.7|11 Reviews
May '25 - Apr '26
5(18.2%)
4(0%)
3(0%)
2(0%)
1(81.8%)
5(18.2%)
4(0%)
3(0%)
2(0%)
1(81.8%)
Frequently Asked Questions About Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has a TrustIndex of 0 out of 10 on Hellopeter, based on 11 reviews in the last 12 months. Hellopeter has tracked Department of Justice and Constitutional Development across 126 total reviews. How is the TrustIndex calculated? →
Recent reviews (11)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your ExperienceIS
IVY S
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
6 Mar 2026, 11:06
Pathetic humanitarian viola8
Honestly the DOJ there is so much *******ion Bureaucracy Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Minister must sort out this Department
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)IS
IVY S
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
6 Mar 2026, 11:06
Pathetic humanitarian viola8
Honestly the DOJ there is so much *******ion Bureaucracy Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Minister must sort out this Department
0
Replies (0)K
Kelebogile
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
23 Feb 2026, 15:48
I want to lay compla...
I want to lay complain on the Injustice in registration of marriage and divorce proceedings at court
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)K
Kelebogile
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
23 Feb 2026, 15:48
I want to lay compla...
I want to lay complain on the Injustice in registration of marriage and divorce proceedings at court
0
Replies (0)JP
Jillian P
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Jan 2026, 19:37
Justice failing victims of GBV
CMR Wierdapark were approached to assist a mother trying to get contact to her child and she was told that they could not assist as there was no court order. The mother has being trying to get a court date but has been told she could not be assisted due to a backlog. She completed all the forms she needed to, but could not get a date. All while an unstable father (proof provided of his mental illness) was keeping her child from her. What is our government doing about it? The child is in danger and the father is mentally unstable (with proof), yet they are allowing this poor 7 year old to stay in his care and ignoring the mother. Reference 6919109 Dinah
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)JP
Jillian P
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Jan 2026, 19:37
Justice failing victims of GBV
CMR Wierdapark were approached to assist a mother trying to get contact to her child and she was told that they could not assist as there was no court order. The mother has being trying to get a court date but has been told she could not be assisted due to a backlog. She completed all the forms she needed to, but could not get a date. All while an unstable father (proof provided of his mental illness) was keeping her child from her. What is our government doing about it? The child is in danger and the father is mentally unstable (with proof), yet they are allowing this poor 7 year old to stay in his care and ignoring the mother. Reference 6919109 Dinah
0
Replies (0)A
GN
Garison N
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
17 Dec 2025, 07:26
Poor service
I had a case in Praktiseer, Limpopo whereby my car was bumped by a police officer in March 2015. I asked Scorpion Legal Protection to assist me with legal issues. The Minister of Police department dragged their feet until March 2025 when the magistrate awarded a default judgement in my favour. The Minister of Police must pay the damages to my car. The paperwork for payment was also delayed due to taxation which took close to 3 months. The request for payment was sent to the state attorney by the beginning of December 2025. Until today the office of the state attorney hasn't responded. They are just dragging their feed on everything. I'm not happy about the way government officials treat this case because I'm being treated unfairly.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)GN
Garison N
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
17 Dec 2025, 07:26
Poor service
I had a case in Praktiseer, Limpopo whereby my car was bumped by a police officer in March 2015. I asked Scorpion Legal Protection to assist me with legal issues. The Minister of Police department dragged their feet until March 2025 when the magistrate awarded a default judgement in my favour. The Minister of Police must pay the damages to my car. The paperwork for payment was also delayed due to taxation which took close to 3 months. The request for payment was sent to the state attorney by the beginning of December 2025. Until today the office of the state attorney hasn't responded. They are just dragging their feed on everything. I'm not happy about the way government officials treat this case because I'm being treated unfairly.
0
Replies (0)EP
Eunice P
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
22 Nov 2025, 20:16
Urgent Concerns: Disorganization and Delays at Child Maintenance Court (19 November 2025)
I was shocked and disappointed by the severe disorganization at the Child Maintenance Court on Wednesday, 19 November 2025. 1. Attendees were first sent to Schoeman Street, then redirected back to Pretorious Street. 2. We waited until 10:00 for electricity to come back. It is amazing that till today such big Government Departments do not invest in Generators. 3. The toilets were also out of order. 4. When the roll call finally began. My file was again missing from the pack for the day. 5. We also discovered the court was double booked, so we couldn't go in for Section 10. 6. The defendant did not come to Court, and the matter was postponed unnecessarily. *My observation when we were at the Magistrate's office to request a new date: * 1. Even the Court Officer, Mr Muzunga did not appear to fully agree with or understand the Male Magistrate’s reasoning behind subpoenaing the Defendant just to appear on January 29 merely to have the process explained. 2. This decision seems to unnecessarily drag the process, despite the Courts themselves complaining about limited resources. 3. I saw lack of urgency of securing outstanding payments and school fees for January 2026 does not appear to be recognized. 4. It is unclear why the Male Magistrate made this decision after instructing us to wait for Ms Marx, who had already explained the Defendant’s repeated pattern of skipping court and failing to pay. Right to Request Clarity 1. I wish to know whether I had the right to respectfully request clarity or remind the Male Magistrate of the progress we have already made? 2. As far as I understand, he sent the process back to Section 6 for reasons known only to him. *Enforcement of Court Order* 1. I was promised that the Sheriff will not return without something. However, he came back with excuses. 2. The proceeds are urgently needed to cover the child's: - School fees: R6,300/month. - Matric exam fees: ~R8,000. - Matric Dance costs. - Seasonal clothes, - Money for toiletries, hair and Tuckshop. # The Child requested me to pursue education with father’s contribution, unlike her brother who struggled without support. Hence, I respectfully request the Sheriff to go back to seize, even the defendant's suits, if it calls that. This action is also necessary to ensure that the Defendant takes the Court Order seriously. Strategic Consideration Given the current job overload for Courts, I appeal to Department of Justice to consider adopting a business strategy similar to Mr XRepo’s, which has proven effective and popular. Many clients appreciate regaining their dignity through timely results, and such a strategy would enhance both complainants satisfaction and pride and job satisfactionto the Court Officers.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)EP
Eunice P
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
22 Nov 2025, 20:16
Urgent Concerns: Disorganization and Delays at Child Maintenance Court (19 November 2025)
I was shocked and disappointed by the severe disorganization at the Child Maintenance Court on Wednesday, 19 November 2025. 1. Attendees were first sent to Schoeman Street, then redirected back to Pretorious Street. 2. We waited until 10:00 for electricity to come back. It is amazing that till today such big Government Departments do not invest in Generators. 3. The toilets were also out of order. 4. When the roll call finally began. My file was again missing from the pack for the day. 5. We also discovered the court was double booked, so we couldn't go in for Section 10. 6. The defendant did not come to Court, and the matter was postponed unnecessarily. *My observation when we were at the Magistrate's office to request a new date: * 1. Even the Court Officer, Mr Muzunga did not appear to fully agree with or understand the Male Magistrate’s reasoning behind subpoenaing the Defendant just to appear on January 29 merely to have the process explained. 2. This decision seems to unnecessarily drag the process, despite the Courts themselves complaining about limited resources. 3. I saw lack of urgency of securing outstanding payments and school fees for January 2026 does not appear to be recognized. 4. It is unclear why the Male Magistrate made this decision after instructing us to wait for Ms Marx, who had already explained the Defendant’s repeated pattern of skipping court and failing to pay. Right to Request Clarity 1. I wish to know whether I had the right to respectfully request clarity or remind the Male Magistrate of the progress we have already made? 2. As far as I understand, he sent the process back to Section 6 for reasons known only to him. *Enforcement of Court Order* 1. I was promised that the Sheriff will not return without something. However, he came back with excuses. 2. The proceeds are urgently needed to cover the child's: - School fees: R6,300/month. - Matric exam fees: ~R8,000. - Matric Dance costs. - Seasonal clothes, - Money for toiletries, hair and Tuckshop. # The Child requested me to pursue education with father’s contribution, unlike her brother who struggled without support. Hence, I respectfully request the Sheriff to go back to seize, even the defendant's suits, if it calls that. This action is also necessary to ensure that the Defendant takes the Court Order seriously. Strategic Consideration Given the current job overload for Courts, I appeal to Department of Justice to consider adopting a business strategy similar to Mr XRepo’s, which has proven effective and popular. Many clients appreciate regaining their dignity through timely results, and such a strategy would enhance both complainants satisfaction and pride and job satisfactionto the Court Officers.
0
Replies (0)AS
Ashona S
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
2 Sept 2025, 22:35
Logging of complaints for judicial injustice
Good day please assist I am being wrongfully accused by member of the justice department and have been summoned to smalls claim court. Person accusing me is Trudy Van Der bank from the Ermelo mpumalanga smalls claim court who has falsely accused me of killing her sons dog's. She has been investigating and getting information about me with out my consent. I have lost hope in the justice department as it seems to be failing me and the judges involved in there hearing are all colleagues of Trudy Van Der bank and believe this hearing on Thursday 04.09.2025 will not be a fair trial for me to prove my innocence
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)AS
Ashona S
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
2 Sept 2025, 22:35
Logging of complaints for judicial injustice
Good day please assist I am being wrongfully accused by member of the justice department and have been summoned to smalls claim court. Person accusing me is Trudy Van Der bank from the Ermelo mpumalanga smalls claim court who has falsely accused me of killing her sons dog's. She has been investigating and getting information about me with out my consent. I have lost hope in the justice department as it seems to be failing me and the judges involved in there hearing are all colleagues of Trudy Van Der bank and believe this hearing on Thursday 04.09.2025 will not be a fair trial for me to prove my innocence
0
Replies (0)AF