Overcrowding in Prisons & Release of Prisoners; Escapes & Anti-Corruption

Meeting report

CORRECTIONAL SERVICES PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
3 October 2000
OVERCROWDING IN PRISONS AND RELEASE OF PRISONERS, ESCAPES AND ANTI-CORRUPTION

Documents handed out :
Overcrowding in prisons, release of prisoners, escapes and anti-corruption [see Appendix]

Chairperson: Ms R Capa

SUMMARY
One of the central issues at this briefing was the release of awaiting trial prisoners and early parolees as part of an endeavour to deal with overcrowding in prisons. Discussion ensued on the release that took place in September 2000 and the extent to which this effort had failed. The Department of Correctional Services gave its assurance that preventative measures have been taken to deal with further releases which resume in October 2000. There was consensus that the Department of Correctional Services could not accept sole responsibility for this failure, nor for the general overcrowding of prisons. Fault lay with the Department of Justice for imposing incorrect bail amounts for Schedule One offenders which had led to their release.

MINUTES
Release of prisoners in September 2000
Mr Thami Nxumalo, Acting Commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services, referred to the controversial release of prisoners, the first of which took place in September. These prisoners can be divided into two categories:
- awaiting trial prisoners whose bail had been set at R1000 or less
- parolees: parole dates were advanced by nine months.

Awaiting trial prisoners
The decision to release awaiting trial prisoners was implemented on 15 September 2000. To date, 8262 prisoners have been released. However, amongst them, 722 were Schedule One offenders. In terms of a subsequent Cabinet memorandum, the Minister stated at a media briefing that prisoners to be released excluded those accused of violent crimes and Schedule One Offences.

Mr Nxumalo explained that the error had arisen when certain provinces had rushed to release these prisoners. Of the 722 Schedule One offenders released, 240 had been charged with murder. Of the 240 accused of murder, 124 had received bail for R500,00 or less. Of the 722 Schedule One offenders released, 361 prisoners had received bail of R500,00 or less. Upon realising that Schedule One offenders had been released, attempts were made to bring back the Schedule One Offenders and 215 of them have been recaptured.

Mr Nxumalo alleged that it was evident that this was not a Correctional Services issue, but a national government issue. In support of this view he argued that problems had arisen when magistrates had given bail amounts of R250 to people charged with murder (as was evident from the statistics).

Parolees
The early parole decision became effective on 2 October 2000, but will be implemented some time next week. In terms of this decision, parolees will have their parole dates advanced by nine months. However, there are exclusions such as prisoners convicted of aggressive crimes and sexual offences. This is to avoid the problems encountered previously. A task team has also been established to manage the process. Due to different parole dates, the releases will not be simultaneous and will take places over a period of a few months.

Unlike previously, the decision to release had not been given to the provinces, but lay with national headquarters.

Discussion
Ms Seaton (IFP) asked whether the rationale behind the release of awaiting trial prisoners was that if the criminal had the money, he would have been released in any case.

Mr Nxumalo replied that instead of filling prisons with people who cannot pay bail, they should be released and this release should be recorded as having taken place in terms of a Cabinet decision.

Mr Schmidt (DP) commented that Cabinet had made an incorrect decision by using bail amount as a criterion for releasing prisoners. They had then tried to rectify this by introducing the exclusionary categories. He noted that bail ensured that a prisoner attends trial and asked why no other mechanism was in place to ensure his attendance on the trial date.

Mr Nxumalo replied that the prisoner would be informed that his release has conditions and that it was not an amnesty. He also stated that it was not the Correctional Service's responsibility to ensure that they attend court on the trial date.

The Chairperson reiterated that bail conditions still applied and that Correctional Services was not responsible for implementing this, but the police.

Mr Schmidt (DP) argued that these prisoners are not returning to court on the trial date. He argued that Cabinet was interfering with a judicial decision by granting free bail where magistrates had decided on an amount.

The Chairperson stated that at a meeting discussing the relevant Bill, the Department of Justice had been present when the decision was taken not to grant bail of less than R1000 to serious offenders. Ms Seaton added that there was no way that magistrates could be ignorant of this decision.

With reference to the issue of overcrowding, Mr Durand (NNP) asked why Correctional Services was bearing the brunt of government's incompetence. He argued that this could be attributed to long periods awaiting trial and lack of preparation by police. He also alleged that some prisoners had been released even though they had not satisfied the R1000 bail limit criterion. He asked if the Correctional Services had ensured that the correct parolees in the "nine month category" will be released.

Mr Nxumalo refuted the allegation that prisoners with bail exceeding R1000 had been released. He stated that the issue had been the exclusionary Schedule One category. He explained that measures are being taken to verify the parolees release process which is the reason it has not been implemented yet.

An ANC member stated that it is naïve to say that overcrowding was due to inefficient justice. Rather the more effective justice was, the more convicted persons there were and this would lead to overcrowding.

Mr Schmidt (DP) said that the Department of Justice was to blame for overcrowding and not Correctional Services as one should deal with the cause and not the symptoms of the problem.

A committee member commented that it did not make sense to imprison a person for being unable to pay R100 bail as accommodating such person was costly to the state.

Mr Durand (NNP) argued that cost to the state should not be considered, but rather the risk to the community resulting from such a person's release.

Mr Nxumalo stated that if the policy of restorative justice, community service and other such measures were implemented, the problem of overcrowding would be diminished.

Escapes
Mr Nxumalo read through the document dealing with this issue.

An ANC committee member stated that it was very costly to the state to prevent escapes of persons being transported from court to prisons. He suggested that dangerous prisoners be tried in prison courts and that instead of transporting these prisoners to outside hospitals, treatment be administered at the prisons.

A Correctional Services member responded that the problem was that courts should be accessible to the public.

Due to time constraints, no further discussion took place.

Corruption
Mr Nxumalo read through the document dealing with corruption.

Mr Schmidt (DP) asked whether the Anti-corruption Unit had not been eroded to the point of being dysfunctional.

Mr Nxumalo replied that there were currently five members and that although it was always a reactive organisation, they were aiming to make it more pro-active.

An ANC member stated that the government's effectiveness can be measured by how it deals with corruption. He stated that structures in place had to be improved to ensure transparency.

The Chairperson stated that the Anti-corruption Unit had limited capacity because of its support system, which she believed needed improvement. She also agreed that there was a need for transparency to get away from the culture of "covering up".

Closure of prisons in the Eastern Cape
Mr Nxumalo explained that certain prisons had been closed for renovations because of their poor condition. After being renovated, Elliotdale and Mount Ayliff will reopen on 22 September 2000. Lady Frere is still receiving attention.

He referred to Kokstad prison, which was described in the news as being empty despite overcrowding in prisons. The problem is that there is no kitchen or laundry. They are expecting these to be completed by February or March 2001. In addition, he noted that R21 million is needed for bulk services for the prison without which they would have the same problems as with the other prisons.

Mr Durand asked whether this had not been considered when the prison was designed.

Mr Nxumalo responded by saying that this had been the responsibility of the Department of Public Works and not Correctional Services.

The chairperson proposed that a committee go to Kokstad to get first-hand information.

Mr Schmidt (DP) asked about Empangeni and other prisons which had been closed.

Mr Nxumalo replied that they were being renovated according to a priority list. He said that Empangeni will be reopened and currently has 514 inmates.

The Chairperson said that if members wanted information regarding the reprioritisation, it can be dealt with at the next meeting. The meeting was adjourned.

Appendix 1:
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
OVERCROWDING IN PRISONS & RELEASE OF PRISONERS

OVERVIEW
On 31 July 2000, the Department of Correctional Services managed 236 prisons in 9 provinces. These prisons are made up as follows:
· 8 for female offenders
· 12 for youth correctional facilities
· 121 for male offenders
· 90 for male and female offenders
· 5 prisons temporarily closed for repairs and renovations
· South African prisons have designed accommodation capacity for 101 006 prisoners with a current offender population of 169 486.
· this situation constitutes an average overpopulation rate of 68% and a total accommodation capacity need for 68 480 offenders.

From January 1995 to 31 July 2000 the prison accommodation and offender population figures increased as follows:

[PMG note: not included]

BREAKDOWN OF PRISON POPULATION AS ON 31 JULY 2000:
· Sentenced adult male offenders: 96 220
· Sentenced male juveniles: 12 835
· Unsentenced adult male offenders: 42 784
· Unsentenced male juveniles: 13 380
· Sentenced adult female offenders: 2 641
· Sentenced female juveniles: 252
· Unsentenced adult female offenders: 1 128
· Unsentenced female juveniles: 246
· Total number of offenders: 169 486
· Accommodation capacity: 101 006
· Average overpopulation rate: 68%

FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO OVERCROWDING:
· Provision of additional accommodation could not compete with growth in the offender population
· Increasing number of awaiting-trial offenders
January 1995: 24 265
July 2000: 57 538
Increase: 33 273 (137%)
· Increase in court cycle times:
1995: 76 days
August 2000: 140 days
Increase in length of sentence:

Sentence categories	1995	2000	Increase	% Increase
> 7 - 10	12 394	18 772	6 378	51.5
> 10-15	6 099	11 137	5 038	82.6
>15-20	2 731	4 892	2 161	79.1
>20	1 983	5 171	3 188	160.7
Life	433	1 271	838	193.5

EFFECTS OF OVERCROWDING
· Causes tension, hostility and aggression (With regard to offenders and officials).
· Not consistent with humane incarceration.
· Not conducive to efficient application of rehabilitation programmes.
· Restricts effective supervision and control.
· Creates unsafe working environment.
· Undermines security and safe custody.
· Affects staff morale and efficiency negatively.
· Increases in maintenance cost of prison buildings.

ACTIONS TAKEN TO ADDRESS OVERCROWDING:
· A task team was established to focus on the following:
-Utilisation of the clustering approach to formulate strategies
-Utilisation of Community Corrections system to its fullest extent
-Advancement of approved parole dates
-Transfer of unsentenced juveniles to Places of Secure Care
-Conversion of sentences of imprisonment into Correctional Supervision
-Extend the amount of bail that may be set by the SAPS
· Release of certain categories of awaiting-trial prisoners
· Optimal utilisation of Asset Procurement and Operating Partnerships
· Extension of the awaiting-trial project within the IJS to reduce the cycle time of awaiting-trial offenders
· Identification, renovation and upgrading of existing facilities

NEW PRISONS WHICH WILL BE UTILISED IN THE NEAR FUTURE
- Empangeni (accommodation = 1 392)
- Kokstad (accommodation = 1 440)
- Bloemfontein (APOPS) (accommodation = 3 028)
- Louis Trichardt (APOPS) (accommodation = 2 960)
- Devon (accommodation = 600)

RELEASES
· Bursting:
- In terms of section 67 of the Correctional Services Act, 1959 (Act no 59 of 1959) the Minister approved that the parole dates of offenders who oppose approved parole dates may be advanced with a maximum of 9 months. Aggressive and sexual offenders are excluded.

±7 000 offenders will benefit from this measure which will come into effect on 2 October 2000.

· Release of awaiting-trial offenders
- In terms of section 66 of the Correctional Services Act, 1959, Cabinet approved that prisoners awaiting trial for less serious offences, with bail of R1 000 or less may be released.

During the week up to 15 September 2000 a total of 8 262 awaiting-trial offenders were released in terms of this measure.

RESULTS:

	Offender population	% overcrowding
31 July 2000	169 486	68%
Anticipated figures after completion of above actions	154 224	54%

Appendix 2:

ESCAPES
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

ESCAPES STATISTICS: PAST FIVE YEARS
1995 : 1177
1996 : 1244
1997 : 989
1998 : 489
1999 : 459

ESCAPE STATISTICS: FIRST 7 MONTHS 1999 VERSUS FIRST 7 MONTHS 2000

	1999	2000
January	39	13
February	34	14
March	48	26
April	18	22
May	34	16
June	44	26
July	25	21
August	31	28
TOTAL	242	138

ACTIONS TO REDUCE ESCAPES
· Anti-escape workshops conducted by the Minister with all Provincial Commissioners, Area Managers and Heads of Prisons during latter part of 1999.
· Main contributory factors leading to escapes were identified.
· National plan to combat escapes was compiled and implemented in all provinces.

MAIN CONTRIBUTORY FACTORS LEADING TO ESCAPES
· Negligence and non-adherence to security policies/procedures by officials.
· Poor conditions of building structures.
· Overpopulation in cells and sections which negatively affect supervision, control, searching and security.
Staff shortage.

MEASURES INTRODUCED TO COMBAT ESCAPES
· Involvement of management at all levels to motivate/guide officials towards adhering to security policy/procedures.
· Strict disciplinary action against officials who are negligent in the performance of their duties.
· Strict disciplinary and criminal action against corrupt officials aiding escapees.
· Optimal utilisation of existing security aids and equipment.
· Upgrading of personnel training.
· Sensitisation of prisoners in respect of the negative consequences of escapes.
· Criminal prosecution of escapees and those who assist in escapes.
· Rewarding prisoners who report planned escapes or who blow the whistle.
· Installation of electrified fences and X-ray scanners in so-called "high risk" prisons.
· Incarceration of High Escape Risk Prisoners in C-Max Prison.

CONCLUSION
The current escape figure of 138 proves that the Management of the Department of Correctional Services is committed to its target of decreasing escapes by at least 50% within a year.
Despite the above-mentioned successes the Department is striving to reduce the number of escapes even further and is committed to its goal of zero tolerance when dealing with escapes.

Appendix 3:

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
ANTI CORRUPTION

• A holistic view was taken with a new approach to instituting good governance in all processes of the department of correctional services.
• Create synergy between all the investigative / checking resources in the department of correctional services.
• the first step was the creation of the following structure reporting directly to the commissioner:
• create strategic importance by upgrading to director level.
• create a proactive and reactive capacity.

[PMG Editor's Note - Graphs not included]

A. STATISTICS: ANTI-CORRUPTION UNIT PERIOD: 1 JANUARY 2000 TO 31 JULY 2000

Province	Number of cases	Dismissals	Type of offences and number of officials dismissed on the type of offence
Northern Cape	2	2	Theft of prisoners' money = 2
Eastern Cape	6	1	- Submission of false / misleading information = 1
North West	12	5	- Threatening to kill = 1 - unauthorised withdrawal of a prisoners' money = 1 - dealing in cannabis = 1 - possession of government property = 1 - receiving money from a prisoner's family = 1
Gauteng	21	7	- Possession of drugs = 2 - illegal supply of exam papers to a prisoner = 1 - escape due to gross negligence = 3 - forgery and fraud = 1
Northern Province	4	2	- False information at employment = 1 - forgery: medical certificate = 1
Western Cape	7	-	-
Free State	7	2	- Possession of cannabis = 1 - dealing in cannabis = 1
Mpumalanga	9	3	- Altering of sick certificate = 1 - theft = 1 - possession of cannabis = 1
Kwazulu-Natal	1	-	-
Head Office	3	1	- 7 counts: submission of forged qualifications and false documentation = 1
Total	72	23	23

B. SUMMARY: NATIONAL

Number of cases	Dismissals	Type of offences and number of officials dismissed on the type of offence
72	23	- Theft of prisoners' money = 2 - submission of false / misleading information = 1 - threatening to kill = 1 - unauthorised withdrawal of prisoners' money = 1 - dealing in cannabis = 2 - possession of cannabis = 2 - possession of drugs = 2 - possession of government property = 1 - receiving money from a prisoner's family = 1 - illegal supply of exam papers to a prisoner = 1 - escape due to gross negligence = 3 - false information at employment = 1 - forgery: medical certificate = 2 theft = 1 - submission of forged qualification and false documentation = 1 - forgery and fraud = 1

TOTAL 23

C: 7 of the 23 cases that led to the dismissal of the officials, were also handed over to the South African Police Service for Criminal Investigation

CORRECTIONAL SERVICE AMENDMENT BILL. 2000
I BACKGROUND
1. The Correctional Services Act, 1998 (Act NO 111 of 1998) was assented to by the President on 19 November1998.

2. Due to the fact that it was a total new Act it meant that Act No 8 of 1959 (The old Act) had to be repealed in total. It also called for a total new structure of subordinate legislation. A section was included to deal with the piece-meal repeal of the old Act and the piece-meal introduction of the new Act.

3. Certain sections of the new Act are already in operation but when it came to the release system (Parole and Correctional Supervision) the Department of Justice and the SAPS were approached because the new independent Correctional Supervision and Parole boards consist also of members of the aforementioned Departments.

4. It is anticipated that there will be i 52 Correctional Supervision and Parole Boards that will operate on a full time basis. This however means that 52 officials of each of the mentioned Departments will sit fulltime on the Boards.

The financial implications of either seconding such officials or the creation of new posts were of such a magnitude that the Heads of the 3 Departments (I.e. Correctional Services, Justice and SAPS) decided to approach Parliament with a view of amending the new Act to put a more financially viable option on the table.

5. The regulatory framework of the new Act was drafted during 1999 and submitted to the State Law Advisers, and whilst discussing the aforementioned amendment, comments were received from the State Law Advisers and it was decided it would be opportune to include such comments relating to the provisions of the Act also in the Amendment Bill.

II DISCUSSION
1. The source of the amendments are therefor:

i) The Amendment of the provisions relating to the Correctional Supervision and Parole Boards.

ii) Comments by the State Law Advisors indicating that it is more appropriate to deal with certain issues in the Act itself than to relegate it to the Regulations or Orders.

iii) Grammatical/drafting problems.

A. Correctional Supervision and Parole Boards
i) Members of the Departments of Justice and the SAPS are removed as permanent members of the Boards;

ii) Boards may however co-opt such officials who will then have full voting rights.

iii) The Commissioner of DCS, SAPS, the DG of Justice and the National Director of Public Prosecutions will determine a schedule of offences and lengths of sentence which the Boards must advise the Departments of Justice and the SAPS of, two months in advance of a Board sitting with the purpose to obtain recommendations as to the granting of Parole or Correctional Supervision in a specific case.

B. Amendments relating to comments by the State Law Advisers
I) Section 1: "Amenities" described in full in stead of in regulations.
"Authorised Official" to assist Head of Prison in disciplinary hearings.
"Disability" to be in line with Promotion of Equality and the Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act.

ii) Section 3: Deals with the powers of the Commissioner in terms of human resource matters and to stipulate that he/she may also remunerate and discipline officials and also to add the applicability of the Public Service Act to such matters, including clarifying the position as to the entering into collective agreements with employee organisations on Departmental level.

iii) Section 5: To spell out the power of the Minister not only to establish prisons but also to classify them.

iv) Section 6: To add the rationale for the compulsory medical examination of a prisoner on admission.

v) Section 7: To provide for accommodation in single cells which is not isolation or segregation, and the separate detention of prisoners if there is a possibility that their association may defeat the ends of justice.

vi) Section 8: To close up a possible gap relating to the hours between meals.

vii) Section 16: Inserted to be disability and gender sensitive so as not to discriminate.

viii) Section 24: To insert the concept of "authorised official" to assist the Head of Prison in disciplinary hearings and also to provided for legal representation at certain disciplinary hearings.

ix) Section 31: Prescribing the circumstances of using incapacitating devices.

x) Section 32: Prescribe conditions under which force may be used.

xi) Section 33: Prescribe conditions under which non-lethal incapacitating devices may be used.

xii) Section 34: Prescribe fully conditions under which fire-arms may be used, also to be in line with the amendments to section 49 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

xiii) Section 40: Insert provisions as to the labour by sentenced children.

xiv) Section 70: To authorise the Commissioner to return a parolee/probationer to the community if there is a valid reason for not complying with his/her conditions of community corrections.

xv) Section 85: Remove the duty to look into corrupt and dishonest practices from the Judicial Inspecto rate.

xvi) Section 89: To empower the Inspecting Judge to regulate administrative affairs of his/her staff.

xvii) Section 95: Add the duty to investigate corrupt and dishonest practices to the Internal Service Evaluation component of the Department.

xviii) Section 101: To deal with the property of a deceased or escaped prisoner.

lxx) Section 134: This section 5 extended to authorise issues on which the Minister may make regulations and the Commissioner orders.

xx) Section 136: The Act indicated that the Minister must issue regulations on how prisoners will be dealt with in the transitional period. This provisions are now brought into the Act in stead of dealing with it in terms of regulations.

C. Grammatical/Drafting/Technical Amendments
Sections 1; 4; 12; 20; 21; 26; 27; 30; 42; 49; 58; 73; 96; 97; 106 and 132 deal with above-mentioned issues and need not be discussed here.