State of Nation Address priorities for Correctional Services; Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services Annual Report: Committee Researcher input; Oversight Programme

Correctional Services

15 February 2012
Chairperson: Mr V Smith (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The consideration of the 2012/13 oversight programme of the Portfolio Committee, indicated discussions with civil society about the feasibility of the Correctional Services White Paper. There was an upcoming meeting with the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS), and thereafter a meeting about closed circuit television (CCV) in prisons. Three subsequent weeks would be devoted to the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) and Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) quarterly reports. An overseas study tour was scheduled for July/August. The recent murders committed by parolees and the efficiency of parole boards had to be discussed as well as the extension of the DCS nutrition contract and the killing of a Leeukop Centre inmate. The 7day establishment and the 2x12 hour shift system needed attention too.

The analysis of the State of the Nation Address (SONA) by the Committee Researcher, noted that correctional services had not been directly referred to in an address devoted to knowledge, economy and development opportunity. Indirectly, the President’s comments about fighting corruption; vetting; infrastructure development and gender equity were relevant to the DCS. The DCS had taken a stand against corruption, but the outcome of corruption cases were not made sufficiently public. There was a dire need for vetting as a very small percentage of DCS officials had been vetted. Infrastructure development challenges centred on vast cost escalation due to delays in construction of new centres. Concerning gender equity, the researcher noted that of the 11 DCS top management positions, four were filled by women, of whom two were black, one Indian and one white.

In discussion, some members were disappointed that Correctional Services had not received any direct attention in the SONA. A question about gender equity called for figures about women in decision-making positions in the DCS. There was concern about the small percentage of DCS members vetted, and a question about what vetting entailed. The comment was made that a sense of entitlement led to corruption. The concern about escalating costs of construction projects was raised again. On the gender equity issue, there was concern about female warders at male maximum security centres. Members returned to the problem of questions left unanswered by the DCS.

In his briefing on the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) Annual Report, the Committee Researcher noted that JICS had to report to the Committee about prison deaths and deal with inmate complaints via Independent Prison Visitors (IPVs). Reporting on deaths had improved. Most unnatural prison deaths were suicides (often through hanging in showers, which could be better prevented with closed circuit television installed). Most complaints made to IPVs were about inmate transfers, which tended to be punitive, rather than at the inmate’s request. The DCS was slow in responding to inmate requests for transfers.

In discussion, members complained that IPVs did not attend sufficiently to inmate complaints, especially about transfers. There were objections about reports on inmate deaths reaching the media before it reached the Committee. The JICS mandate meant it had to report about a broader range of complaints such as gangs, drugs and corruption. JICS should supply more background information about transfers.

Meeting report

Consideration of 2012/13 oversight programme
The Chairperson looked at the second term of the Committee Programme, saying there would be discussions with civil society about the Correctional Services White Paper. Its impact would be considered, and the question asked whether it is in fact realistic and implementable. There would be a meeting with the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS). The issue of closed circuit television in prisons would be put to bed on 2 May. The Portfolio Committee would put forward its position on that matter. The following three weeks would be devoted to the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) quarterly report, and that of the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS). The DCS would be required to explain the position with regard to its IT systems. The planned overseas visit was scheduled for July/August. Australia and New Zealand would be visited, along with one other country.

Mr V Ndlovu (ANC) said that he was looking forward to the planned overseas trip.

Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) also came out in strong support of the trip. The Committee had been treated badly in that regard. Other committees received more support for overseas visits.

Mr Shareef Shah (DA), Shadow Minister of Correctional Services, cautioned that the enthusiasm for the overseas visit should not send the message that it was seen as a holiday. The purpose had to be to learn and study to improve own systems.

The Chairperson replied that it was not a matter of enthusiasm. The Committee had fought for three years to make the study tour possible. He noted with satisfaction that there were DCS members present. He raised the matter of late submissions of DCS documents. The Department had been asked from the start to submit documents 7 days in advance for study by members. The DCS had to take the Committee seriously. There were weighty matters that the Committee had to prepare for. It would be better to give notice in advance that the Department needed more time to deal with a deep matter. He asked Members to cancel appointments in other committees for the following week, when the DCS would be asked to talk around Committee oversight visits to Mpumalanga and the Western Cape. Members had picked up on infrastructure issues and challenges. The Committee wanted to discuss parole issues with the DCS.

The media had recently surprised the Committee with shocking reports about two people killed by parolees. The DCS had to give a briefing. The status and competence of parole boards had to be discussed. The Committee had made oversight to three different centres, and there were three different interpretations of the same sentence. Case management had to be discussed. Senior DCS members had to explain the process. It was unacceptable that parole boards let people out who should remain in, or kept people in who had to be out.

The Chairperson continued that the extension of the nutrition contract would also be on the agenda. The Committee had warned the Department the previous September that the contract was about to expire. The DCS had replied that it had set up a committee, but the next communication on the matter was in the media. It seemed as if the DCS had taken to communicating with the Committee through the media. The Committee had raised the issue and the Department had made a commitment. Extension had become necessary to avoid a food problem. The Committee wanted the names of the adjudication panel. The names and rank of those who had made the decision, had to be supplied. The Committee had written to the Auditor General (AG) and the Treasury about implications in terms of Treasury regulations. The contract would have to be extended without an open tender. The principle at stake had to be discussed. Consultants had become an institution. The same thing was happening with IT. They were an institution rather than service providers. The 7day Establishment and the 2x12 hour shift system had to be discussed in meetings to follow. The shift system caused staff shortages which could put one warder in charge of 300 inmates.

Mr S Abram (ANC) asked for a report on the inmate who had allegedly been murdered at Leeukop. There had to be feedback from contractors. The question was on what grounds the Department of Public Works (DPW) agreed to huge increases in building contract amounts. The response had been that it was on account of delays in sourcing materials, inclement weather and other factors. The DPW had appeared before the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA) the day before, and the Minister himself had said that the department was in a shambles. Millions were lost with feeble excuses made. Contracts would never be allowed to escalate like that in the private sector.

The Chairperson advised Mr Abram to put it to the DPW in the following week. Concerning the Leeukop death, the Committee was entitled to a report on any unnatural death from the Judicial Inspectorate. It was not advisable to elevate the Leeukop death to a special position. All unnatural deaths had to be treated the same, otherwise it would be driven by a media agenda.

Mr Ndlovu insisted the DPW had to send senior delegates who would be able to answer questions. It would not do to have junior staff who would shrug their shoulders and say they did not know.

Mr L Max (DA) asked about standing procedure in the case of an unnatural death. The Committee had best be informed immediately, to be familiar with circumstances surrounding it.

Mr Shah cautioned that there was a need to be vigorous, but it should not result in micro-management.

The Chairperson stated that standing procedure was that the Office of the Inspecting Judge was obliged to report to the Committee on all unnatural deaths. There would be a preliminary investigation by the Judicial Inspectorate, and then the matter would be handed to the police.

The Chairperson agreed with Mr Ndlovu that the DPW deferred to their Head Office. The DCS had declared that the reason why the food contract had to be extended, was because the DPW had not repaired kitchens. The DPW had to explain why it could not provide infrastructure. The Minister agreed that the DPW had to be asked some hard questions. He asked Mr Cele to visit Durban-Westville, where the food contract had been extended, to see what the actual situation was. Other Committee members had visited the female section, and there had been one person in the kitchen. It had to be established who was actually doing the cooking. The Committee had to know whether it was DCS stoves and people who were cooking. He asked if Ms Ngwenya and Mr Max could conduct similar visits to Johannesburg and Pollsmoor. There had to be a sense of what service providers were doing. He told the DCS members present that the Committee did not intend to ambush the Department. He himself would visit Pretoria. Modder B and Krugersdorp also had to be visited. Mr Abram elected to go to Modder B, and the Chairperson to go to Krugersdorp as well.

Analysis of the State of the Nation Address (SONA) by the Committee Researcher
Mr Mpho Mathabathe, Committee Researcher, noted that Correctional Services as such received scant attention in the SONA. Yet issues relevant to it were dealt with in the address. His analysis was aimed at producing recommendations to the Committee to assist the DCS mandate.

The priorities singled out in the SONA were knowledge, economy and development opportunity. Relevant to the DCS within that framework were the fighting of corruption; vetting; infrastructure development, and gender equity.

The issue of corruption had been dealt with in the SONA since 2009. It distorted and degraded the economy and service delivery, and was an impediment to development. Anti-corruption agencies included the Hawks and Cosatu’s Corruption Watch.

The DCS had taken a stand against corruption. The Departmental Investigations Unit (DIU) formed part of a fraud prevention plan. R2.5 million had been recovered, related to medical aid scheme fraud. The DCS had opened 143 corruption cases in 2008/09; 87 in 2009/10, and 172 in 2010/11. A report was need on the outcome of those cases. Cases solved would show a seriousness about fighting corruption.

The need for vetting was dire, as the DCS formed part of the security cluster. It was a serious challenge. There was evidence that DCS officials had colluded in prisoner escapes. The DCS adopted a vetting policy in 2007, but the unit designed to deal with it, was understaffed. Only 2 478 out of 40 290 members had been vetted.

The DCS had made progress with infrastructure by creating 965 bed spaces. But there were delays in finalising construction projects, which had led to cost escalation. 500 million had been budgeted for the Kimberley Centre, but costs had eventually escalated to close to R1 billion. The Committee was also concerned about money budgeted for posts, that was used elsewhere.

Regarding gender equity, he noted that 11 312 out of 40 108 DCS members were women. Out of the 11 top management positions, four were filled by women, of whom two were black, one white, and one Indian.

City Press had reported over the weekend that Coloureds numbered 40% of the DCS in the Western Cape, yet there were no opportunities for promotion for them. Some officials abused the equity system. Blacks from other provinces would work in the Western Cape for six months, get promoted and then go back to their home province.

Discussion
Mr Max remarked that equity was a sensitive issue, and had to be debated. The Committee could not solve the issue. What was being done in practice did not conform to the definition in the Employment Equity Act. People were demoralised by limitations placed on opportunity.

Ms Ngwenya protested that the President did not say that he took the Department seriously.

Ms M Phaliso (ANC) said that questions had to be answered about 1st Quarter 2011/12 statistics. She insisted that gender equity could not be a sensitive issue. Women were human, and had the same rights as males. The DCS had to indicate how many women were employed in decision-making positions in management.

Ms Phaliso continued that DCS members present at a meeting the previous year had been asked how many of them had been vetted. They had answered that none of them had been vetted, and then the Chairperson had rescued them. It was possible that Correctional Services had not been taken up into the SONA because of unresolved issues.

Mr Ndlovu opined that the President did not talk about the DCS and infrastructure because it had not been reported to him. A link was missing with the President. He had also not talked about vetting. The Committee and Department had done their work, but someone else neglected to take it forward.

Mr Abram asked that the DCS explain what vetting entailed. He asked if it was merely personal information or a possible criminal record, or if it went beyond that. He asked if vetting could catch out a secret agent. Many people masqueraded as cleared and vetted, and were in fact not.

Mr Abram continued that outcomes of corruption cases had to be publicly known. Reports had to be finalised. Cases had escalated again after a lull in 2009/10. The problem in the country was a widespread sense of entitlement. There was only a commitment to a paycheck, and no willingness to go the extra mile. The labour force had to change its psyche. A lack of a service motive had caused lack of trust in public representatives. The question was how to inculcate a work ethic.

Mr Abram remarked that the DCS did not have to reinvent the wheel when facilities were constructed. Millions were spent on planning. The Committee needed a body to do technical and construction oversight, and to monitor costs. It could not be left to the DPW. If costs increased by 50% during construction, someone benefitted.  He regretted the amount spent on catering at a SONA dinner. Envoys had left because supper had been served only at 11h30. It had happened right there in Parliament.

The Chairperson suggested that the first meeting in the second term, intended for discussion of the White Paper, be used to have the DCS deal with questions that remained unanswered. Members could submit areas not covered.

The Chairperson noted on the topic of gender equity, that the Committee had asked about women employed in male maximum-security centres. The Committee had to clarify itself on that matter.

Mr V Magagula (ANC) noted that gender differentiation in the country was limited to toilets. Women were fulfilling management positions properly, in line with the Constitution.

The Chairperson suggested that gender equity be included in the forthcoming discussion of the 7day establishment. It should not be limited to conditions of employment.

Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) Annual Report:  briefing by Committee Researcher
Mr Mathabathe said that the Annual Report identified 241 correctional centres in the country. 129 were for males, eight for females, 91 mixed, and 13 for youth. The capacity catered for was 118 000, but the actual inmate numbers were 160 000. Overcrowding was at its worst in Gauteng. Awaiting Trial Detainees (ATDs) amounted to 30% of the total. The majority of inmates were serving long sentences of up to 20 years or life.

Many complaints made to the JICS were about transfers. It seemed that punitive transfers were more frequent, rather than requested ones. A survey had been done of 194 centres. Some inmates had waited seven months for response to a transfer request. Requests were related to family, education, skills development and health. Inmates had to be informed about rights and procedures related to transfer requests. Some inmates wanted to be moved away from their families or from gangs, for reasons of personal safety. Families were sometimes not informed about transfers.

Death in prison had to be reported to the JICS, in terms of Section 15(2) of the Correctional Services Act. Reporting had improved. Unnatural deaths in prisons were increasing. Most were suicides, with hangings in showers the most frequent cause of death. In 8 cases, officials had been involved in the unnatural deaths of inmates. Deaths were caused by gangs, with officials knowing but doing nothing to prevent it. Suicides in showers were hard to prevent, which presented a case for Closed Circuit Televison (CCTV) to be installed. 900 unnatural deaths occurred in 2009/10. Three deaths of infants had gone unrecorded.

Independent Prison Visitors (IPVs) had to record complaints in a diary. That process could have been extended to matters like HIV/Aids and gangsterism. The Annual Report did not say if JICS targets had been met, and it was silent on IPV challenges.

Discussion
Mr Shah asked if there were figures for inmates who had killed officials. He asked about 2010/11 figures for natural deaths. He asked how increased overcrowding was dealt with.

Mr Magagula remarked that for a family to travel from his constituency in Barberton to Pretoria for a prison visit, was costly.

Ms Phaliso said that Committee oversight had confirmed what the researcher had said. She had received a call from a mother who had signed for her son’s transfer, but had then been told that her son had to appear before a parole board again in July. No reasons were given. The DCS had to provide reasons for steps taken. She wondered if the JICS was at all effective. That was why members were being called by inmates. Inmates complained that they were not visited by IPVs.

Ms Ngwenya declared that Committee oversight had shown that the JICS did not work. They were useless. They did not do what they were supposed to do. There was a lady who had been before the Committee who did not do anything. In Barberton inmates were crying for transfers. If not for the Committee they would stay there forever. They did not take inmate complaints seriously.

Mr Shah said that he was not yet familiar with the JICS mandate. Yet there seemed to be a lack of skill and capacity. The question was whether a transfer problem lay with the inmate or officials. There could be legitimate reasons for an inmate not being transferred.

Mr Ndlovu remarked that IPVs were paid per visit, and that was a structural problem. It had to be discussed with the JICS. The Committee needed to know about deaths in prison before it reached the media.

Mr Abram agreed with the Committee Researcher that the JICS had to report about a broader range of issues such as drugs and corruption. He referred to a visit to the centre in Ceres, where mostly young prisoners were kept. They made themselves out to be angels, but their graffiti and tattoos showed that they were not. There were sexist tattoos. They made life difficult for staff. He felt sorry for female warders. It was not good for a female to do work such as receiving prisoners who came in. The question was what the DCS was doing to separate the innocent from the experienced in centres. There had to be a law against tattoos that showed disrespect to women.

Mr Abram continued that if some requests for transfers were dealt with in two days, and others took three years, there was something wrong. Corruption could be involved. Some officials might be befriending gangsters. An inmate had told him on oversight that a certain official belonged to the same gang as he did. He suggested that vetting could help with that problem.

Adoption of minutes
Minutes of 2011 meetings were adopted for 18 October, 19 October, 20 October, 26 October, 2 November, 16 November and 23 November.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.


Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: