Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services on Mangaung Private Correctional Centre and two others; Quarterly Report 1 July to 30 September 2013
Meeting Summary
The Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) was asked to comment on the Mangaung Private Correctional Centre, which had recently been the object of media scrutiny, and two other centres. Comments led to questions from Members, and a discussion developed. The Inspectorate reported that complaints received at Mangaung centered on reclassification and transfers; forcible injection with anti-psychotic drugs, and torture; and illegal segregation in two sections. The Department of Correctional Services had intervened at the centre, and placed 200 of their members there, to take over the security function. Forty troublesome inmates had been transferred. There had been complaints about meals not being on time. The Inspectorate was asked if injections had been justified. The reply was that the medical section deemed the injections necessary.
The report on the Durban-Westville centre pointed out that 1 004 inmates had been transferred, which made it difficult to investigate the situation. Searches of cells had yielded large amounts of contraband, including a gun. The Regional Commissioner stated that DCS officials had been suspended for collusion. Members asked if dockets had been opened for assault. The reply was that inmates had been transferred too rapidly for that to happen.
The Quarterly Report was not formally gone through. The Inspectorate provided a brief executive summary of the programmes of administration, and of community oversight and stakeholder engagement. Stakeholder engagement in Visitors Committees, comprised of Independent Correctional Centre Visitors from different centres, had increased during the quarter. Legal Aid South Africa was commended for its participation. The programme of complaints monitoring, inspections and investigations was not formally presented. Members were invited to interrogate reports of complaints received at various centres.
In discussion, there were questions about the state of the inspectorate’s offices, and funding from the DCS. It was remarked that communication between the Department and the Inspectorate was not good. There were questions about an unnatural death at the Goodwood centre. The Inspectorate was advised to pick up on current trends, through their inspections. The inablity of the Department to respond to urgent issues was discussed.
Meeting report
Briefing on Mangaung Private Correctional Centre and two others
Judge Vuka Tshabalala, Inspecting Judge, said that there was not yet a full report on the Private Correctional Centre at Mangaung. Mr Umesh Raga (Head, Legal Services) and Mr Lennard de Souza (Head, Inspections) were also sent to Mdantsane and Durban Westville. Mr De Souza had prepared a sketchy report on the Durban Westville centre. The problem was that troublesome inmates had been transferred to other centres, which had hampered investigations. Officials had assaulted inmates. Mr De Souza had reported that emergency support teams had been called in, and people had been beaten up. A report was tabled.
The Chairperson asked for a report on Mangaung and Durban-Westville.
Mr Raga said that he and Mr De Souza had visited Mangaung on the previous Thursday. They first met with their own staff in the Free State region. Judicial Inspectorate records had been checked. Issues and complaints were as follows:
Transfers from Mangaung to other centres – inmates were under the impression that their status had been changed from maximum to medium.
There were allegations of forcible injections with anti-psychotic drugs, and torture.
There was alleged illegal segregation in two sectors of the facility known as Broadway and Wols. Those were intermediate sections.
He and Mr De Souza had gone to Mangaung centre and had met with Mr Zach Modise, Gauteng Regional Commissioner, who headed the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) task team. They had met with Mr Conradie, Mr Venter and Mr Lucky Mthetwa, and had been briefed by the DCS task team. They had spoken separately to the DCS task team, the DCS controller, and the G4S management team. 200 DCS officials had taken over security. The G4S current role was to continue to provide meals, care and programmes. Security was the main concern of the DCS at Mangaung.
DCS officials had stated that security was under control. Forty troublemakers had been moved to other maximum facilities. 275 inmates had been reclassified since August, and were gone. Mr Motsake, the DCS controller, said that he had submitted monthly reports to the Regional Commissioner and Area Commissioner. There had been an incident at Mangaung in 2009, where a doctor and a nurse had been taken hostage. There were unhappy inmates who wanted transfers. Inmates who were legible for parole had had their release dates changed, and transfers had been delayed. There were 2 000 inmates. When inmates were transferred, they had to wait for new people to come in. The Case Management Committees would define status as medium, but they were classified maximum on paper. Demands were for one hour of exercise per day, three meals in terms of the Act, communication with families, and programmes. The position of inmates who studied and who had to write exams, was unclear. The DCS task team confirmed that meals were not on time. There were meetings with G4S to manage the situation on a daily basis.
The Chairperson referred to media reports of assaults and forced injections. He asked if there was evidence of assault and undue force, and whether the injections were justifiable on medical grounds.
Mr Raga replied that the head of the medical section had been asked whether injections took place. He had answered that it was done, and that it was necessary in his professional opinion. The medical section had provided a list of names of inmates who had been injected. The medical staff had opined that it was indeed necessary.
The Chairperson asked if the meaning in lay language was that inmates were injected to cool them down, because of hyperactivity. Were the injections prescribed by a psychiatrist? He asked about assaults and reasonable force.
Mr Raga replied that there had been no allegations of assault.
Mr De Souza said that he had visited Durban-Westville on 28 October. It had been reported that a gun had been smuggled in. After a search on 7 October, nine bullets had been found, as well as a huge number of cellphones, DVD players and drugs. 1 004 inmates had been transferred. 37 inmates had been assaulted. There had been unconfirmed allegations of a hunger strike. It was not possible to get statements about the unrest, as inmates had been transferred.
Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) asked how many inmates were accommodated at Mangaung, and how many staff there were. She asked about the length of sentences. Was there a parole board at Mangaung? How was it known who were on programmes, and ready for parole? She remarked that the transfer of troublemakers was a challenge. It made it hard to get information. It was necessary for the Portfolio Committee to go to Mangaung for oversight. She was worried about the 200 DCS members there. She asked if any inmates had escaped.
Ms Ngwenya said that the PC had to go for oversight to Durban-Westville. She asked how often searches were carried out.
The Chairperson likewise asked about the frequency of searches. He asked if the possibility of collusion by officials to supply contraband had been checked.
Mr De Souza replied that there was supposed to be daily searches at Durban-Westville, but the journals indicated that searches had not been carried out. Contraband was usually brought in by officials. There would be a report on the matter. The Regional Commissioner had stated that officials had been suspended.
The Chairperson asked about the staff-to-inmate ratio at Mangaung before and after the DCS takeover.
Mr Raga replied that the staff-to-inmate ratio was 1 to 64. In a maximum centre, the ratio had to be 1 to 30.
The Chairperson asked how effective the Parole Board and Case Management Council were.
Mr Raga replied that the CMC was understaffed. There was one Parole Board for Mangaung, and there were backlogs. The general profile of inmates was that they were classified maximum, with many lifers and double lifers. An official had said that he had never seen so many high ranking gangsters on one street.
The Chairperson asked how the challenge of transfers was being dealt with.
Mr Raga responded that transferred inmates were tracked as far as possible. Mr De Souza had gone from Durban-Westville to Ebongweni. It had been checked whether the Act had been complied with.
The Chairperson asked about programmes.
Mr Raga replied that the G4S claimed that there were various programmes, ranging from religious care to vocational training, woodworking and painting.
Mr L Max (DA) asked if dockets had been opened for the assaults at Durban-Westville.
Mr De Souza replied that inmates had been transferred so fast that there were no dockets. There had not even been time to write an injury register.
Mr Max asked what had happened concerning G4S capacity at Mangaung.
Mr Raga replied that G4S was a United Kingdom company. They had said that their staff complement had been 400, but 300 had been dismissed. Concerning administrative capacity, there had been a general staff of 500, of whom 330 had been dismissed. They had been re-certified.
Mr Max asked if the injections had been looked at in terms of medical protocols. The necessity had been justified. He asked how many had been injected, and if inmates had been injected on the grounds of mental disturbance, or because they were not cooperative.
Mr De Souza replied that when asked, the medical section had replied that they got their protocols from the DCS.
The Chairperson said that the Committee wanted recommendations. It was unheard of to have so many gangsters in one street. There was one official for every 64 of them. There was concern with humane detention, but it was unacceptable to have one official to deal with 64 extremely dangerous lifers.
The Chairperson asked about Mdantsane centre.
Mr Raga replied that Mr Professor Mohlaba was visiting there on that very day. An investigation into the death of an inmate and gang violence would proceed.
Briefing on Quarterly Report, 1 July to 30 September 2013
Mr Michael Prosent, Acting Director, Head of the Central Management Region, provided a brief introduction, after which discussion proceeded immediately.
Mr Prosent noted that during the absence of Mr Adam Carelse, Mr Michael Masondo had been appointed as the Acting CEO on 4 September 2013. Participation in the Visitors Committees – made up of Independent Correctional Centre Visitors from various centres – had increased during the quarter. Legal Aid South Africa was commended for its participation.
Ms Ngwenya asked about the situation with regard to offices for the Judicial Inspectorate.
Mr Prosent replied that the offices at Mangaung were satisfactory. The Inspectorate was still awaiting developments at Durban and George.
Judge Tshabalala commented on the Judicial Inspectorate's status. The Minister had been told that the DCS was not funding the Inspectorate properly. A R35 million budget had been asked for, but only R27 million had been received. The Minister had asked what the problem was, and the Acting CFO had said that it would be sorted out. Ms Nontsikelelo Jolingana, the Acting National Commissioner, had made an appointment with Mr Masondo, as Acting CEO of the Inspectorate, to discuss the matter. Ms Jolingana had later phoned the offices to make an appointment, which would take place on 8 November.
Ms Ngwenya remarked that the report showed that the DCS and the Judicial Inspectorate were not communicating. The report questioned the relationship between the DCS and the Department of Public Works. There were issues at DCS centres, like no water and toilets not flushing. The Department had to wait for the DPW to fix kitchens and taps. Inmates could be trained to do the work.
Judge Tshabalala replied that there had to be more regular meetings with the Department. There were always gaps in reports. The Inspectorate could not go beyond telling the DCS what they were doing. The Inspectorate could not find out why there was no response. The duty of the Inspectorate was done when it pinpointed shortcomings in the system. There would be follow ups in future, to ask what the DCS had done about the Inspectorate's reports.
The Chairperson asked what the Inspectorate was doing about the DPW. The DPW could not always be blamed.
Ms M Phaliso (ANC) asked about the poor relationship with the pharmacy at the Douglas centre, listed on page 14. There had been a shortage of medicine. Medicine had to be issued.
Mr De Souza replied that the Douglas centre was far removed from other centres, and had a poor relationship with the pharmacy in town, due to the fact that the centre owed them money.
The Chairperson asked if that meant that inmates were not getting anti-retrovirals and TB medication.
Ms Phaliso referred to unnatural deaths at the Goodwood centre. The DCS had to answer.
Mr Raga replied that post mortems on the causes of death were outstanding. A death had been called unnatural, and the post mortem was awaited.
The Chairperson said that the Judicial Inspectorate was supposed to have foot soldiers on the ground. There had to be a proactive system, to pick up whether there were many gangsters in a certain locale, for instance. Trends had to be picked up. It had to be possible to predict what would happen at a centre like Goodwood.
Ms Phaliso said the DCS wanted to put up new wire fencing that would cost half as much as building a new centre. It was a wasteful exercise. Reports about Springbok caused concern. The Springbok centre was small, but it was a hot spot. There was a lack of staff at Goodwood.
Mr Max remarked that he was currently more sympathetic to the DCS, having seen their conditions. He asked if the Assistant Regional Manager at George was on contract, or permanently employed.
Mr Prosent replied that Mr Mabaso had been appointed as Assistant Regional Manager. The Regional manager post was still vacant and not funded.
Mr Max asked about matters noted as “outstanding” in the report.
Mr M Cele (ANC) agreed that there were reports from the JICS, but progress from the DCS could not be seen.
Mr S Abram (ANC) referred to recurrent nagging issues. Constitutionally, the DCS's responsibilities were underpinned by legislation. It was a Constitutional imperative that there be programmes. Inmates had to be assisted to improve themselves. Mr Cele had referred to a systemic problem. It was not possible to make better people when there was an inability to carry out mandatory issues. There were often reports about inadequate facilities, with water challenges. Buckets and urns were not proper in a state-run institution. Mr Cele had also referred to mundane issues not responded to on time. There was a lack of urgency to provide spiritual, moral and health care. Urgent action was needed. Problems were said to be in small outlying centres, but they were also in the larger centres. He had empathy with the JICS for not receiving acknowledgement and assistance.
The Chairperson asked about the JICS presence at Springbok.
Mr Prosent replied that he would give a written reply about Springbok.
Judge Tshabalala remarked that the Department of Justice had been engaged about the extradition of people from London. The Dewani matter had not been resolved. He kept on appealing, on the grounds of mental disturbance. Treatment for him was not available in South Africa. The lower courts had granted the extradition order, but he had appealed to the British Supreme Court. He had been arrested in South Africa, but had not honoured the terms of his bail. Drugs and fraud were involved. The judge was supposed to give evidence on video, but this had been postponed.
The judge noted that a visiting professor had made a survey of the Johannesburg centre, on matters such as crimes committed. He had complained about overcrowding. He had made certain points about the appropriateness of the Johannesburg centre. The JICS had had to respond to his findings. The duration of trials and the position of awaiting trial detainees had been highlighted in the study. The country had laws and provisions that protected those jailed. When the DCS was talked to, their response was that it was for them to decide where people went.
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.