Draft Correctional Services Regulations: briefing
Correctional Services
02 April 2003
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
1 April, 2003
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES REGULATIONS: BRIEFING
Documents handed out:
Presentation on Correctional Services Regulations
Draft Correctional Services Regulations
Correctional Services Act, No 111 of 1998
Chairperson: Mr JN Mashimbye (ANC)
SUMMARY
The National Commissioner was keen that the Draft Correctional Services Regulations come into effect as soon as possible as they had been two years in the pipeline and they affected the day-to-day business of the Department plus were essential for guarding against court challenges.
However the Committee deferred deliberations on the draft Correctional Services Regulations after it became apparent that members had not received a copy of the text prior to this meeting (although the text initially had been furnished last November). In its briefing on the regulations, the Department noted that the Committee's input was a prerequisite before the Minister could sign the regulations into law though its approval of the Regulations was not.
MINUTES
The Chair noted that the briefing was supposed to be held jointly with the NCOP Committee but that since they were not present the committee would discuss the proceedings together with them at a later date. The Chair urged members to make an effort to attend the presidential invitation for the Imbizo week that would be held in the Limpopo province.
Briefing by National Commissioner
Comm. Linda Mti informed the Committee that he was happy to have the proceedings in progress noting that the regulations were handed over to members last November and that only a minor amendment on the area of access has been effected. He pointed out that the Regulations supply the meat to the Act and that without them the legal framework would be rendered inoperational. The Department was in the process of reviewing Schedule A and B to strengthen the disciplinary procedures which he noted were too lax to provide a measurable impact on the ongoing anti-corruption measures. With these opening remarks he then invited Commissioner Schreiner to address the meeting.
Briefing by Chief Deputy Commissioner Functional Services
Comm. Jenny Schreiner informed the Committee that the presentation is based on the 1998 Act and that the Regulations are supporting provisions to the Act. The Department has maintained a policy of revisiting and updating the regulations and orders so as to keep it consonant with the changing times. She added that the Minister would take note of the Committee's recommendations before signing the Regulations into law.
Briefing by Director of Legal Services in the Department
Mr. Carel Paxton gave a brief background to the Regulations noting that the Act (No 111 of 1998) made provision for subordinate legislation. Section 134(5) requires submission of the regulations to the parliamentary committees in both Houses. He explained that the regulations do not need the approval of the Committee but merely their recommendations. He pointed out that the Regulations were drafted according to the same structure as the Act. He then outlined and explained the various sections covered by the Regulations. (See Powerpoint presentation).
Discussion
Dr. Jordan (ANC) faulted Regulation 25 which deals with transfer of a prisioner: " If the transfer is for security reasons the Head of Prison or the authorised official need not inform the prisoner of the proposed transfer, but the prisoner must be informed of the reasons as soon as practicable after his or her admission to the place where he or she is transferred to and must be allowed an opportunity to make a representation in this regard as well as an opportunity to notify his or her spouse, partner or next of kin in the manner prescribed by Order." He said that it violated the basic principle for one to be heard beforehand.
being condemned when it purports to be applying the ex post facto rule.
The Chair suggested this remedy is necessitated by imminent security concerns that Department could be faced with at a particular point.
Comm. Mti agreed with the Chair's explanation noting that such an extreme measure would only be undertaken where there is a security threat and that this move is not a permanent one since such prisoners would ordinarily be returned to their original station. He added that indeed transfers and relocations may be requested by other state organs for reasons that may necessitate such a drastic action.
The Chair observed that he was initially reluctant to deal with the regulations but was corrected that these provisions govern the day-to-day operations of a big institution hence the importance of the Committee's input. He appealed to the Department and members to give suggestions as to how to deal with the current process.
Mr. Bloem (ANC) pointed out that the Committee's input was most critical but lamented that members had not been supplied with the full text of the Regulations prior to the meeting to be able to appropriately acquaint themselves in order to make a meaningful contribution.
Comm. Mti clarified that the full text of the Regulations was distributed to members in November 2002 and that he has been advised that the very same text was handed to the Committee section on Friday 27 March 2003.
Ms Seaton (IFP) said that she had not received the document prior to this meeting and suggested that the document be handed out to members for consideration whereafter they would forward queries to the Department in a week's time.
The Chair noted that the text supplied on 27 March had not been distributed to them. He admitted that matters were not right with the Committee secretariat and that he had expressed his concerns to the head of the committee section in a written letter. He noted that the Committee's business is hardly ever listed on the Order Paper a matter which is of a serious concern to the Committee. He assured the Commissioner that the blame for this was not with the Department's Parliamentary liaison office but with the Committee secretariat and he promised to deal with it appropriately.
Ms Seaton observed that the Committee had made provision for nutritional supplements in the Act yet the Regulations make no mention of this item. She said that there is definitely a need for members to be given time to scrutinise the Regulations before making their contribution.
Mr. Massiye (ANC) was concerned that the Committee was confined in their contribution to the Regulations and wondered why the Department had come to the Committee if all they needed was a recommendation and not approval. There were apparent ambiguities in the Regulations such as the provision for access to library facilities in Reg. 13 did not make it clear who is entitled to these services as there were various categories of prisoners under the management of the Department. He believed it was important for members to study the Regulations before deliberating on the document.
Comm. Mti apologised for the terminology used in the presentation which implied that members' contributions were insignificant. He clarified that quite to the contrary, members' contributions are most relevant since the Minister would take them into consideration before signing the Regulations into law.
Mr. Fihla (ANC) wondered why there was no mention of the introduction of electronic monitoring which members had recommended should be put in place to improve the process of policing prison precincts.
Comm. Mti pointed out that this is an expensive policy decision and it has been held in abeyance. A convincing case for the necessity of this would need to be established and it should not merely serve ulterior commercial interests.
Mr. Durand (NNP) agreed with the suggestion that members be allowed to study the text in order to make a useful contribution to the Regulations, especially as it was apparent that there are already a few issues of clarity members have picked out from the text.
Comm. Mti. pointed out that the Regulations are of critical importance. That is why the Department had submitted the text to the Committee in November 2002 so that members could acquaint themselves with the Regulations. However the Department was not in anyway insisting that the process must be finalised immediately. The Department had been patient for the last two years and it was willing to wait a little bit longer if that is the Committee's wish. However he did point out that this was a handicap as the Regulations affected the daily operations of the Department in a fundamental way. Further they also will assist in guarding against relentless court challenges.
Mr. Paxton explained that the Act invariably refers to the Regulations for details on particular provisions and that the Act provides for the time frames within which the Regulations should come into effect.
The Chair noted that the presentation had been well structured and easy to understand but that political parties had to consider the text and forward their respective positions to the Committee. He called on political parties to meet in their caucuses and where need be raise queries with the Department. They would then report back to the Committee for deliberations and finally communicate the Committee's views to the Department.
Ms. Seaton suggested that there should be an inter-party exchange of views.
The Chair agreed and appealed to all the parties to report back to him on their positions.
The meeting adjourned.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents
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.