Committee Oversight Report on Pollsmoor Correctional Centre

NCOP Security and Justice

23 November 2016
Chairperson: Mr D Ximbi (ANC, Western Cape)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Documents handed out: 
Committee Oversight Report on Pollsmoor Correctional Centre
[All Committee Reports available under Tabled Committee Reports once published]

The Committee considered the draft Report on its oversight visit to Pollsmoor Correctional Centre. Members raised issues which they felt needed to be included under recommendations made in the Draft Report. These included the code of conduct of a deputy commissioner of the Department of Correctional Services who had spoken negatively about SA abroad and the second was about the huge issue of overcrowding at prisons. The DA was concerned about whether issues raised in the Cameron Report had been addressed. The Committee agreed that outstanding issues would be addressed under the recommendations in the Draft Report. The report was adopted with amendments.

Meeting report

Draft Report on the oversight visit to Pollsmoor Correctional Centre

The Chairperson took members through the Draft Report page by page.

Mr M Mhlanga (ANC, Mpumalanga) pointed out that the Committee had wished to have a recommendation in relation to a deputy commissioner in the Department of Correctional Services who had spoken negatively about SA abroad.

Ms G Manolope (ANC, Northern Cape) said that the issue was around the code of conduct of the deputy commissioner.

Ms B Engelbrecht (DA, Gauteng) noted that Pollsmoor Correctional Centre was a huge problem when it came to the rights of prisoners. She did note that Pollsmoor Prison authorities were trying to implement the recommendations of the Cameron Report. The ratio of staff to inmates was 1 to 4. It was horrifying to see how overcrowded the cells at the prison were. She felt that the Committee should make a recommendation that additional funding be set aside for additional correctional facilities to be provided. The intention after all was to rehabilitate prisoners and to get them back into society.

Ms Manolope noted that the issue of additional funding and new facilities was a long term matter and  said that the Department of Correctional Services had pointed out that an interim solution would be for prisoners to be housed in South African Police Services (SAPS) holding cells. Section 35 of the Police Act came into play where SAPS holding cells were to be utilised. She said that the Committee needed to get a progress report in this regard.

Ms T Mokwele (EFF, North West) understood what Ms Manolope was saying. The fact was that the conditions at prisons were bad. Overcrowding was a huge problem. Police holding cells had in the past been used to house prisoners who had not yet been convicted. There could be some practical and red-tape issues that needed to be considered if the interim measure was considered. In this regard she suggested the mainstreaming of the Security Cluster. The Security Cluster needed to be about assisting each other and working together. It had worked in the past. She suggested that Committee Researchers look into the matter and come up with a concept document.

Mr Mhlanga stated that the Committee had decided that the deputy commissioner in question had to go through disciplinary hearings. He had gone overseas and had spoken badly about SA. On overcrowding at prisons he suggested that the Committee get the Departments of Correctional Services and Justice and Constitutional Development together to discuss the issue. He felt that overcrowding at prisons was a national concern.

The Chairperson summarised the issues raised by members. The first was about the code of conduct for the deputy commissioner and the second was about the overcrowding at prisons.

Ms Manolope, in the interest of time, asked that the Committee finalise the Draft Report. She was aware that members had issues that they wished to raise.

Ms Engelbrecht suggested that it be reflected in the recommendations of the Draft Report that the Committee was concerned about overcrowding at prisons. She asked whether the Committee had addressed issues raised in the Cameron Report. Were all issues addressed? She pointed out that the Draft Report spoke about “most” of the issues raised in the Cameron Report being addressed. The next question that begged to be asked was what issues had not been addressed.

Ms Manolope said that the use of the word “most” meant that there were issues that were outstanding and were in the process of being addressed. She recommended that the Draft Report be adopted.

Ms Engelbrecht felt that the Committee could not adopt the Draft Report without having seen all recommendations.

Ms Manolope stated that any additional recommendations made by members would be added to the list of recommendations in the Draft Report. She did not wish for the Committee to rehash what the Committee had already done.

Ms Engelbrecht responded that what the Committee was doing was to follow up on Judge Cameron’s Report. The Committee had to identify issues that were still outstanding.

The Chairperson said that issues that had been raised had been captured.

Ms Engelbrecht was insistent on what issues raised in the Cameron Report had been addressed and had not been addressed.

Ms Manolope said that Ms Engelbrecht had to state what problems she had with the recommendations in the Draft Report. She added that nothing stopped Ms Engelbrecht from making further recommendations. The Committee had come up with recommendations as captured in the Draft Report.

Ms Engelbrecht noted that the DA was concerned about whether all the issues raised by Judge Cameron had been addressed.

The Chairperson stated that the Department of Correctional Services had made presentations to the Committee and that the Committee had even gone on an oversight visit to Pollsmoor Prison.

Ms Manolope added that the Committee had even engaged the Department of Correctional Services on outstanding matters. The Committee had gone so far as to make recommendations in the Draft Report.

Ms Engelbrecht noted that the Draft Report spoke about “most” of the issues raised being addressed. So what were the issues that had not been addressed?

Mr Gurshwyn Dixon, Committee Secretary, proceeded to speak to some of the issues that had been addressed or on those that had not entirely been addressed.

Ms Manolope interjected and suggested that the Committee agree that outstanding issues would be addressed under the recommendations in the Draft Report.

The Committee agreed to the suggestion. The Committee also adopted the Draft Report as amended.

Committee Minutes

Minutes dated 8 November 2016 was adopted unamended.

The meeting was adjourned

Documents

No related documents

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: