State of Education in Correctional Facilities: Department of Correctional Services briefing
Justice and Correctional Services
16 November 2021
Chairperson: Mr R Dyantyi (ANC)
The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services received a presentation from the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) on the state of education in the Correctional Facilities. The Department aimed to provide offenders with needs-based programmes and interventions to facilitate their rehabilitation and enable their social reintegration as well as personal development.
DCS workplaces had been accredited in the provinces of Gauteng, Free State and KwaZulu-Natal. The Department aimed to use these training facilities and workplaces to become self-sufficient and to encourage sustainability.
The COVID-19 pandemic led to education facilities and skills development programmes being completely closed in 2020 under lock-down level 5.
The Department received discretionary grants from the Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority to train a total of 1 112 offenders between the years 2017 to 2021.
Members commended the progressive initiatives introduced by the DCS. These initiatives enabled offenders to be rehabilitated and to contribute towards their communities. Credit was given to the Department for getting an 81% percentage pass rate for its 2020 class.
Members however wanted to know what role the Department of Sports, Arts and Culture played in relation to the DCS’ arts and culture programmes. The Department said it worked with external partners to enhance sports, recreation, arts and culture in its facilities. One Member remarked that, “All we hear is that there is a partnership with external stakeholders. So should we take it that the Departments of Sports, Arts and Culture has no contribution in this DCS programme”? Another Member asked whether recreational interactions and cultural programmes still existed because, “I don’t hear them reporting about those programmes”.
Members asserted that interrogations had revealed that certain inmates were precluded from enrolling in programmes. They wanted more information on the policy which underpinned this. The Department assured that no offender would be turned away from any programme they wished to participate in subject to the capacity limits within the programme and the term of each inmate's sentence.
Members expressed concern and wanted to know whether offenders who obtained their qualifications through the DCS were able to find jobs. They asked whether the qualifications were being put to productive use.
The issue of assessing learning barriers amongst child offenders to ensure that they were put in the correct stream of education was also highlighted by Committee members. The Department assured that child offenders were being assessed and psychologists and social workers were being used in this process.
The complexities of remand and short-term detainees being excluded from certain programmes was also discussed. The Department reported that remand detainees and short-term offenders kept coming back to correctional centres because there was no time to expose them to all the rehabilitation programmes relevant in targeting their offending behaviour. A new piloted programme had been introduced to address this.
The Department committed itself to providing the Committee with the number of vocational training facilities, the different facilities and the capacity that it is able to accommodate in these. The Chairperson asked that this be done within the standard time period of ten days.
The Chairperson opened the meeting by welcoming everyone. Mr Makgothi Thobakgale, Correctional Services Acting National Commissioner, lead the Correctional Services Management team, which comprised:
• Dr Minette Plaatjies, Deputy Commissioner: Personal Development, DCS;
• Ms M Johnson, Director: Skills Development, DCS;
• Dr Zodwa Mosoma, Director: Correctional Programmes, DCS; and
• The Acting Director: Formal Education, DCS.
Committee Members would be given an opportunity to ask questions after the presentation. The Chairperson also made provision for follow-up questions to be asked. There were certain questions which were not entirely answered and needed revisiting by the DCS team. The Chairperson asked that the Department forward all the outstanding issues that had been raised by members. He hoped that this process would not take a month to do. Written responses would be expected within ten days, which was the standard time period. The Committee would follow-up on this.
Department of Correctional Services: State of Education in Correctional Facilities
The purpose of the presentation was to provide an update on the state of education in the Correctional Facilities. The Department aimed to promote social responsibility and human development. This objective formed part of its mandate which outlined the purpose of the correctional system.
The Department wanted to provide offenders with needs-based programmes and interventions to facilitate their rehabilitation and enable their social reintegration as well as personal development. The programmes in formal education include adult education and training which is offered to learners in partnership with the Department of Higher Education and Training from AET levels 1 to 4 . In formal education there is also the GET band (General Education and Training) which attempts to get offenders literate. There are 17 DCS schools registered with the Department of Basic Education to offer mainstream education. The curricula followed in these schools was that of the National Education system from the Department of Basic Education (CAPS curriculum). Students were also offered the second Chance Programme where they can write up to six subjects to improve their qualifications.
There was an increase in the numbers of learners attending AET programmes from the first quarter to the second quarter, however a decrease was noted in the third quarter. This decrease occurred during the winter months.
Education offered in the Department must comply with relevant legislation and policies of the National Departments of Education and regulations of the various academic institutions. Annual curriculum interventions thus take place. These interventions are aimed at developing the educator to deliver updated and current curriculum and practices.
Skills development for offenders include Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET) college programmes and skills training programmes which focus on basic occupational skills, entrepreneurial skills and basic computer skills.
The Boksburg Steel Workshop in Gauteng, a DCS workplace, had been granted accreditation along with the Departments Boksburg Wood Workshop and the Leeuwkop Wood Workshop. The Department also had workspaces that had been accredited in the province of the Free State and KwaZulu-Natal. The Department also worked with external partners to enhance sports, recreation, arts and culture in its facilities. The Department would be launching its first arts and crafts production centre on 17 November 2021 at Klerksdorp Management Area and the policy of selling Arts and Crafts had been finalised.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, under lockdown level 5 in 2020 schools and skills training sites were completely closed. Furthermore, the 2021 disruptions meant that schools closed for learners on 30 June 2021 and no June exams were written this year.
One of the many achievements by the DCS included signing the protocol agreement with the DHET to receive funding from the National Skills Fund (NSF) in order to train 5 480 offenders from 2018/19 to 2021/22 financial years. The Department also received discretionary grants from the Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority (SASSETA) to train 40 offenders in 2017, 556 in 2018, 276 in 2019, 145 in 2020, and 95 offenders are earmarked for training in 2021.
The Chairperson thanked the DCS for the presentation. The presentation was difficult to follow given the Department’s poor network connection during the meeting. Members were urged to ask for clarity wherever they felt they may have missed certain points. The Chairperson opened the floor for questions.
Mr X Nqola (ANC) said he liked the progressive initiatives which enabled offenders to be rehabilitated and brought back into communities to contribute. He wanted to know whether the highest qualification offered by the DCS was only degrease at NQF level 7 and nothing beyond this? The DCS along with the Sub-Committee on Correctional Services should submit to the Committee the number of graduates produced in engineering since the resumption of the educational programmes and all relevant programmes it offers. This would enable the Committee to assess the actual impact these initiatives had on the community.
How do we curb those reasons given for the decrease in enrollment so that we curb the decrease in enrollment itself to ensure that this initiative does not collapse? In respect of sports, recreation, arts and cultural programmes, what is the role of the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture? The DCS are partnering with external stakeholders but the role of the aforementioned Department needed to be clarified. A nexus is easily formed between the DCS and the National Department of Education given the qualifications and curricula exchanges involved. However, when it came to sports, recreation and arts and culture, the Committee had yet to hear of the contributions from the Departments of Sport, Arts and Culture towards the DCS education initiative. “All we hear is that there is a partnership with external stakeholders. So should we take it that the Departments of Sports, Arts and Culture has no contribution in this DCS programme?” (sic).
Mr W Horn (DA) said that members were at times confronted with complaints from inmates who stated that they were precluded from enrolling in formal educational programmes. Investigations and interrogations have revealed that these inmates were precluded because they were not in correctional facilities for a long enough term. What precisely is the policy behind this? What is the type of sentence an inmate must be serving before they ultimately will be allowed to enroll, specifically in relation to the short courses contained in the DCS report? What is the distinction when an offender specifically qualifies to enroll for a short course even if they do not serve a sentence of a longer term? He wanted to know the logistics of vocational training. He noted on slide 28 of the presentation the ten sites at which the DCS had been awaiting accreditation.
He asked that the Committee be given information for them to know at which sites vocational training is undertaken and at which sites it is not being undertaken. When the Committee had previously gone on oversight it was informed that due to a variety of reasons, the vocational training sites, specifically around the manufacturing of furniture at Kgosi Mampuru Prison, ran at 30% of its capacity. One of the various reasons given was the lack—or insufficient number—of artisans in the employment of the DCS. He warned that if this were still the case and if it became a trend this would be problematic on two levels. Firstly, the DCS would be unable to tap properly into the capacity or the potential of these vocational training sites. Secondly, it would defeat the purpose of self-sustainability and affording the Department the ability to be self-sufficient by for example selling the furniture made in these training sites. He stated that the furniture made was “quite clearly of a very high level”. Where sites are located for vocational training, at what capacity do they function? If these sites are not functioning at full capacity is it the lack of artisans in the employment of correctional services which hamper full capacity? The Committee needed this information.
Ms W Newhoudt-Druchen (ANC) thanked the DCS for its presentation. In addition to Mr Horn’s question she wanted to know overall, out of the 243 correctional centres across the country, how many had educational facilities? Which DSC centres offered the different forms of educational programmes?
She wanted to know how many female offenders received education within the five years between 2015 to now. The Department had mentioned that this number increased and decreased but generally how many females received access to education and in which fields? The Department in their presentation had mentioned that most female offenders were literate. Which streams of education did these offenders obtain? Which budget is attributed towards paying educators within the correctional centres? Are educators paid from the budget of the DCS or the Department of Basic Education or Higher Education? Where is the funding coming from? What is the update with regard to the Occupational Specific Dispensation for educators within correctional centres? Is the education in correctional centres for both remand detainees and other detainees? Detainees tend to wait for a very long time so can they continue with their education while awaiting trial or sentencing? Who are the educational programmes for? Is it exclusively for sentenced inmates or is it also for remand detainees?
She said some children struggle with education and because of various learning barriers they drop out of school. When these children drop out of school they get involved with crime. Many of these children had never been assessed for any learning barriers and then end up in correctional centres. When child offenders are placed in educational programmes are they assessed to determine which stream of education they should go into? How is this done? These children already struggled in conventional schools but were never assessed. What happens to them in correctional centres?
Ms N Maseko-Jele (ANC) wanted to give honour “where it is due”. The DSC did very well in getting an 81% percentage pass rate for their 2020 class of student enrolled inmates (see slide 19). She wanted to congratulate the Department for that.
Was it compulsory, she asked, for the inmates to enroll in the educational programmes and to gain skills? Are there other inmates who are not doing anything at all? How are the educators within the correctional centres recruited? She noted that inmates were also being used in these programmes. Are those inmates who are still serving a prison sentence or those who had left and finished their sentences? Are the educators coming from outside? How are the educators recruited if they are coming from outside? Amongst the inmates who are getting an education how many were foreigners?
It seems as if inmates were funding themselves when it came to higher education. If for example, inmates have to study at UNISA, do they pay for themselves? Could the Department give the Committee more on that? How does the Department manage this and where do inmates get the money to register with these tertiary institutions? Is the Department working with any tertiary institutions? UNISA seems to be one of the institutions but are there other decent learning institutions which the Department is working with?
In respect of child offenders, the Department mentioned that there were children who attended classes daily and others who did not. The child offenders who do not attend classes daily were said to be in this category because of the sentence that they were serving. What category is this? How many of the schools who have full-time registered child inmates are registered with the Department of Education? Are some of these schools private or are child offenders exclusively registered with the Department of Education?
Lastly, on the topic of arts and culture she wanted to know how involved the Department of Sports, Arts and Culture was with the DCS. She reminisced about her time while working with the Municipality on arts and culture and how they used to host “beautiful programmes” where choirs from different prisons would compete. Do these interactive and competitive programmes still exist? “I don’t hear them reporting about those programmes if there is still something like that.”
Adv G Breytenbach (DA) said that the other members had covered most of the questions she wanted to ask. She wanted to know whether the Department kept any statistics or did any follow-up on inmates who had made use of the educational programmes and who leave prison with a qualification. Do these qualifications help inmates find jobs in their field? Does the Department know whether those inmates manage to find jobs? Is the qualification put to productive use?
Response from DCS
The Acting National Commissioner said that in terms of having statistics or follow-ups on those ex-inmates who made use of the qualifications, community corrections branches are used. The community corrections branches, as part of the programmes on monitoring and providing support to parolees and probationers helps the DSC keep statistics. These branches are part of support, they provide information, networks and also encourage parolees and probationers to use the qualifications that they would have acquired. The Department also worked with local government. For example, the arts and crafts facilities that the Department will launch next week will be done in collaboration with the Matlosana Municipality and one of the curators involved in this event is a parolee.
The Department would put in place interactions which will deal with the declining number of inmates participating in the educational programmes. The self-sufficient and sustainability framework gave the Department a platform to re-orientate its rehabilitation, education and skills development programmes towards self-sufficiency and sustainability. The framework gives guidance not only on how the Department could generate revenue but also on how to attract skills and qualifications in terms of its own employees and to help develop the skills and qualifications of offenders.
The Department had been able to prioritise the employment of teachers and skills development practitioners. It had also prioritised partnerships with other departments who could provide the extra capacity needed for teaching and skills facilitation. This would help the Department start to improve on its declining numbers.
Another intervention the Department would be implementing was the conversion of its facilities using its own resources. The Department would use its own offenders and officials who are artisans or technically trained to increase the number of classrooms and facilities. Unused buildings and buildings within its territory would be converted into extra classrooms for use to enable an increase in offender intake for the educational programmes.
The reasons given for for offenders discontinuing education and skills development courses are closely monitored by the Department. Once an offender stops attending these classes it is difficult to get them to rejoin. The Department would thus utilise social workers to help intervene in this respect. Support from family, encouragement and personal well-being programmes from the Safe Space organisation help motivate offenders to rejoin programmes.
In response to the question about remand detainees he said that the Department had piloted a project that would target them. This project would start introducing correctional programmes targeting remand detainees particularly because they represent a large population in correctional centres. The Department would determine how to convert correctional programmes into short skills development and training courses that could be offered to these detainees. The Acting National Commissioner said that the DCS was “very keen” on making an impact on remand detainees because they ultimately transform into the sentence offender population in the care of the correctional services. He requested that the Correctional Services Management team provide answers to other questions that were asked by the Committee members.
Dr Minette Plaatjies, Deputy Commissioner: Personal Development, DCS, said that she would expand more on education for remand detainees. She urged the Committee to note that even in conventional schools, if a learner had been absent from school until the month of July, that learner would not be permitted to enroll. Irrespective of any resources available those learners cannot enroll in June or July. The Department often receives offenders later in the year, it then assesses and recruits those learners. The Departments’ educators go on specific recruitment drives starting from November into December and early January to recruit offenders to join its schools. If remand detainees enter facilities around October and have been registered for grade 12, the Department would ensure that the detainee is able to write their grade 12 examinations. This provision is also made to detainees writing examinations in tertiary institutions. In the past arrangements had been made with tertiary institutions to allow offender to complete their examination. This is almost like a crisis intervention in assisting these detainees.
In terms of assessments the Department in its research could confirm that offenders do drop out because of learning difficulties. Ideally when a child offender drops out and is eleven-years old, that child should be enrolled back into school. The problem is that the Department deals with adult offenders who have not completed a low grade in primary school. When these offenders come to correctional services they are assessed in line with the Department of Basic Educations policies. Adult offenders would often tell the Department that they had completed grade seven but when assessed they end up being placed in grade two. This might be due to the years they had lost and because of changes in the curriculum of the Department of Basic Education. The Department was in communication with schools in the community to obtain proof confirming that offenders completed the grades they claimed to. It is difficult to get offenders immediately into schools because some would refuse to be placed in lower grades.
In terms of skills development, there existed a basic requirement for offenders to be registered into skills development. The presentation made reference to adult education and training level one to four. This was the basic requirement for offenders to be enrolled in an accredited field of training. It had become difficult to get offenders into these programmes. In respect of funding the Department of Basic Education provide education for offenders up until grade 12. Beyond grade 12, offenders fund their own tertiary education but are permitted to apply for financial assistance from various institutions. The Department provided a range of programmes which Ms Johnson would touch on.
The question from Mr Horn on complaints received from offenders that they are not always included, this was true. This exclusion of certain offenders might relate to the short-term offenders. Certain courses were, by nature of their accreditation, six to nine months, or even longer. For this reason the short-term offenders would be excluded from long-term accredited score courses. This did not mean that those offenders would sit idle; there are so many other skills development programmes and life skills under correctional programmes. Offenders are able to get involved in programmes other than formal education and formal accredited skills that are available. The Department had a long waiting list for offenders that want to do engineering or welding but because of safety requirements the Department could only take a limited number of offenders into the facilities. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic the Department had certain requirements in terms of the floor space. There needed to be the required number of security officials and skills development practitioners.
The Department did not have the numbers readily available pertaining to the number of female offenders in the educational programmes but would make this available to the Committee.
Educators are recruited from the DCS and are fully employed by the Department. The Department of Basic Education also provided the DCS with educators given the working agreement the two Departments had with one another. These educators who come from the Department of Basic Education were paid by that department and those who were recruited by the DCS were paid by the DCS. The Department budgeted for the compensation of its educators in these facilities and for its skills development practitioners.
The Departments of Sport, Arts and Culture play a very important role. Dr Plaatjies apologised for not going into much detail in terms of sport, recreation, and arts and culture. The focus of the Department was on education with specific focus on formal education and skills development. Due to time constraints the Department could not extend it presentation beyond 42 slides. She said that the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture had been “a very wonderful strong partner”. The Department hosts the Funda Mzantsi Championship every year with the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture. In terms of the District Development Model the DCS is in the Municipality in George working with this community and their branch National Library of South Africa. The DCS also had assigned MOA’s (Methods of Administration) with the Departments of Sports, Arts and Culture. Before these Departments were amalgamated the DCS had reworked that arrangement to include the sports part into the Department of Sports, Arts and Culture.
Ms M Johnson, Director: Skills Development, DCS, would answer questions relating to how offenders are assessed and whether the provision of education and training was a compulsory element. She said that offenders registered their educational and training needs during the assessment process when they enter the correctional centre. Based on their assessment needs they are placed or referred to either the psychologist, the educator or the trainer. When offenders meet the educator or the trainer they are then assessed to determine their education and training level. If the offender does not meet the entry requirements for training they are referred to education. This is to ensure they at least meet the minimum entry requirements and are efficiently literate and have numeracy proficiency in order to be placed in skills programmes.
One of the Members had asked whether the Department had an assessment tool: The Department had an assessment tool and uses assessment tools available from the Department of Higher Education to assess the learners. With regard to the specific sites available for vocational training, those details would be made available soon.
On the lack of training and capacity at Kgosi Mampuru Prison, depending on when members visited the prison, if it was during the pandemic it was according to the COVID-19 restrictions and adherence to the COVID-19 protocols. The prison is one of the Departments’ centres where there is in depth training of offenders assigned to the workshops. Offenders have access to the engineering studies which also gives them access to accredited training. Many of the offenders have access to artisanship training. The Department received funding from the National Skills Fund (NSF) and many offenders were exposed to accredited training at Kgosi Mampuru. There was a question asking how training is presented and why the numbers were low. There is a specific ratio attached to training a welder. You cannot have more than six offenders or trainees assigned to a welder. In respect of training a brick layer the ratio is a bit higher compared to a welder. The Department therefore offers the training as per industry requirements.
The Acting Director for Formal Education, DCS, said that the Department offered education which went beyond NQF level 4. There were offenders who had gone on to complete their Masters and PhD. If information were requested in that regard the Department would provide it to the Committee.
On the question by Mr Horn where he indicated that some offenders were precluded from enrolling in programmes. The Acting Director asserted that the Department ensured that all inmates who showed an interest in participating in educational programmes and skills development programmes were offered those programmes. This was, however, subject to the sentence they were serving and the capacity of the correctional facility. No offender would be turned away from any programme they wished to participate in.
Remand detainees were offered skills development programmes and were offered assistance to ensure that they are able to write those exams where they are detained during the exam period. Remand detainees form a large percentage of the inmate population so there should be a way in which their needs are also catered for. The Department had 211 full time students who were currently completing their senior certificates with the Department of Basic Education. This number excluded those offenders who were not registered full-time students.
Dr Zodwa Mosoma, Director: Correctional Programmes, DCS, said that the Department had adopted a needs-based intervention when it came to rehabilitation. These were types of interventions which specifically balanced the causal factors with the unique offence profile of the individual offender. This therefore meant that when the offender came to the Department’s facilities they were assessed. This assessment entailed looking at their risks and their needs. The Department would then recommend specific programmes but these were mainly focused on sentenced offenders who were serving sentences longer than 24 months. For these offenders, a correctional sentence plan is developed detailing how the offender would participate in the rehabilitation programme.
Remand detainees and short-term offenders keep coming back to correctional centres mainly because the Department is not afforded enough time to expose them to all the rehabilitation programmes that are relevant in targeting their offending behaviour. This was due to the usually short sentences they served. This therefore meant that the Department had limited time to expose this category of offenders to rehabilitation programmes. The Department had, however, made progress. It had more than 14 correctional programmes that were targeting offending behaviour, specifically the life skills programmes. During the financial year of 2020/21 the Department piloted a programme specifically for remand detainees. Remand detainees were a group of offenders who had not been sentenced which meant that the correctional sentence plan which spoke to the offence that the offenders had committed would not be relevant. The Department offered remand detainees life skills programmes which generally looked at issues like substance abuse and attempted to assist the offender in coping with these issues by looking at restoring personal relationships.
Most of the time offenders are accused of crimes that they had committed within their own families and within their communities. These programmes assist offenders to have deeper insight and to ensure that offenders correct their offending behaviour. This programme had been piloted amongst detainees in the Western Cape and the LMN (Limpopo, Mpumalanga, North West) region. The Department also intended to include short-term offenders but with limited capacity this would be done gradually in a phased approach.
Ms Newhoudt-Druchen asked about the statistics of all the inmates within the 243 correctional centres across the country. How many of them had educational facilities and what educational streams were provided? It would be fine if the Department could send that information in writing to the Committee. She did not get a good sense of what the statistics were around the number of female inmates over the five years who had educational opportunities.
How many correctional centres had libraries of their own? It was not made clear which centres had libraries.
She thanked the Department for responding to her question about offenders with potential learning barriers. There was however a follow-up question. If offenders were young and had not finished school and they come to a correctional facility, what kind of support did the Department offer, if any, to offenders who are minors and still able to finish their schooling?
Mr Horn said that in respect of his question about vocational training he wanted to ask a follow-up question. He confirmed that it was pre-COVID-19 when the Committee visited Kgosi Mampuru. Therefore he asked the Chairperson, with the agreement of the members, for the Committee to be afforded in writing a full report as to which correctional centres had vocational training sites or institutions. This report must also detail at what capacity they were operating at and to what extent (if it is not on full capacity) it is hampered by the lack of artisans in the employment of correctional services.
Dr Plaatjies said that information relating to the number of foreigners in the correctional schools would be made available to the Committee. One of the major challenges with non-South African offenders was the requirement of an ID to access skills development programmes and certain educational programmes. This was a challenge even with South African offenders who did not have IDs. It became difficult to give these offenders access to skills development, certain accredited courses and for them to write exams. DCS was in partnership with the Department of Home Affairs to assist those offenders.
DCS had 17 schools which were registered with the Department of Basic Education. This meant that the DCS followed the curriculum of the Department of Basic Education in all 17 registered schools.
The information about females offenders would be broken down within the last five years and given to the Committee.
There were formal libraries in each and every one of the DCS’ formal schools. In all of the other correctional centres the Department had, some had full libraries and most had ‘reading rooms’ which is a facility for offenders to access books for leisure. The formal libraries were at the formal schools.
There was support to offenders who were minors. Child offenders in correctional centres were being academically assessed. The Department also used the services of social workers and psychologists to assist in dealing with other problems that the minors might have had which caused them to drop out.
“We are attempting a holistic approach but even with the young people we find that if they had left school two or three years ago they are not so enthusiastic about joining school again. We keep on motivating and recruiting them to join the educational programmes”.
The Department committed itself to providing the Committee with the number of vocational training facilities, the list of different facilities, and the capacity that these facilities are able to accommodate.
The Chairperson thanked the Acting Commissioner and the Correctional Services Management team for their presentation and for responding to the questions of members. He asked that the Department forward all the outstanding issues that had been raised by members. He hoped that this process would not take a month to do. Written responses would be expected within ten days, which is the standard time period. The Committee would follow-up on this.
The Chairperson asked for a processing Committee meeting to be arranged to process three issues, including the Committee’s minutes, and also the report that the Committee will present to the main Committee. Members had been raising issues of oversight. The Chairperson would like to use that meeting to deal with whatever ideas are proposed for oversight.
The Chairperson thanked Members for attending and for their contributions.
The meeting was adjourned.
Dyantyi, Mr QR
Breytenbach, Adv G
Horn, Mr W
Maseko-Jele, Ms NH
Newhoudt-Druchen, Ms WS
Nqola, Mr X
Selfe, Mr J
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.