DCS & JICS 2022/23 Annual Performance Plan, with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Opening remarks
The Chairperson welcomed everyone to the meeting. He acknowledged apologies from Adv G Breytenbach (DA), Ms N Maseko-Jele (ANC), Adv S Swart (ACDP), and Mr X Nqola (ANC).

Mr Makgothi Thobakgale, Acting National Commissioner (AC), Department of Correctional Services (DCS), said the Deputy Minister of the Department of Correctional Services, Inkosi Sango Phathekile Holomisa, was experiencing load shedding and for that reason was possibly going to join the meeting late.

The Chairperson acknowledged his apology and asked the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) to proceed with its presentation.

Presentation: Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services Operational Plan 2022/2023

Judge Edwin Cameron, Inspecting Judge, JICS, thanked the Committee for inviting the organisation to the meeting. Before handing over the presentation to his executive colleague, Ms Sibutha, he pointed out that JICS had fully restored its oversight and energies in the past two years since its personnel were readmitted to correctional facilities in June 2020. The organisation now also had a full executive team with the appointment of Ms Sibutha and Ms Thembelihle Ngema, Head of Legal.

He pointed out that the Minister had informed the Committee that he was negotiating with National Treasury to secure the minimal budgetary adjustments that were necessary for JICS to be able to function effectively as an independent statutory oversight body under the oversight of the Committee. Treasury had suggested that JICS be folded into the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC). This was vehemently rejected by the Committee. For that reason, JICS wanted to report its appreciation, not only to the Minister but to the Deputy Minister, Deputy Minister Inkosi Holomisa, who both gave their full support for the necessary organisational and budgetary arrangements to be made. Those include legislative arrangements.

Judge Cameron said the Committee was aware of JICS’ overriding concerns arising from its oversight mandate. These included the overcrowding and institutional degradation arising from the lack of prompt and effective maintenance and repair by the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI). Other issues included the misguided legislative model which was imposed on the Committee by its predecessors 25 years ago, the practice of solitary confinement which JICS was negotiating with the Acting Commissioner, the rising levels of violence between inmates, as well as inmates and officials, and the increase of cases of suicides and attempted suicides. All these were negative signs. They also underscored the importance of JICS to finalise its statutory and organisational form. The organisation was therefore working hard together with the Acting Commissioner to achieve this goal. In the past three weeks, the Deputy Minister made a beneficiary intervention that indicated that JICS and the Department had to finalise the statutory presentation for the Committee which would enable the Committee to meet the Sonke Gender Justice deadline set by the court (3 December 2022). He reminded the Committee of the proposal that it made in the previous year for the Committee, JICS and the DCS to meet in a seminar to discuss sentencing options. He then handed the presentation over to his executive colleague.

Ms Ntombizodwa Sibutha, Director: Management Regions, JICS, greeted everyone and thanked the Committee for inviting JICS to the meeting. She said the allocated budget for the entity in the 2022/23 financial year was R78.7 million. Of this budget, 86.6% was under the compensation of employees, 13.4% under goods and services, 0.02% under transfers and subsidies and 1.9% was allocated to payment of capital assets.

She said JICS was stretching its operations with this budget. It was hoped that when it became a government component it was going to receive a budget that would enable it to carry its mandate.

One of JICS’s strategic objective is to provide effective and independent oversight relating to the treatment of inmates and conditions in the correctional facilities. In line with this, JICS reported that it had inspected:

129 facilities out of 243 (53%) in 2019/20
136 facilities out of 243 (56%) in 2020/21
170 facilities out 243 (70%) in 2021/22

The 2022/23 target was 136 inspections out of 243 facilities (56%).

JICS reported that its operations were also stretched in performing these inspections. This was because there were only eight appointed inspectors. It was hoped that after the proposed changes to the organisation were effected this figure would be improved. In terms of quarterly performance, in quarter one the organisation targeted to inspect 15% (37) of correctional facilities. For quarter two, it targeted 30% (36) of correctional facilities. For quarter three, it targeted 41% (27) of correctional facilities. For quarter four, it targeted 56% (36) of correctional centres. JICS had communicated this plan with its stakeholders. However, unannounced visits would also be conducted.

The Committee was informed that JICS conducts investigations at correctional facilities into allegations of human rights abuses on an ad hoc basis within 30 days after receiving instructions. These include cases of:  Suicides by inmates; Violent acts in correctional facilities; Unnatural deaths with allegations of homicide, negligence and Allegations of assault by officials on inmates.

If necessary, JICS requests that all the records relating to incidents from DCS (copies of medical records, registers and other relevant documents) be made available electronically.

(See Presentation)

The Chairperson thanked JICS for its presentation and opened the meeting for discussion.

Discussion

Mr R Dyantyi (ANC) thanked the JICS for its “forward-looking” performance plan. He assured the Inspecting Judge that the Committee was going to address the matters he raised concerning the seminar to discuss sentencing options. This was still firmly on the Committee’s agenda. He then expressed his concern about the absence of a “risk register” in the JICS performance plan. Considering the space that the organisation operated in, it was bound to encounter risks that stalled its performance. The performance plan seemed to suggest that JICS operated in a space where it chose how things had to happen. He invited the JICS team to list some of the potential risks that the organisation could face unless there was “a miracle” where there were none at all. In the case that it had identified these risks, was there an intervention plan? Did it function? He said the eight appointed inspectors alluded to in the presentation seemed inadequate to serve the 243 correctional services in the country. In addition, the presentation did not state if these inspectors were going to operate in specific priority areas. The highest target of 70% set by JICS was another cause for concern. What happened to the other 30% not included as a target?

Mr W Horn (DA) thanked the JICS for its presentation. He asked if the entity considered producing an integrated report that could assist the government, the Executive, and the Committee to perform their duties. He agreed with Mr Dyantyi’s observation that the number of inspectors was limited. He asked if there was something forthcoming to assist the conditions of inmates in remand, detention centres, and in centres housing sentenced inmates during the tenure of the Inspecting Judge? He said it was well known that South African correctional centres were overcrowded. The Committee was aware of this and struggled to find solutions for it. There were correctional centres that claimed that overcrowding did not pose a significant impact on their performance of rehabilitation programmes. The Committee was sceptical about this as it did not have a full appreciation of the extent to which overcrowding impacted the ability of correctional services to properly execute the rehabilitation of offenders. The other aspect was how this overcrowding affected the centres’ abilities to treat sentenced offenders in a humane manner. From the oversights conducted in the past, the close proximity of cells must have had a psychological impact on the inmates. He hoped that under the current JICS team the Committee would receive a report on the systemic issues being faced by centres based on the inspections. He stressed that the Committee was thankful for these inspections as they made its work easy.

Judge Cameron replied that JICS had no executive managerial policy or disciplinary powers over the functioning of the correctional system. It was on one end of the models for prisoners’ oversight. In other models, oversight bodies were entitled to make binding recommendations. However, JICS was working on finalising its 20th draft of a statute that would give it greater powers. He explained that these powers did not give the oversight body the ability to give orders. This remained the responsibility of the operational and executive powers entrusted to the Correctional Services Department itself. He said Mr Horn’s questions were consistent with the concerns of the entity. The overarching and systemic report he requested was only going to be possible once JICS acquired the powers he alluded to.

He explained that inspectors played a specific and statutory role. The statute provided for a limited number of inspectors and granted them very specific statutory powers. For ongoing oversight, there were 243 independent correctional centre visitors who were the entity. JICS also had a regional system in place. It had regional heads in Bloemfontein, KwaZulu-Natal, East London and in Pretoria. These had a full-time staff comprising of the independent correctional centre visitors who frequented the correctional centres every day. While JICS underscored the concerns raised by Mr Dyantyi about the limited number of inspectors, he supported it as the entity required a greater budget to be able to do so. The Minister was currently negotiating the budget. Concerning the risk register, he invited the CEO to shed more light on this.

Mr Vick Misser, Chief Executive Officer, JICS, thanked the Committee for the discussion. JICS had conducted a Situational Analysis which incorporated the Risk Analysis processes of the organisation. He proposed to forward this information to the Committee. He explained that the targets were guided by the national inspection plan. In the past, this plan stipulated that the entity had to visit only 81 centres out of 243. With recent adjustments to JICS’s work activities, this figure had been improved to approximately 57%. The organisation’s goal in the future was to assess every single correctional centre within the performance cycle of 12 months. Once the necessary capacitation was acquired, it was going to be possible to successfully execute this plan and to report accordingly in the performance cycle within the 12-month period.

He agreed that overcrowding was a problem but also pointed out that this was the case throughout the world. The Department was trying to address this. It was currently sitting with approximately 142,000 unblocked totals and that these matters were going to be tabled in greater detail in the organisation’s annual reports. The Inspecting Judge was engaging with Judge Brian Mashile, Chairperson of the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS), and his team, to address the overcrowding issues. To shed light on the conditions in the correctional services, he said there were 2093 inmates over 60 years of age and 1772 between 72 and 79 years of age. This was an issue JICS was addressing with the NCCS. In addition, JICS requested a workshop to address these issues with the Committee.

Judge Cameron thanked the Mr Misser for his contribution. After engagements with Judge Mashile, he found that JICS and the NCCS had similar concerns. He also brought to the Committee’s attention that the overhaul created by the NCCS committee’s predecessors was a statutory blockage where only the Minister could grant lifer’s parole. Whilst the organisation understood the political sensitivities of this matter, the Minister did not agree. He said there was “a terrible backlog” on the Minister’s desk and that JICS could provide the Committee with these figures. Lastly, he said JICS was in the process of formulating recommendations that he hoped would result in reforms.

Mr Dyantyi said he was “not interested in a document on a shelf”. If there was a risk register which had been budgeted for and linked to the performance of the entity, it would have been available in the meeting. He suggested that there had to be a follow-up session to discuss this specific issue. This was in the best interest of JICS because risks were a serious matter. He pointed out that public funds were being spent on the organisation, therefore, accountability had to be prioritised.

Dr W Newhoudt-Druchen (ANC) thanked JICS for the presentation. She asked how many inmates were above the age of 79. She said the NCCS constantly appeared in the discussion but it had never presented itself to the Committee, or produced a report. There was very little information about it yet it was continuously mentioned in Committee and Sub-Committee meetings. She was therefore interested to know more about this entity to have a full appreciation of the correctional services landscape.

The Chairperson thanked Members for their engaging discussion. He then expressed concerns about the entity’s targets. 56% was very low, especially considering that JICS had at some point achieved a 70% inspection rate. Despite achieving this figure due to unannounced visits, it demonstrated that the organisation could stretch itself. He quoted a scholar who argued that modern correctional services were focused on keeping the inmates safe than rehabilitating them. Given the low budget that the Department was receiving, was this true in the South African case?

Judge Cameron welcomed Mr Dyantyi’s suggestion for a follow-up session. He also assured Dr Newhoudt-Druchen that the NCCS would be willing to face the Committee to report on their operations.

Mr Misser provided the demographic statistics of inmates in the correctional centres. JICS interrogated all inmates over the age of 60 and they made up a total of 2093. Of this total, 531 were un-sentenced and 1536 were sentenced. Those over 60 to 69 constitute a total of 1772 inmates. Out of this figure, 540 did not have previous convictions. JICS is continuing its interrogation and analysis of this data. There were 295 inmates in the 70 to 79 years category. Out of this total, 57 inmates did not have previous convictions. In the 80 to 89 years old category, there were 22 inmates and only two of them had previous convictions. In the last and most senior category of 90 to 99 years of age, there were four inmates and only one had a previous conviction. The oldest inmate in the centres fell under this category at the age of 99 years old. In respect of females, the oldest inmate was 78 years old. JICS was analysing these age categories in order to share findings with the NCCS and the Committee.

He explained that there was a national inspection plan which stipulated that there were to be 136 inspections out of 237 centres annually. This figure equated to 57%. As already mentioned, the 70% inspections were due to unannounced visits. JICS had begun a separate programme of conducting unannounced visits. These were to tie up all the specific correctional centres that the entity identified to visit during the performance cycle but had not been included in the national inspection plan. It is hoped that this would have a similar effect of increasing the figure from 57% like the last time.

The Chairperson asked how many unannounced visits JICS intended to conduct.

Mr Misser said this was dependent on the availability of resources and senior management to execute this. JICS was planning to conduct unannounced visits in approximately 18 centres within a quarter. In addition, the organisation was in the process of engaging the lower judiciary in an endeavour to partner with it. Here magistrates were going to assist in conducting routine visits in correctional centres within their jurisdictions.

The Chairperson thanked Mr Misser for his response. He added it was important to get actual figures so that the Committee could hold JICS accountable at the end of the year for the programmes that it had included in its plan.

Judge Cameron thanked the Chairperson and the Committee for the valuable feedback. He agreed with the Chairperson’s observation that rehabilitation was no longer prioritised in the correctional centres. It was indeed the case in South Africa because the entity had neither control over the budgetary allocation nor the operationalisation of the statutory mandate of the Department. He pointed out that the South African statute on correctional centres was based on the Nelson Mandela era. He was the world’s most famous prisoner and he envisioned a system where imprisonment was for the purpose of rehabilitation and reintegration.

The Chairperson thanked the Inspecting Judge for his response and invited Mr Dyantyi to pass his final remarks on this issue as the Chairperson of the Sub-Committee.

Mr Dyantyi said the Committee noted the critical work that needed to be done starting with the outstanding seminar with the JICS. He also noted the proposals that were made by the JICS. He supported the Chairperson’s observation about the mandate of centres to rehabilitate offenders. This was a question that needed to be answered.

The Chairperson thanked Mr Dyantyi for his remarks. He also thanked the JICS for its report and expressed appreciation for its dedicated efforts. He described the entity’s reports as objective, robust and always an honest assessment of the situation. He then asked the Department to proceed with its presentation.

Presentation: DCS Annual Performance Plan 2022/23

Mr Thobakgale thanked the Chairperson and the Committee for the opportunity to present the annual performance plan. He then handed over the presentation to the DCS team.

The DCS reported that it continues to be confronted by an increasingly challenging environment considering the socio-economic conditions presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. The R11 billion budget reduction and reversal of the wage agreement over the 2021 MTEF will continue to have a negative effect on the funded establishment of the Department during the 2022 MTEF. The Department will be required to reduce its staff complement which will negatively affect new initiatives. The Department is currently engaged in the alignment of the structure with the approved service delivery model. The Department is also engaging with Organised Labour on a multilateral level on the shift pattern system. Based on the outcomes of the engagements with stakeholders, the shift pattern system may require additional funding. The strategic focus of the HR Strategy includes the Africa University of Corrections, modernisation of work practices, HR Talent Management, ideal correctional environment and the professionalisation of Corrections. The Department, being a labour-intensive organisation, places a great deal of emphasis on developmental programmes i.e. the learnership, internship and apprenticeship programmes, to attract and ensure a pipeline of skills for entry-level as well as to contribute to youth development and empowerment.


The Department reports on its planned targets for each programme. Some key targets in 2022/23 were:
- Unqualified audit opinion with reduced findings
-30% of tenders above R30 million awarded to designated groups
- 4.55% of inmates injured as a result of reported assaults in correctional facilities
- 70% of Remand Detainees (RD’s) subjected to Continuous Risk Assessment (CRA)
- 32% of overcrowding in correctional facilities in excess of approved bedspace capacity
- 56% of offenders, parolees and probationers receiving social work services
- 4 100 victims who participated in Restorative Justice Programmes

As part of the Strategic Risk Register, DCS outlined:

-Inadequate Information Communication Technology (ICT) Infrastructure and Modernisation
-Inadequate security strategies and safety systems
-Inadequate systems for successful reintegration of offenders into communities as law abiding citizens
-Inadequate provision and access to needs-based rehabilitation programmes (Psychosocial, Correctional, Spiritual, Care) services to inmates
-Inadequate provision of a comprehensive health care package to inmates
-MTEF budget cuts on the DCS vote
-Misaligned/inadequate Organisational structure to support the departmental needs and mandate
-Inadequate and inhabitable (dilapidated) infrastructure for inmate, stakeholders and officials
-Inadequate strategies to prevent irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure 10) Inadequate records management strategies, processes and systems

The following 2022 ENE allocations will be listed as specifically and exclusively appropriated in the 2022 Appropriation Bill, and may not be used for purposes other than those specified:
-Upgrading, rehabilitation and refurbishment of correctional and other facilities – R360,202 million in 2022/23, R451,962 million in 2023/24 and R472,263 million in 2024/25
-Departmental compensation ceilings have been set incorporating the 2021 MTEF reductions over the MTEF period as approved by Cabinet.
-The amounts of R17,872 billion in 2022/23, R16,929 billion in 2023/24 and R17,869 billion in 2024/25 provide the total allocation towards the payment of Compensation of Employees in DCS.
-Funds earmarked for the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services amount to R78,7 million in 2022/23, R76,5 million in 2023/24 and R79,9 million in 2024/25

(See Presentation)

The Chairperson thanked the DCS for its presentation. He then invited the Deputy Minister to pass his remarks before commencing discussions.

Deputy Minister Holomisa thanked the Chairperson and the Committee for the invitation. He apologised for joining the meeting late. He had been facing connection problems due to load shedding. He said that he did not have anything to deduct or add to the presentation but was available to participate in the question and answer session.

The Chairperson welcomed the Minister and thanked him for being available. He then opened the meeting for discussion.

Discussion

Mr Horn welcomed the presentation and asked for clarity on the Integrated Inmate Management System. In the previous meeting, the Minister said he was satisfied that DCS had “done some beefing up of the project”. This, unfortunately, did not answer the question especially considering how the Department in the past had not been able to meet targets despite spending significant amounts of money on the project. Since there was an increase on the targets from 12% to 16%, despite only 6% being met in the previous financial year, what interventions had been made to give the DCS confidence that the successful rollout could be achieved? He asked for more clarity where the Integrated Inmate Management System had been successfully implemented. He also expressed concern about overcrowding. The special dispensation that worked hand in hand with the management during the COVID-19 pandemic helped in this regard. However, in the long and medium term, a viable solution would be additional bed spaces. The Department has unfortunately not been successful with this in the past years. In light of this, he asked for more clarity on capital projects. The annual performance plan indicated that there was one completion. Which project was that? Furthermore, what was the medium and long term outlook of capital projects? Lastly, he said the three new focus areas identified by the Department did not reflect in its presentation. He asked the Department to explain how these focus areas were going to be integrated into the annual performance plan.

Dr Newhoudt-Druchen welcomed the Department and its presentation. The presentation began with a situational analysis that examined the challenges faced by women, the youth and people with disabilities. DCS highlighted that it had received an update from the Department of Women, Youth and People with Disabilities. What was this update? What did they inform DCS? Was it just a discussion or a presentation? She asked for more clarity on the statistical representation on slides 29, 32, 37, and 51. How many youth represented 20% on slide 29? Furthermore, in 2020/21 the target for the percentage of youth employed within the Department was 72% but in the current year it had reduced to 20%. How did such a high percentage reduce drastically? She asked for clarity on the designated groups that were offered tenders. On slide 37, she asked the Department to convert the percentage of escapes to the actual number of people. In addition, she said the Malmesbury Correctional Centre in the recent past had been prone to escapes. Was it a security challenge? Had action not been taken to address this? She asked for clarity on what was meant by unnatural deaths. She asked what had informed the increase of the therapeutic diet in the facilities. She mentioned that during the oversight visit to the Grootvlei correctional facilities, security cameras were not working. Security checks were conducted manually. Why were these cameras not working?
She said the budget for rehabilitation was minimal and it needed to be increased given the number of inmates. Did the DCS envisage having more rehabilitation programmes for inmates and perhaps increasing the budget in that regard? Lastly, she congratulated the Department for the 86% Matric pass rate. This was an admirable achievement. Was it possible for the Department to provide the actual number of these inmates.

A Committee Member greeted everyone and welcomed the presentation by the DCS. Like the previous speaker, she expressed concern about the Grootvlei security problem. Had the Department made any plans in terms of budget to address this issue. This also applied to the Tzaneen Correctional Centre. The facility operated manually. She said “the doors are wide open and their system is not working at all”, and this was shocking considering that this was a new correctional centre. Was this being addressed by the Department? Furthermore, during the Tzaneen visit, she noticed that there were no accommodation facilities for staff within the correctional centre. During the designing of this facility, was there no plan to include such a facility? Was there a budget for the construction of housing for official stuff?

The Chairperson thanked Committee Members for their engaging discussion. He asked for clarity about the hiring out of offender labour. Was there a document or policy basis for it? Did the DCS look into the advantages and disadvantages of hiring out offender labour? Who did it hire out this labour to? What were the advantages and disadvantages of doing so? This system existed during the apartheid era. Inmates were hired out to farmers. However, they were often ill-treated in this programme. In light of this, had the DCS looked at the pros and cons of hiring out labour? He also pointed out that the budget allocation of the Department was not consistent with the White Paper on Correctional Services. He explained that at the centre of this white paper was rehabilitation. However, about 76% of the DCS’ budget went into administration and incarceration and only 9% to social integration and rehabilitation. What progressive plans had been put to address this? He also asked the Department to justify why it had increased the budget on communications. What activities warranted the increase from R55.3 million to R56.4 million?

Several minutes were lost due to communication challenges

A DCS representative stated that the Department had appointed the Development Bank of Southern Africa to assist with the infrastructure plan. In terms of allocations in the current financial year, funds were channelled to the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure, the Independent Development Trust (IDT) as well as the Development Bank. Additional allocations were made for housing projects that involved inmate labour. He outlined the Department’s most recent construction projects. The Department was currently building a new correctional centre. This project was 85% complete and would provide an additional 240 bed spaces. Another project was the repair and upgrade of the Emthonjeni Correctional Centre in Gauteng. This project was anticipated to provide an additional 640 beds. These mentioned projects were scheduled for completion in the current financial year. The Umzimkulu Correctional Centre in KwaZulu-Natal was in the process of being re-opened after a period of being shut down. Preparations to take off the construction project at the Burgersdorp Correctional Centre were under way. A design was finalised with the appointed contractor. He acknowledged the concerns that were raised about the Grootvlei and Tzaneen correctional centres and confirmed that the Department was aware of the challenges there. These scenarios prompted the DCS to diver to diversify this procurement strategy. It appointed additional implementing agents. For integrated security systems, the Department allocated an amount of R169 million to upgrade these security systems and maintenance. Apart from Tzaneen, there were 21 correctional centres that needed integrated security systems and the Department prioritised all of them. In the case of the Grootvlei centre, he said the security camera system was outdated. It was an analogue system. The Department was in the process of settling its backlog in order to migrate to a digital system.

The Chairperson thanked the DCS for its response. He said he was facing connection issues and feared he was not going to be able to finish the meeting. In the event that this happened, he said the matter concerning the Regional Commissioner for KwaZulu Natal had to be finalised urgently and that it had to be a priority in the next meeting.
[The audio was unclear during this part of the meeting. PMG is trying to piece together the missing part and will update the report].
A DCS official replied the question concerning people with disabilities. She said the Acting Commissioner approved the disability programme. This programme included the training of people with disabilities and the improvement of infrastructure and housing individuals with disabilities. In addition, there was going to be a conference held for persons with disabilities and the Acting Commissioner was going to lead this event.

The Acting Commissioner said the number of matriculants from the previous year was 191. The increase in the budget for therapeutic diet was due to applications made by the offenders based on medical reasons and spiritual beliefs. These applications were considered and processed. In the 2021 financial year there were 68 escapes by offenders in Malmesbury. This occurred in the Medium B facility which was very old. As a result, the escapes were due to infrastructure. Efforts were being made to reinforce security in this area. He confirmed that all the 68 offenders were found and rearrested. In the Medium A part of the same facility, there were three other offenders who escaped. This was also due to the old infrastructure. Out of the three offenders only two were found and rearrested. Strategies had been implemented to track this individual. This involved working hand in hand with the community that the offender comes from. In terms of unnatural deaths, the categories included suicide by hanging and overdosing medication being administered. In some very uncommon instances, inmates would set themselves on fire. He then asked the Deputy Commissioner responsible for planning to address the questions on targets.

The Deputy Commissioner said indeed the special dispensation resulted in a reduction of the inmate population. However, Department was losing bed spaces on an annual basis. About 2000 bed spaces over the last financial year due to the DCS’ verification exercise, and also due to the dilapidation of infrastructure. The loss of bed spaces was also due the increase in the inmate population. The overcrowding target for the 2021/22 financial year increased from 28% to 32%. The Department was in constant engagements with the Department of Women, Youth and People with Disabilities for guidance in strategic planning. In all targets, the Department tried to assign women, the youth and people with disabilities. For instance, in the rehabilitation and reintegration programmes, women, the youth and people with disabilities were prioritised. In the 2021/22 financial year, 112 youths were appointed out of 314 appointments which translated to 35%. Considering the budget constraints set for the 2022/23 financial year, the target for the appointment of youths has been set at 20%. There were also targets to increase the appointment of people with disabilities. Over a five-year period, the Department hoped to increase the target from 1% to 2%. However, due to the working environment at the DCS only 0.78% was achieved. She explained that designated groups with regards to tenders referred to black people, women, the youth and people with disabilities. A total amount of R30 million was allocated to this group in the 2021/22 financial year. She said there were also notable improvements in prison escapes from 0.0031% to 0.015%. The Department intended to improve this number through upscaling on security.

The Chairperson thanked the DCS for its response and asked the Committee if it had follow up questions.

Mr Dyantyi asked if the Department had any plans for the funds that it was going to receive from the Department of Public Works? He also asked for clarity on a recent report that an inmate had been found dead and burnt at the Mangaung Correctional Centre. Was the Acting National Commissioner aware of this development?

The Chairperson thanked Mr Dyantyi for his question. He asked if Mr A Ramolobeng’s question about the prison that was burnt in Limpopo was answered.

The Acting National Commissioner suggested that Dr Botha to address this question.

Dr Riaan Botha, Acting Deputy Commissioner: Facilities Planning and Property Management, DCS, said when the Department started planning and design for the Tzaneen correctional centre after the incident, it was found that the correctional centre was built on an existing state-owned facility. There was previously a corrugated structure. As a result, the Department built a new facility on that existing site. Another challenge worth noting was that the municipality was unable to supply adequate water and electricity during construction. So, at that stage the Department evaluated the services that the municipality was going to be able to supply to that specific site and found that the site was not conducive for additional accommodation in that facility. The priority, then, was to phase out the corrugated infrastructure. However, the long-term plan was to identify provisional of staff accommodation at the site. As a result, the Department was in constant communication with the municipality to look at the upgrade of the current services it could provide to the site.

The Acting National Commissioner confirmed that there was an inmate notoriously known as “the FaceBook rapist” who was found dead and burnt to ashes in the Mangaung Correctional Centre. His real name was Thabo Bester.

The Chairperson thanked the DCS team for its responses and asked Mr Dyantyi to deliver his closing remarks.

Mr Dyantyi thanked the Chairperson. Not much could be said with regards to these plans but that the Committee was going to hold the Department accountable. He also expressed the Committee’s commitment to follow through the issue of the devolution of funds from the Department of Public Works, and generally monitoring all plans tabled to the Committee by the Department.

The Chairperson thanked Mr Dyantyi for his comments. He the invited the Deputy Minister to pass his last remarks.

Deputy Minister Holomisa thanked the Chairperson and said what the Department could do at this point was to commit to its plans. There was no reason to make excuses as the Department had had time to reflect and see past mistakes. The situation in Tzaneen was unacceptable because it was standard that staff had to reside in the facilities for the purposes of emergencies. The problems with the security systems and the escaping of prisoners were embarrassing and a reflection of the Department. He was hopeful that the Department’s stance to take over the maintenance using the institutions that have been mentioned in the meeting and offender labour would bring significant improvements.

Closing remarks

The Chairperson thanked the Deputy Minister, JICS, the Department and the Committee for joining the meeting.

The meeting was adjourned.