6th Parliament Legacy Report for Correctional Services

Meeting report

The Chairperson informed members that the Legacy Report guides on what truly transpired in the Sixth Parliament in this Committee.

Mr Mpho Mathabathe, Content Advisor/Researcher to the Portfolio Committee, gave a synopsis of the 6^th Parliament Legacy Report for Correctional Services. He noted key statistics, the impact of the portfolio Committee on oversight, sector-specific briefings from the Department of Correctional Services and Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) as well as the relevant legislation awaiting amendments.

Emerging challenges were the delays in introducing Bills to Parliament by the Department of Correctional Services. He noted with concern that Bills requiring amendment as ordered by the Constitutional Court were not being introduced to Parliament within the stipulated 24 months, which then necessitated requesting an extension from the Constitutional Court. He also emphasised that study tours which the Portfolio Committee had applied to undertake in 2023 could not materialise due to lack of funding.

Discussion
Mr E Cloete (ANC) touched on one of the achievements from 2023 which was the correctional centres had a matric pass rate of 77%. What happens when an inmate passes their matric in prison? What is the law if such an inmate becomes eligible for parole? Normally one is released but must still report to one’s probation officer. The Committee needs to look at how best they can assist such an inmate.

The second point he raised was the reduction in fruitless and wasteful expenditure. The Committee must investigate ways that the inmates/prisons can be self-sufficient in the sense that they produce their food and contribute to other departments. He specifically singled out inmates that are due for parole in that they can be eligible to pay for their parole if they contribute positively to prisons.

He mentioned that inmates have access to cell phones and the internet. They can see what is happening outside and possibly looking into ways of how to escape.

Mr Cloete vehemently supported the study tour to learn best practices in places such as the UK and Netherlands in order to put an end to unlawful activities.

Mr J Engelbrecht (DA) suggested that the Committee must as soon as possible do a general oversight visit to the facilities. This would be massively advantageous to all the new committee members. Reading a report does not allow one to comprehend exactly what prison conditions are. People in Correctional Services and the Department of Justice tend to speak in jargon so they can understand what it means. But if you have not been involved you will not have an idea.

Coming back to the Legacy Report, he noted three challenges. One of the problems entails the functionality within the Department of Public Works on maintenance work. When Public Works falls short of its responsibility, the Department of Correctional Services gets affected negatively.

Secondly, the Department of Justice had impeded DCS work, as in most cases there are always legislative ways that Correctional Services can reduce the number of awaiting parole cases. He questioned the pace of the consideration of parole applications. He believes there is a huge backlog problem that is man-made. The Committee needs to address this as it negatively impacts its work as well.

He supported the proposal of the JICS Bill so it becomes a separate component to DCS as that was very important. However, he urged the Committee to request that the public participation stage and other stages a Bill must undertake before enactment be skipped as bills tend to take an unreasonably long time.

He supported self-sufficiency in correctional centres as he understood that R500 a day is spent on food only. This would save the department a lot of money.

Mr Engelbrecht said that keeping someone in prison who is eligible for bail of R300 but cannot afford it, is a big burden to DCS. He proposed that there must be a way for the bail issue to be looked at. This comes against the backdrop of the bail fund proposal in the presentation.

On the study tour, Mr Engelbrecht suggested that as the new Committee, they need to determine which country to visit as each of the countries mentioned in the presentation has different systems. Netherlands is set more on rehabilitation compared to Finland and Sweden.

Ms B Diale (EFF) asked about the status of the proposed JICS Bill and the reason it is not in Parliament. She asked for clarity on the two public private partnership (PPP) correctional centre facilities in the presentation, as well as the two court judgment citations.

Mr D Klopper (DA), asked about the metric used to compare the work of this successor committee. What would be an ideal point of achievement or improvement that would signify success for the present Committee? Noting a decrease in committee meetings and oversight meetings, he questioned what the improvement would be if they were to increase Committee oversight. He asked what interventions the Committee should take considering the decreased budget and how that makes things better.

Response
The Chairperson provided the names of the PPP facilities mentioned in the presentation as Kutama Sinthumule Correctional Centre and Mangaung Correctional Centre or MCC. It is widely known because of the Thabo Bester matter.

The Chairperson gave clarity on the budget, saying that Correctional Services does not have a stagnant number of inmates. She noted how remanded detainees contributed to this and said Correctional Services does not determine how many inmates it has. There are only two facilities that have a stagnant number of inmates and do not fluctuate like the other facilities.

The Chairperson answered about oversight indicating that from 2014 to 2024, the Department of Correctional Services was clustered with the Department of Justice. The Sixth Parliament Committee was at a crossroads in dealing with oversight appropriately as they were required to sit on Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday for the Department of Justice. She understands that this led to a lack of focus or minimal focus on Correctional Centres. Therefore, the Sixth Parliament Committee as part of its recommendations in the Legacy Report stated that the two departments need to be de-clustered for Correctional Services to be given the priority it deserves.  

The Chairperson said the Sixth Parliament Committee once arrived during an emergency at one of the correctional facilities. An officer had brought in a gun for an inmate. The staff were sorting out the emergency when the Committee got inside the premises to do oversight. She then commented that it is best to do oversight before the department gives you a presentation. She holds this view on the basis that the presentation is beautiful on paper, but the conditions are deplorable. In conducting an effective oversight, it has to be unannounced. It can even take Members have a relationship with staff in the prisons so that they can get a clear picture of what is happening in the facilities daily. What you read in reports is not the true reflection of reality because staff prepare for Committee member oversight visits.

Mr Mathabathe indicated that the Chairperson had replied to most of the questions. He took the questions about interventions back to the Committee stating that this question must be answered by all of them, the how and the when. This would be determined by the Committee strategic plan. During the strategic planning session, the current Committee will have to develop interventions in terms of their oversight.

Follow-up questions
Mr G Jonas (PA) asked what sort of oversight the Committee plays and what is its position when there is incomplete DCS projects.

Mr D Moela (ANC) asked about the state of readiness for the department to take over the two correctional centre public private partnerships (PPP) as the Legacy Report mentioned that the contract is nearing an end.

Response
The Chairperson observed that the Sixth Parliament was required to invite DCS to take them through both PPP correctional centres on their state of readiness to take over. In the Committee’s upcoming oversight, they need to visit the two centres to understand the progress to date.

Mr Mathabathe highlighted that the previous Committee did have an engagement with the relevant stakeholders of the two PPP projects and they agreed to have a follow-up meeting with them to update this Committee on their readiness to take over those two centres.

Mr Mathabathe explained that at the time DSC did not have funds to build more centres so there was a joint venture between the private sector and government. In terms of the contract the private sector was to build and operate those PPP prisons and the department would have to pay the private contractor to do so. That money over time would cover the building costs as well as keeping each offender in the facility. The time frame for this project was 25 years. During the first 15 years government would pay for the building. The contract is nearing an end and DCS decided that it will not be extended at the end of 2026 and 2027.

Mr Mathabathe answered Mr Jonas that firstly the Committee needs to identify where the development is so they can attend to the delayed projects to check what the challenges are that they are experiencing. With the electronic monitoring system, the study tour is meant to help with sufficiently understanding this system.

Ms Diale asked if a bail fund was already in action within South African policies.

Mr Mathabathe replied that this was not the case. For now, it remains a suggestion open to deliberations.

Second Term Committee Programme
The Committee deliberated on this at length.

The Committee adopted the 9 and 10 July meeting minutes.

The meeting was adjourned.