North West and Mpumalanga Visit Committee Report: discussion

Correctional Services

11 March 2005
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

CORRECTIONAL SERVICES PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
11 March 2005
NORTH WEST AND MPUMALANGA VISIT COMMITTEE REPORT: DISCUSSION

Chairperson

: Mr D Bloem (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Report on visits to North West and Mpumalanga prisons [available shortly at

Committee Reports]

SUMMARY
Members suggested amendments to the Committee Report on their visit to prisons in North West and Mpumalanga provinces between 26 January and 5 March. The report will be adopted on 15 March. The Committee was particularly concerned about coverage of the release of Awaiting Trial Detainees unable to pay bail, and the need for compulsory education of child prisoners. Members also expressed concern about the salaries of legal aid representatives, the ratio of prison staff to inmates, and keeping children in prisons.

MINUTE
The Committee went through the Committee Report and amendments were suggested. The Chairperson said the report would only be adopted on 15 March after the necessary amendments had been effected. There would also be a discussion on minimum sentencing on that day. The Report on the investigation into the death of three inmates at Pollsmoor in a fire, would not be discussed since the Committee had already made its recommendations.

Discussion
Mr S Mahote (ANC) reported that the visit with the Legal Aid Boards and Independent Prison Visitors (IVPs) to discuss staff concerns had not occurred. He suggested that the Committee’s recommendation to reduce overcrowding should be rephrased to read "all inmates with fines less then R1 000 who cannot afford payment should be released". The Chairperson said that this was debatable, and that such offenders had to be categorised. Mr Mohate suggested "those with minor offences". Ms S Rwexana (ANC) asked whether the Committee could stipulate who should be released and make recommendation since there was legislation to that effect.

Ms M Mokgate (ANC) was of the opinion that the R75 per client paid to legal aid representatives was inadequate. This could be the reason why some did not attend to their clients. She recommended an investigation into the matter.

A Member suggested a monitoring process to ascertain the truth of complaints that legal aid representatives did not visit their clients in prison. The Chairperson suggested the heads of prisons keep a record of legal aid members who visit their facilities.

Ms Rwezana felt that the recommended bail for the release of Awaiting Trial Detainees (ATDs), especially juveniles, should be less than R1 000 and not R1 500. She also recommended a rephrasing of the statement that "there was no fixed ratio of staff to inmates". She believed that there were defined ratios but these had been affected by overcrowding. The Chairperson said bail of under R1 500 was a way to accommodate the increases in bail amounts for minor offences by magistrates from R1 000 to R1 200, and also to make allowance for any subsequent increases. Mr Mohote agreed that it should be R1 500 and lower.

Mr J Selfe (DA) was uncertain whether the Criminal Procedure Act 57 of 1977 made provision for ATDs release back into the community. He recommended that the report simply state that a magistrate, on application, had to decide whether a person be remanded or be released on bail. The Committee could put in a request for the review of the provisions of s63A of the Act. The Chairperson agreed.

Mr Fihla (ANC) said the Committee needed to stipulate the type of crime committed, but the emphasis had to be on those that had committed minor offences.

Ms Rwexana said the Committee had to discuss with magistrates whether bail amounts were likely to increase. She wanted clarity on whether the Committee had the power to make recommendations that superseded the law.

Mr Selfe cautioned against getting fixated on the bail amount because ultimately the magistrate decided. They should instead look at circumstances under which bail was granted. This should be informed by the nature of the offence, its gravity, and the likelihood of the person re-offending while out on bail.

Mr Fihla reminded Members that the recommendation for the release of ATDs had been informed by the need to reduce overcrowding. There was no need to hold persons with minor offences. The Committee’s proposals and recommendations might very well inform Parliament to change the law. The Chairperson agreed and said the objectives had to be reviewed.

Mr Selfe said the ratio of staff to inmates (1: 100) had to be qualified - none of those ratios could be as low as 1: 20. He also asked if the marked posts had been advertised.

Ms Rwexana pointed out the auxiliary nurses could not stand in for professional nurses who had gone on training.

The Chairperson said it was not appropriate to recommend an upward adjustment of salaries of correctional services officials because of its implication for the Department. Mr Fihla agreed. The Chairperson also suggested that the agreement that the Department report on salaries and ensure that their staff earned comparable salaries to other security establishment staff, be deleted.

Mr Selfe asked whether there would be a presentation by the Department on the provision of educational facilities and training to offenders. The Chairperson said he had asked the Department to present on its programmes. Educational facilities were a priority, but in his opinion, they would not have major financial implications.

Ms Rwexana felt it did not make sense to recruit within a particular management area, but that it should be more open. The Chairperson agreed.

Mr Fihla said the deductions from staff salaries for a recreational trust, which had been stopped, had to be reviewed and put into effect.

The Chairperson suggested that the danger allowance be paid to staff working with dangerous ATDs, as well as those working with maximum sentence offenders. Mr Mohote reported that danger allowances fell under the control of the SA Police Service (SAPS), and were not meant for correctional services staff.

Mr Selfe said Section 6 of the Schools Act needed to be applied to children serving prison time. Correctional services officials in charge of children of school-going age that did not send them to school were breaking the law. The Chairperson responded that it was not possible to put all child prisoners in school. The provisions of Section 19 of the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998, emphasised that where practical, all child prisoners must be allowed access to educational programmes. Mr Fihla said most of the prisons lacked educational facilities and the Department had started a programme to deal with the situation. However, he was of the opinion that the Department of Social Welfare should take responsibility for children in prisons. The Chairperson said where facilities were available, learning had to be made compulsory.

Ms Rwexana suggested amendments to Section 6 of the Schools Act and Section 19 of the Correctional Services Act so that these were aligned. The Chairperson said the Department of Education should investigate and implement issues concerned with education. A Member suggested that they emphasise that there should be compliance that children should not be imprisoned but be put in Places of Safety. Mr Fihla and Ms Rwexana felt that the Committee should ensure enforcement of the law that children in correctional facilities, aged between age 5 and 15, should be in school.

Me Selfe said that both the Schools Act and the Correctional Services Act provided for compulsory education of child prisoners. The Committee should urge the Department to co-operate with other departments to ensure that the provisions of the law were adhered to, and request that the Director-General report on implementation.

The Chairperson hoped that the proposals and recommendations contained in the final report would be addressed with immediate effect. Thirteen stakeholders would be invited to public hearings on the budget on 5 April, and there would be a follow-up meeting on the budget with the Department.

The meeting was 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.

Share this page: