C-Max Prison Report: briefing by Minister of Correctional Services

Correctional Services

20 February 2007
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

CORRECTIONAL SERVICES PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE, with SECURITY AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE - JOINT MEETING
20 February 2007
C-MAX PRISON REPORT: BRIEFING BY MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES

Co Chairpersons
: Mr DV Bloem (ANC) and Kgoshi L Mokoena (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Presentation by the Ministerial Task Team to the Portfolio Committee

SUMMARY
The Minister of Correctional Services and his Task Team briefed the Committee on the circumstances and findings of the escape from C-Max Prison of Ananias Mathe.The circumstances were fully set out, and it was noted that either Mathe managed to find his own route out, or, less likely, that he was in fact driven out of the prison with the assistance of a number of authorities. The circumstances that aided his escape pointed to gross negligence on the part of a number of officials, combined with lack of observance of protocols. The entries into the journals and registers also indicated that proper procedures in reporting and following up on the matter were not followed and there was a possibility that the records had been falsified in an attempt to cover up, but this possibility was still under investigation.

Members raised a number of questions on the method of escape, the lack of staff at every point in the facility, the reasons why Mathe was at C-Max prison, and whether there had been tampering with restraints. The interviews and polygraph tests were questioned, as well as the forensic tests conducted on the window and bed-frame. Further questions examined the reasons why the window had subsequently been sealed, why the five-pillar security plan that should have been in place was not observed, why three Towers were not manned, and what steps were to be taken against the officials concerned. The Committee recommended that immediate charges be laid against those who had failed to do their jobs. The matter would be fully discussed by the Committee at its next meeting. 

MINUTES
C-Max Prison Report and escape of Ananias Mathe: Briefing by Minister of Correctional Services
Mr Ngconde  Balfour, Minister of Correctional Services reported that the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) faced many challenges after adoption of the White Paper, and it was necessary for people to understand how the system worked. It was necessary also to boost confidence in the Justice Department's operation of the parole system and parole supervision. Parole boards worked independently of the Minister’s office. There was also some contention regarding Meritorious Awards, which were also independent of his office, and were governed by the legislation.

The Chairperson noted that these matters would be discussed by the Committee.

Minister Balfour continued that one approach to the challenge involved re-examining and  reclassifying prisons. The Department had not done this before he came into office. When he heard of the escape of Ananias Mathe he was shocked for two reasons. Firstly, Mathe should not have been in C-Max, as it was for sentenced prisoners. Secondly when he visited the prison he was disturbed by the lack of precautions in light of his profile. He had therefore decided to set up a task team to explore these and other issues. He noted that since Mathe was still awaiting trial this affected his relationship with the justice system. There were some areas upon which he could not report in full as the task team were still investigating.

Mr G Engle, Ministerial Task Team Leader stated that there were three agencies looking at the integrity of the state organs, checking service delivery and uncovering any misconduct. His presentation detailed the findings.

The Task Team had thoroughly investigated the circumstances that led to the escape of Ananias Mathe, using the interviews conducted with inmates and members of the prison service, including appropriate polygraph tests. They made findings and gave recommendations on possible disciplinary steps, criminal charges, and improvements to physical security and monitoring and internal controls. The Task Team was to submit an interim report on their findings and recommendations to the Minister of Correctional Services by 04 December 2006 and to submit a final report no later than 31 January 2007. The Task Team comprised members of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), South African Police Services (SAPS) and the Department of Correctional Services. The methodology split the team into groups. The first was the Investigative team, which conducted interviews and obtained statements from DCS officials and inmates, as well as conducting polygraph tests and lifestyle analysis of the officials on duty on the day of the escape. Secondly the Security Systems and Audit Team had conducted a security appraisal of the state of the security at the C-Max Prison, using other prisons such Kokstad (Ebongweni) and Bloemfontein (Manguang) prisons as a benchmark. The Policy and Standing Operational Procedure Team had identified the relevant policies and procedures of officials of C-Max Prison.

The scope of the investigations was focused on the events prior to the day of the escape, the events of the day, and any possible help after the escape. Their techniques included 40 structured interviews, 29 sworn statements, lifestyle analysis of DCS officials, polygraph tests of some of the officials and a communication analysis.

Prior to Mathe's escape on 18 November 2006, he had already made four attempts to escape. It was noted that the profile of Mathe had to be understood and that the investigation team believed that his modus operandi had not changed throughout. Mathe had something of a history and was known to have little fear.

On 13 November 2006 an official was called to the cell that was then housing Mathe. Because Mathe had damaged Cell 49 in section A6, the instruction was given to move him to Cell 4. The following morning a search was conducted of Cell 49 and it was discovered that the window was loose. This information was supposedly reported to the security manager. If the officials were following procedural protocols the incident had to be reported, but no record of the report could be found. Telephone records indicated that telephone calls made by Mathe did not correlate with with the prescribed telephone recording register that should apply to all prisoners.

On the day of the escape there were four officials who were responsible for the daily routine of the prisoners between 07:30 and 15:00. The first watch shift changes ran from 14:00 to 22:00, and the second from 22:00 to 06:00. Personnel were distributed throughout the prison. There was a member in charge, one at the main gate (portal area), someone at Sections A5, A6, A1, A2, A3 and A4, and personnel at Tower Posts two and five, the A catwalk had one official, and one person was at the main gate of Tower five’s access point. The unmanned posts were Watch Towers 1, 3 and 4, whilst the C catwalk was patrolled by the same person who was patrolling the A catwalk.

Mathe’s escape was discovered at approximately 21:50 by the A catwalk official who noticed the cell monitoring window had been removed and was lying next to its opening. It was noted that the escape must have taken place earlier. The investigative team discovered, from the statement taken, and in light of the shift changes, that this should have been discovered earlier by the patrolling officer. Afterwards the official who noted the escape did not comply with procedure, but had been unable to take a polygraph test. Officials had discovered the broken window leading from the catwalk on to the roof.  rope and iron bars were discovered in close proximity to Tower 2. The two officials on duty were not supposed to be working that day, and the change in the shift that related to the fact that they were working had not followed the correct procedure. Both of these officials were in critical positions in relation to the escape.

The task team found that the probable route of escape that Mathe took was to forcibly remove the cell monitoring window, and then either to force himself through the opening on to the catwalk, or to be assisted in being pulled up by someone else to the catwalk. He then moved down the catwalk towards the door that led to the roof of the exercise area, where he removed a number of louvre window panes and climbed though the window frame. Mathe then moved over the roof of the exercise area, jumped on to the ground and headed towards Tower 2. He probably scaled the perimeter of the wall close to Tower 2 and/or exited through an unmanned Tower 2. He made his escape over the chain link fence and was picked up by a getaway vehicle in close proximity to the prison. An alternative escape route that could have taken place would have included a number of helpers. The Task Team believed it was more likely that his assistance was fortuitously facilitated by the unintentional gross negligence and non-compliance. The alternative possibility of being directly aided would mean that Mathe would have been removed from his cell, possibly by the official in charge of Section A6, and would then have been escorted from Section A6 past  all of  Sections A5 through to A1. He would then have had to be loaded on to a vehicle at the portal main gate, or escorted through the C-Max perimeter exit point. If he was escorted on foot he would have been picked up by a vehicle in the main parking area. If this had happened, he would then have been offloaded close to the correctional centre or the city centre, where he would have been picked up by a getaway vehicle. The Task Team emphasised that it believed that this scenario would have involved too many people, and therefore regarded it as merely a possibility.
 
Factors that contributed to the successful escape of Mathe included the security breaches, mishandling of the keys to Tower 2, and shift exchange protocol that was not adhered to. It was noted that entries into security journals such as the search and telephone register were in non-compliance with set institutional orders, that there was stereotyped entries and that the entry times and the dates of the actual entries did not correspond with each other. There was also a lack of managerial supervision. Other external factors were the heavy rainfall on the day, and the rain, together with the broadcast of a sporting event meant that both visibility and audibility were hampered. The critical areas such as the catwalk passages, the towers and the perimeter lacked any sort of electronic detection.

The Task Team had therefore concluded the delay in discovering the escape and raising of the alarm arose through non-compliance with procedural rules, and failure of the responsible official to conduct proper and regular visits to all sections and posts. Furthermore, officials did not follow procedure regarding shift change, and failed to inspect the damage to the window of his cell. The  official on duty at the catwalk failed to perform his duties properly, which resulted in the late discovery of the escape. There were fraudulent entries and non-compliance in regard to the completion of the Daily Activity Registers, Section Journal, Movement Control Registers and the Head of Centre Journal, which could be viewed an a deliberate attempt to cover up the discovery of the escape.

The Task Team recommended that internal disciplinary action should be instituted for the non-compliance with duties that aided Mathe’s escape, that a team should immediately be installed to assess and oversee the viability of the latest technological security system and security organisational models, as well as their implementation, that the NIA and SAPS further investigate the possible corruption and bribery of the DCS officials who could have aided in Mathe’s escape,  and that SAPS pursue criminal charges against the DCS officials who, through their negligence, aided in the escape.

Mr Arnold Boonstra, Investigating Officer then commented that in the three years that he had known Mathe he had come to realise that he was intelligent and had a deceptive air of innocence that could lull a person into letting down his guard. He was able also to use the system to his advantage.

A member of the Task Team commented that it should be noted that C-Max Prison was an old facility that should not be compared to other modern facilities. It was an anomaly to discover that Mathe was housed in C-Max, given his history of prior escapes, but it should be remembered that sometimes the South African Police Service (SAPS) specifically requested that C-Max Prison housed dangerous criminal.

Discussion
Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) asked why did that specific tower have only one person to patrol and stand guard. He enquired specifically whether this was through lack of staff or confusion of duties.

The Minister said that the Department was recruiting members all the time, but there remained a problem in deploying the staff and placing them in the wrong areas. He also made mention that many of the staff were primarily working for financial gain from weekend and overtime work.

Ms S Seaton (IFP) wondered why Mathe was not taken to the Kokstad facility. She also enquired whether it was feasible for Mathe to have slipped through the bars across his window.

The Task Team noted that Mathe was able to endure considerable of pain, which would have enabled him to get through the bars.

Mr J Selfe (DA) asked if the investigating team found how Mathe was able to remove both his leg shackles and handcuffs.

Mr Engle said that the forensic investigation revealed no tampering with the leg shackles and handcuffs.

Mr Selfe said that under the previous Minister there were allegedly specific programmes designed to prevent such escapes, since recommendations and assurances had been approved by the Committee. He asked why they were not in place.

A Committee Member asked how the interviews and polygraph tests were chosen.

Mr Engle noted that in terms of the polygraph tests, there was a preliminary investigation that took place. An integrated team had then looked at the discrepancies, and taken statements. Many officials claimed that they could not remember what happened that day. Polygraph testing was not used from initially, but when it was used it was with consent, and sometimes two tests were given to the same person so that the team could remain objective  and give the person taking the test the benefit of the doubt.

Mr L Tolo (ANC) asked how conditions could be improved so that another escape of this magnitude did not happen.

The Task Team answered that the results of the profiling of dangerous criminals should result in better management between departments. It was important to remember that the weaknesses discovered during the course of the investigation would be addressed.

Mr M Shah (DA) asked if the task team conducted a forensic test on the window that was used for Mathe's escape.

The Task Team said that forensic reports indicated that there was a strong possibility that Mathe did go through that window.

Mr Shah enquired if the task team had investigated the allegations that Mathe was connected to the underworld crime environment.

Mr Boonstra said that Mathe had been linked to a crime syndicate. Mathe was considered to be a very valuable asset because he was very good at his activities. His crime boss had been arrested and sentenced to five years imprisonment, and 29 other members of the syndicate had been arrested.

Mr Shah asked when the Committee would receive a detailed report regarding the investigation of the escape.

The Chairperson replied that he was under the impression that this was the final report and that no other report was expected.

Mr M Phala (ANC) found it difficult to believe that Mathe could have passed his head through the bars of the windows. He was concerned that Mathe used lack of proper security at the C-Max facility to his advantage.

Co-Chairperson Mokoena noted that after Mathe escaped it was seen that the window through which he escaped was sealed with cement. He asked why this had been done and apparently done only to that window.

The Task Team answered that there was some confusion. After the escape the officials at the prison decided that they had to do something about the window in order to prevent another escape. The maintenance team were informed that they must change the bars on the windows, but they apparently misunderstood, and cemented up that window before the official supervising  had managed to stop them and correct the misunderstanding. It was reiterated that there was no intention to cover up any evidence.

Mr Tolo asked why the Minister was not informed of the fact that Mathe was housed in C-Max.

The Minister stated that he did not have to be informed of the day-to-day activities of the correctional facilities.

Mr Selfe asked whether the discovery was made on the earlier or the later shift. He also enquired   where the two officials who had swapped their shift were during the time of the escape.

Mr Engle replied that one official was in Tower 2 and the other was the member in charge for the day.

Mr Selfe said that he would like to know why the five pillar security plan that was supposed to be implemented was not in place.

The Chairperson replied that he had noted that there were supposed to be structures in place. It was the responsibility of the Committee to follow up on recommendations and it was their fault that there were no structures in place.

A Committee member asked why the Towers 1, 3 and 4 were not manned as they should have been.

The Minister responded that this was due to shortage of personnel. The colleges were recruiting to their full capacity but it was not enough.

Ms Ngwenya commented that she was not satisfied with the explanation given regarding the window and the lack of guard at the two Towers.

Mr Shah asked why it was necessary to show the Committee pictures of Mathe. He was concerned with how the Minister was going to deal with the officials who directly or indirectly were responsible for the escape of Mathe.

Mr M Phala (ANC) enquired why C-Max Prison was not downgraded.

The Minister answered that the state of the building would have warranted a downgrade several years ago. However, there was a problem in Kokstad which impacted upon this facility. The lack of facilities and other problems in Kokstad had led to prisoners being sent to C-Max.

A Committee member wanted to how responsive Mathe was to questions after he was rearrested.

Mr Boonstra stated that Mathe was able to manipulate the system, and was very unresponsive because he insisted that he would only give a statement if he was uncuffed.

Mr Phala asked where the window of the cell was, and how Mathe managed to hoist himself up to reach the window.

The Task Team answered that there was a table in the cell, which Mathe used to hoist himself up to the window.

A member asked if forensic tests were done on the material used for the prison beds, since a piece of the bed was fashioned into a hook that Mathe used to climb over the wall.

The Task Team replied they were still waiting for the result.

Kgoshi Mokoena mentioned that it was very interesting that Mathe had chosen a tower that was manned.

Mr Engle stated that Tower 2 was the most strategically placed of all the towers

Co-Chairman Bloem believed that the non-compliance with procedure was a fraudulent attempt to deliberately cover up the escape. He also stated that he disagreed that C-Max's problems were attributable to the age of the facility as humans ultimately guided the prison. Those who failed to do their jobs should be charged with immediate effect, and not be given suspension with pay, as their actions had allowed a dangerous criminal to roam freely.

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: