Report of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services on its Visit to Prisons in the Western Cape Province.

The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services having undertaken an oversight visit to the Western Cape Province from Monday 07 May to Friday 11 May 2007, reports as follows:

A. Introduction

The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services decided to undertake an Oversight visit to the Western Cape Province from 07 – 11 May 2007.

B. Delegation

The following members of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services visited prisons in the Western Cape Province.

· Mr. DV Bloem (ANC) (Chairperson)

· Mr. NB Fihla (ANC)

· Ms ZN Nawa (ANC)

· Ms. W Ngwenya (ANC)

· Mr. LJ Tolo (ANC)

· Mr. ET Xolo (ANC)

The following Members submitted their apologies:

· Ms LS Chikunga

· Mr I Vadi

· Mr. MJ Phala

· Mr J Selfe

· Mrs. SA Seaton

C. Objectives

The objectives of the visit were to examine the following:

The Committee has since 2004 visited most of the Correctional Services regions and has identified many shortcomings within the DCS. In the hearings on the 2005/6 Annual Report of the DCS, the 2007/8 Budget of the DCS, it was established that the DCS will put in place systems, projects and initiatives to ensure an unqualified audit for the next financial year. According to the DCS, many of these initiatives are already in place. The Committee requested to be provided with timeframes for many of these projects and would like to keep a vigorous eye on the development and implementation of such activities.

With the advent of the Jali Commission report, it is important that the Committee monitor the implementation of recommendations made in the report. The Minister informed the Committee that many of the recommendations made already form part of the strategic direction of the DCS and that many plans and structures has been set in place to deal with the recommendations of the voluminous report. In line with the Presidents State-of-the-Nation-address, it is imperative that the Committee monitor the recommendations made.

The huge awaiting trial population is of grave concern to the Committee. This is not a problem that the DCS can solve alone, but rather the Intersectoral Justice Cluster. It is therefore that the Committee interacts with the Cluster in all the areas, to ensure that this problem is being addressed and that prior recommendations the Committee made with regard to awaiting trial detainees, are being implemented.

The functioning of the Correctional Supervision and Parole Boards: Many of the Parole Boards in the regions have been established as well as Chairpersons and Deputy Chairpersons has been appointed. At a meeting in November 2006, representatives from various Parole Boards appeared before the Committee. It was mentioned at this meeting that many Parole Boards has a lot of challenges when carrying out its functions. The Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, makes provision for independent Parole Boards and it is for this reason that the Committee needs to ensure that these boards are functioning.

Women and women with children in prison: This remains a serious concern for the Committee. In a report given to the Committee by the Honourable Inspecting Judge, the Committee was informed that a lot of women, especially those who are pregnant or those with children, subside to crime in order to go to prison. The idea or misconception is that conditions in prison are better than in society. This has a serious negative impact on the children of these mothers as well as on the families of these offenders.

Youth and Children in prison: The priority of the Committee remains to assist in the creation of a better environment for juveniles in conflict with the law and to ensure that children are not in prison.

The Committee visited the following prisons in the region:

· Helderstroom Correctional Centre

· Buffelsjagsrivier Correctional Centre

· Mosselbay Correctional Centre

· Knysna Correctional Centre

· George Correctional Centre

D. Findings and recommendations

The following are the findings and recommendations of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services:

1. Correctional Centre Statistics

Overcrowded conditions in prisons affect both offenders and staff working within those prisons.

A. Helderstroom Correctional Centre:

Medium Centre:

Sentenced Inmates = 1239

Maximum Centre:

Sentenced Inmates = 910

Unsentenced Inmates = 8

Ratio of Staff to Inmate:

Medium Centre: 1:25

Maximum Centre: 1:19

Staff Totals:

Medium Centre = 226

Maximum Centre = 172

Administrative Staff = 101

B. Buffelsjagsrivier Correctional Centre

Sentenced Adults = 270

Unsentenced Adults = 44

Sentenced Juveniles = 7

Unsentenced juveniles = 8

Ratio of Staff to Inmate = 1:8

Staff Totals = 82

C. Mosselbay Correctional Centre

Lock Up totals as at the time of visit = 505

Actual Percentage Accommodation = 152.56%

Sentenced Inmates:

Children = 39

Juveniles = 230

Unsentenced Inmates:

Children = 31

Juveniles = 106

D. Knysna Correctional Centre

Actual Approved Accommodation = 179

Unsentenced Inmates = 198

Sentenced Inmates = 147

Lock up Total as at the time of the visit = 345 (192.7%

Overcrowding)

Staff Totals = 97

E. George Correctional Centre

Actual Approved Accommodation = 535

Sentenced Inmates = 681

Unsentenced Inmates = 345

Lock up total as at the time of the visit = 1026 ( 191.77% Overcrowded)

Staff totals = 252

Unlike many of the Correctional Centres the Committee has visited countrywide, the centres visited during this oversight visit were not as overcrowded as others in the country.

This is a true reflection of the continuous interaction by the Department of Correctional Services with the Intersecoral Justice Cluster. The Committee has been informed that the magistrates and courts are encouraged to place unsentenced juveniles in the custody of their parents, to consider Correctional Supervision sentences, to apply Correctional supervision sentences for unsentenced inmates as well as to consider conversion of sentences. Unsentenced offenders are also encouraged to consider plea bargaining and those unsentenced offenders with further charges are often placed in single cells to relieve overcrowding at centres.

Despite the interventions from the DCS, awaiting trial detainees (ATDs) receive little, or in some instances, no assistance from the Legal Aid Board lawyers. Many of them do not know their lawyers and cannot reach these lawyers telephonically. It was stated that the lawyers are only seen at the court without prior consultation with their clients.

The DCS, as part of a Crime Prevention initiative is part of Community Policing Forums in many of the areas. This initiative has proved many successes. The DCS also has Case Flow meetings with the Department of Justice as well as joint meeting with SAPS to address the large awaiting trial population in Correctional Centres as is the case in the Boland region.

Because of the management of overcrowding, gangsterism is not very rife in the areas visited. Some of the centres do attempt to separate gangsters from other offenders, but this initiative does not receive preference as accommodation, (single cells) are not always available. The DCS has reported a few instances of gang violence such as gang fights etc, but this is managed by the staff and managers. Drug Trafficking by member of the public remains a problem as many of the centres visited are located in rural areas of Western Cape.

A variety of Development and Care programmes are offered to offenders by the DCS as part of the rehabilitation initiative and other life skills and needs based programmes are offered in partnership with external stakeholders and the Department of Labour. The importance of personal wellbeing of offenders through rehabilitation with special reference to the Offender Rehabilitation Path by ensuring that offenders are empowered, abled and skilled upon release has been highlighted by the region.

Concerns with regard to the availability of educational facilities, especially for juveniles has been raised. Most of the centres also attempt to implement Unit Management, but because of the structure of the Correctional Centres, this is not always possible. Another concern raised was that many offenders cannot undergo the training courses offered by the Department of Labour, because they do not have Identity documents. The Department of Home Affairs was to assist the DCS, but never showed up at Correctional Centres as is the case at the George Correctional Centre.

2. Correctional Supervision Parole Boards

The Portfolio Committee as part of its oversight function over the DCS, met with the Parole Boards in the different areas to investigate the composition, functioning and challenges faced by the Parole Boards.

The Parole Board of the Overberg District serves Helderstroom and Buffelsjagsrivier Correctional Centre. This Parole Board is still chaired by an official from the DCS in an acting capacity. The representatives from the South African Police Service (SAPS) as well as the Department of Justice does not always attend the hearings of the Parole Boards, but are represented at these hearings. The Helderstroom Management Area has 57 expiry cases of parole. The circumstances around these cases differ from availability of accommodation, clarification of addresses and the acceptance and support by family members. The DCS indicated that it has regular Imbizo’s to make communities aware of the role and functioning of Parole Boards.

The Parole Boards of the Southern Cape area serves Mosselbay, Knysna and George Correctional Centres. This Parole Board faces many challenges and this was put into perspective when the Committee met with management and staff of the DCS. It was stated that the Chairperson of the Parole Board is biased, racist and does not consider the recommendations of the Case Management Committees (CMC) or the profile of the offender that has been prepared by the social worker and the CMC. There is a standard format to which the DCS must comply when drawing up the profile of an offender, but profiles are often sent back by the Parole Board Chairperson. It was brought to the attention of the Committee that the Southern Cape has a backlog in terms of cases before the Parole Board, because of inconsistencies when offenders are placed on parole.

Whilst interacting with inmates, the Committee found many inmates who had to appear before the Parole Board, but did not appear as yet, mainly because of the profiles of these offenders. Section 276 (i) of the Criminal Procedure Act seems to be problematic for many of the CMC’s as it states that a person can be considered for parole after serving one sixth of the sentence, but many offenders who committed sexual offences, must first complete module three (3), which is a three year sexual offences programme.

It was also stated that there is no sound relationship between the members and the Chairperson of the Parole Board. The Chairperson often does not show up for Parole hearings or deliberately delay the proceedings of the Parole Board.

Comments and Recommendations

The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services agrees that Parole Boards should be independent from the DCS, but where it does not function properly, it should be taken to task.

The Committee has always stated that parole is not a means to relieve overcrowding and that the interest of the public should always be taken into consideration. The Committee is also of the view that parole is not automatic, but rather a privilege and that inmates should be made aware of this.

However, the Committee cannot condone improper functioning of Parole Boards, whether in terms of representation, sitting of the board or biasness.

The Portfolio Committee believes in a just and fair Parole Board and will never be soft on crime and recommends that the following be addressed immediately;

(a) That the backlog of cases is dealt with and that proper communication exists around the completion of profiles of offenders.

(b) That the Western Cape region reports the Chairperson of the Southern Cape Parole Board to the Minister for immediate intervention. If the Parole Board Chairperson does not perform or carry out functions as prescribed in the Act, strong action needs to be taken against the individual.

(c) That the composition of the Parole Board of the Overberg region be addressed and that the DCS should ensure that the officials from SAPS and Justice are present at Parole Board hearings.

(d) That mayors and counsellors in the different areas be involved in raising community awareness about parole as well as assisting in tracking addresses of offenders’ families.

(e) The Committee further recommends that staff who is serving on the Case Management Committees must be sent for in depth training as case officers. This will greatly assist Parole Boards.

3. Staff concerns

The Portfolio Committee met with both management and staff in all Correctional Centres to address key concerns and problems. Most of the problems identified were common in the region. The following are some of the key concerns highlighted by managers and staff:

3.1 Salary Adjustments and Promotions

Many concerns were raised in terms of the salary packages of staff. Staff indicated that those working in the DCS for 10 years or longer are still on the same level. A recommendation was made that the Committee should intervene to ensure that the DCS become part of the Security Cluster of Government as it forms part of the Social Cluster. Being in the Security Cluster, staff of the DCS can be on the same level as their colleagues in the Police. It was stated that an official from SAPS with 24 months service earns R 73 000 per annum, but an official from DCS with 20 years of service, does not even earn R 63 000.00 per annum.

The morale of staff is low in many areas. It was mentioned that staff terminate their services with the DCS as there is no link between bursaries, notch progression and promotion in the DCS.

It was eluded that the monies of staff on retirement, ill health retirement or who passes on, takes a very long time to get paid out. Families are left destitute and do not have places to stay.

Comments and Recommendations

(a) The Portfolio Committee recognises the implementation of the Interim promotion policy within the DCS, but recommends that much more needs to be done in terms of promotions. The lack of promotion is one of the key factors that have led to the decline in staff morale.

(b) The Portfolio Committee urges the DCS to develop a promotion policy for staff at lower levels. This will boost the morale of staff and at the same time enhance the rehabilitation of offenders.

3.2 Shortage of Professional Staff

The White Paper on Corrections highlights needs-based rehabilitation as an integral part of the sentence of an inmate. The Offender Rehabilitation Path, recently developed, forms an integral part of an offender’s period of sentence from the day of admission till release. This can be achieved with the assistance of professional staff, but in the absence of all the necessary measures and staff, such as professional staff, it is difficult to implement the tools.

Nurses, leave the Department in search of better work opportunities, some being employed abroad and some returning to the Department of Health, who offer better incentives to health care workers. The shortage of social workers is especially problematic, as it is a requirement that an inmate must consult with a social worker before appearing before the parole board. The shortage of social workers means that parole hearings are often delayed.

Comments and Recommendations

(a) The Committee is aware that a retention and recruitment strategy for all staff of DCS, not only professionals, has now been developed and approved, but calls for the immediate implementation of this strategy.

(b) The Portfolio Committee has on numerous occasions complained about the salary packages of Professionals. Those packages will not attract and retain the necessary and critical staff members.

(c) The DCS should offer market related salaries to professionals as a means to retain professional staff.

3.3 7 Day Establishment

Whilst many of the staff members understand the provisions and or procedures of the 7-day establishment, it has created many problems within their working environment. Staff do not want to work overtime as they are not sure when overtime will be phased out completely. Staff indicated that the DCS should make provision for other compensation when overtime is phased out.

The 7 Day establishment has created many staff shortages especially over weekends as staff is entitled to take time off for working on a Sunday. At the Helderstroom Correctional Centre the ratio of staff to inmate can be 3 staff to 90 inmates over weekends. These three staff members must then guard inmates, register telephone calls, register complaints, manage gates and do other administrative tasks. This does not only pose a security risk to staff, but to inmates as well.

Comments and Recommendations

(a) The Portfolio Committee recommends that staff of the DCS should be informed with regard to developments around the complete phasing in of the 7 day establishment and whether the DCS would provide for alternative benefits for staff.

3.4 Transport

Staff has complained about the provision of transport, especially for those working night duties. The Knysna Correctional Centre is located in a remote area of the town where public transport is not freely accessible. Staff often has to walk long distances to the Centre and this is extremely dangerous.

Comments and Recommendations

Whilst the Portfolio Committee recognises that the provision of transport to staff has budgetary implications, it is clear that when there is no or limited public transport systems available and when it is dangerous for staff to travel at night, the DCS should ensure that transport is available to staff to ensure their safety.

(a) The Portfolio Committee recommends that the transport policy of the DCS be revisited so as to allow transport, especially for those working night duties. This should be prioritised in the rural areas.

3.5 Staff Accommodation

Many staff members identified the need for more and decent staff accommodation. New recruits are often placed at centres far from their homebase and have to rely on official accommodation.

At the Buffelsjagsrivier Correctional Centre, staff complained about the single quarter accommodation and the fact that female and male staff members have to share shower and sanitary facilities.

Another complaint raised is the current housing allowance of

± R 400.00 per month. Many Correctional Centres are situated in well established areas and Correctional Services staff cannot afford to purchase property in close proximity to their place of work. It was even stated that a town such as Knysna is a holiday resort and it is impossible for DCS staff to compete with international investors.

Comments and Recommendations

The Committee thinks it is unacceptable that female and male officials have to share bathroom facilities.

(a) The Committee recommends that the DCS give serious attention to the above and that bathroom facilities should be erected at this Centre as soon as possible, even if it is temporary facilities, until such time permanent facilities are complete.

(b) The Committee is aware that the DCS is revisiting its policy around official accommodation and recommends that staff should be informed of any developments and or changes in this regard.

3.6 Facilities

The practicality of the White Paper has been questioned at many of the centres during this visit. Staff felt that the White Paper has been written taking into consideration New Generation Prisons. The current Correctional Centres were never build to rehabilitate offenders, but rather to detain people. These facilities are very old and definitely not conducive to rehabilitation. The implementation of Unit Management is virtually impossible in many of the centres.

Staff complained about the availability of classroom facilities at centres. Many potential students have to be turned away from attending schools, because of the availability of space.

The Committee was also informed that the DCS aims to separate first offenders from other hardened criminals as this will have a negative impact on the offender, but because of space, this initiative is not possible.

One of the Social Workers of the region has informed the Committee that she often has to offer programmes to 12 offenders in her office. This creates a security risk and it is difficult to implement the programme under this conditions.

Comments and Recommendations

Rehabilitation should be seen as the core function of the DCS. The DCS will fail dismally in fulfilling its mandate if services such as education cannot be made available to inmates. This Committee views education as an integral part of rehabilitation especially since many of inmates are illiterate, as is the instance at the Mosselbay Correctional Centre where only 12% of juveniles has completed Grade 2.

(a) The Committee strongly recommends that the DCS uses its own labour force i.e. inmates to upgrade and maintain facilities.

(b) This labour force should also put up temporary classroom facilities, in order for the DCS to accommodate more offenders in educational programmes.

3.7 New Recruits

Many new recruits/ students has been deployed to the Western Cape region. Many of these students has not been to the Training Colleges yet, but started at the Correctional Centres. Many staff has complained that it is difficult to work with the students as they do not have the basic knowledge and practice of Correctional Services. These students are often utilised as administrative staff.

The DCS informed the Committee that students are selected randomly and that it has been decided that whilst others receive their theoretical training at colleges, other will receive practical training at the centres.

E. Conclusion

The Portfolio Committee is very impressed with the management and functioning of the prisons visited in the Western Cape. The Committee is furthermore impressed with the concerted effort made by DCS staff to address problems of awaiting trial detainees and parole. The Parole Board Chairperson of the Southern Cape should be brought to task. The Committee would like to see more community involvement and awareness in DCS’ programmes and activities. Everybody needs to be brought on course to ensure rehabilitation and to assist in preventing crime. The Committee applauds the officials of the region for their hard work under very difficult circumstances.

The Committee will monitor the implementation of the recommendations in this report and the DCS should report back to the Committee within one month after tabling of this report.

________________________________________

D V Bloem

CHAIRPERSON: PC on Correctional Services

________________________________________

Date