Questions and Replies

Reply:

Emergency Support Team (EST) from the Limpopo, Mpumalanga and North-West Region were deployed to work at the KwaZulu-Natal Reginal office.

(a) The deployment commenced on 24 April 2020 and ended on 22 May 2020.

(b)(i - iv)

EXPENDITURE	AMOUNT
Subsistence & Travel (S&T)	R78 721.04
Fuel	R30 556.45
Overtime	R92 317.06
Toll gates	R2 912.89
Standby allowances	R40 698.00
Public holidays	R33 229.52
Total Sunday allowance	R20 762.37
Accommodation	R855 653.00
TOTAL DEPLOYMENT COST	R1 154 850.33

END

Reply:

The total number of parolees in the South African system as on 29 February 2020 is as follows:

Probationers	Parolees	Awaiting Trial Person (ATPs)	Total
7 371	45 914	1252	54537

END

Reply:

1. A total of 411 Parolees were rearrested during the 2019/20 financial year for offences relating to Gender Based Violence from 01 April 2019 to 31 March 2020 and is indicated per Region in the tables below:

Region	Number of rearrested parolees for offences related to gender based violence during the 2019/20 financial year
Eastern Cape	81
Free State/Northern Cape	106
Gauteng	17
KwaZulu-Natal	48
Limpopo, Mpumalanga North West	105
Western Cape	54
Total	411

(2)(a) Seven Halfway Houses (7)

REGION	(2)(a) NUMBER OF HALFWAY HOUSES	(2)(b) AMOUNT ALLOCATED PER HALF WAY HOUSE
FS/NC (Free State)	1	R480 000,00
GP	1	R396 000,00
KZN	1	R496 200,00
LMN (North West)	1	R360 000,00
WC	3	R384 000,00
		R384 000,00
		R438 048,00
TOTAL	7	R2 938 248.00

END

Reply:

The number of matters that were lodged and commenced against the State since the announcement and implementation of the national lockdown regulation aimed at curbing of the spread of Covid-19 in March 2020 amounts to 116 in total. It is worth mentioning that 80/116 matters (92%) of these matters were populated between State Attorney in Pretoria with fifty-one (51) cases and State Attorney in Cape Town with twenty-nine (29) matters.

The Office of the Solicitor-General is tallying the total costs and expenses in relation to these matters by collating information from all thirteen (13) Offices of the State Attorney. However, for the period under review, the State has paid invoices (inclusive of fees and disbursements) to the value of R3 462 327.00. The Offices of State Attorney are yet to complete the quantification process of the costs involved as they are currently segmenting the matters in terms of those rendered by Junior and Senior counsel on pro-bono (free of charge) basis.

I am unfortunately unable to furnish the Honourable Member with information, in relation to the cumulative amount of cost orders issued against the State, due to the following:

a) Matters that are still serving in court and are yet to be finalised (sub-judice);

b) Invoices to matters where services have been rendered but accounts are yet to be submitted by the legal services providers;

c) Matters which were not opposed by the State and to which no costs orders have been made and resulting in savings to the fiscus;

d) Matters that were in terms of section 13 of the disaster management regulations finalised either via mediation or arbitration to which no costs orders relate; and

e) Matters where adverse costs orders were issued against the state but in relation to which matters the accounts by third parties are yet to be rendered to the State and/or taxed.

To the extent that the Honourable Member also requires information on the disclosure of names of the recipients and the quantum payable to such recipients, I shall revert with the answer once legal clarification in relation to the issues of Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) and other legal prescripts have been clarified.

Reply:

1. (i) Reducing the secondary victimization or trauma of Gender-Based Violence

(GBV) survivors is a key pillar of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, as well as the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)’s interventions to combat GBV. To reduce secondary victimization in court processes, the NPA has specifically included a module on social context sensitivity awareness in their training curricula dealing with GBV and Femicide related matters.

Victims of GBV must always be encouraged to speak out and report these offences, as this is the only way in which Criminal Justice System (CJS) can deal with the matter and ensure that justice is done. It requires laying a charge with the South African Police Service (SAPS), followed by prosecutor-guided investigations and related court processes. Victims of domestic violence and harassment can also apply for protection orders at their nearest court.

No two (2) GBV cases are ever exactly the same and therefore each case is handled on its merits, circumstances and complexities.

Another key pillar of our interventions is the provision of support services to victims. Dedicated Sexual Offences Courts make use of a number of interventions to reduce secondary trauma for victims, such as preparation services, pre-and post-trial trauma debriefing services, intermediary services, private testifying room/closed court services (via a closed-circuit TV system) and private waiting rooms for adult and child victims.

For victims of sexual offences, the Thuthuzela Care Centres (TCCs) have specifically been established as a mechanism to minimize secondary victimization, as the objective of the TCC model is to provide all related services (medical, psycho-social, statement taking, follow-up services) at a 24-hour One Stop Centre. There are currently 55 TCC-sites nationally, with six (6) additional sites in the process of being added to the list.

(ii) Each GBV matter and sexual offences matter is dealt with on its own merits.

They do generally take longer as they are often more complex in nature. As soon as the SAPS present a docket to the NPA, the prosecution arm is set in motion. Should the evidence contained in a docket prove a prima facie case against the alleged accused, such person will be prosecuted, either by putting a charge to the accused or by diverting the matter away from the court process, depending on the merits and the severity of the charge. In addition, it is worth noting that prosecutors, specifically in dealing with serious/contentious offences (as is the case with all GBVF matters), are required to have detailed consultations with witnesses to follow the court preparation program before they are to testify in court. These steps are vital for a successful prosecution, but they do, unfortunately, take time.

2. (i) The provision of support services and court preparation ensure well prepared

witnesses for court, which also minimizes the impact of secondary victimization. Effective preparation is more crucial when dealing with child witnesses and severely traumatized witnesses. The NPA has therefore appointed Court Preparation Officers who, inter alia, inform witnesses of the court environment, legal processes and terms. Their fears and concerns are addressed, and court preparation aims to reduce secondary victimization. In court, the victim has to once again relay their version of the events, and then they are also exposed to cross examination by the defense and questions from the bench. Service providers, and those within the NPA environment, prosecutors and TCC staff, are specifically trained and encouraged to minimize secondary victimisation, i.e. to minimize consultations, appoint one specific prosecutor to deal with a victim (which helps with rapport building, especially with younger victims), keep the victim updated as to the status of the case and to ensure that court preparation is provided, and that the necessary counselling has been offered.

Prosecutors also have a duty to inform victims of the various protective measures provided for in the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977, i.e. section 153, which provides a court to sit in camera, section 154, which prevents the personal details of the victim to be made public, section 158, which allows for adult persons to testify through as CCTV camera and section 170A, which allows, by application, for the use of an intermediary for persons under the biological or mental age of 18.

3. (ii) Victims of GBV are always encouraged to speak out as it the only way that we

can put a stop to GBV and to ensure that victims access support services. A lot is being done to prevent secondary victimisation in the broader criminal justice system. One of the principles that guides the implementation of the National Strategic Plan on GBV and Femicide’s programmes are a human rights-based, victim-centred, survivor-focused approach to the provision of services that reaches all, regardless of financial means. A victim-centred approach is the systematic focus on the needs and concerns of a victim to ensure the compassionate and sensitive delivery of services in a non-judgmental manner. It seeks to minimize traumatisation associated with criminal justice processes by providing support of victim advocates and service providers, empowering survivors as engaged participants in the process, and providing survivors an opportunity to play a role in seeing their offenders brought to justice.

There are also structures which aim to further assist and support specific vulnerable groups, such as victims of trafficking in persons and members of the LGBTI community when they are victims of GBV.

New legislation is also underway to further strengthen the rights and protection of victims of GBV. The Domestic Violence Amendment Bill is one of a package of three legislative interventions which are intended to contribute to the fight against the scourge of gender-based violence and femicide. The two other Bills seek to amend the statutory provisions in the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 and the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1997, dealing with bail and sentencing, as well as the National Register for Sex Offenders. Appropriate legislation to reduce and prevent GBV is of critical importance. It is envisaged that these Bills will be introduced into Parliament shortly and will go a long way in further combating and preventing all forms of GBV.

In addition to the legislation being prepared by my Department, the Department of Social Development is also working on a Victim Support Services Bill. The Bill was gazetted on 17 July 2020 and recognizes that victims experience secondary victimisation and therefore creates a prohibition against such. It provides that secondary victimisation needs to be prevented at all times through service provision and stipulates the various services to be provided to victims.

Reply:

1. (a) The Special Investigating Unit (SIU) has informed me that six (6) proclamations were published, and they mandated the SIU to investigate matters in respect of the National Department of Rural Development and Land Reform.

(b) i) and ii)

Proclamation R8 of 2011: National Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (Land Reform): GG: 34031 of 18 February 2011

Schedule to the Proclamation

The application for and award of grants, the transfer of land or the payment of funds to beneficiaries and the administration thereof by the Department, under the Department's Land Reform Programme, in a manner that was (a) contrary to applicable (i) legislation; (ii) manuals, guidelines, practice notes and instructions issued by the National Treasury; or (iii) manuals, policies, procedures, instructions, prescripts or practices of, or applicable to the Department; or (b) fraudulent. The incurrence of (a) irregular expenditure; (b) fruitless and wasteful expenditure; or (c) expenditure not due, owing and payable, in relation to payments made, land transferred or grants awarded to beneficiaries, suppliers, contractors or service providers, in or relating to the Department’s Land Reform Programme

Proclamation R53 of 2012: National Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and its agents (Land Restitution): GG: 35691 of 21 September 2012

Schedule to the Proclamation

The payment of advances, subsidies or compensation to claimants in respect of the restitution of a right in land in terms of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994 (Act No. 22 of 1994) to persons who were not entitled to receive such advances, subsidies or compensation; or in a manner which was contrary to applicable legislation, manuals, policies, procedures, instructions, prescripts and/or practices of, or which were applicable to the Department; or fraudulent. Maladministration of the affairs of the Department by officials or employees or their agents in respect of the payment of advances, subsidies or compensation to claimants in respect of the restitution of a right in land in terms of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994 (Act No. 22 of 1994), including the causes of such maladministration.

Proclamation R7 of 2014, amended by R599 of 2015 and R32 of 2017: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (formerly known as the Department of Land Affairs) in its national department, its provincial departments, its trading entities and their respective agencies (herein referred to as the DRDLR) and the State Information Technology Agency (PTY) Ltd (herein referred to as SITA): GG: 37346 dated 14 February 2014; GG: 38985 dated 10 July 2015; GG: 41165 date 6 October 2017

Schedule to the Proclamation

Any reference to (a) "contracting" includes but is not limited to, any negotiation processes involving a contract, the conclusion and signing of a contract and any novation, renewal, extension or amendment of the contract; (b) "the ICT systems/projects" means (i) the e-Cadastre project and the e-Cadastre system for the DRDLR; (ii) the Deeds Registries System for the DRDLR; (iii) the Enterprise Architecture product for the DRDLR; (iv) the Regularity Impact Assessment for the DRDLR; (v) a BPR project for the DRDLR; and (vi) the back scanning of records of the DRDLR into microfilm images for the DRDLR database individually or collectively, as the context may require or as may be applicable; (c) "the institutions" means the DRDLR and the SITA, individually or collectively, as the context may require or as may be applicable; and (d) "the institutions' suppliers and service providers" includes any consultants, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers or service providers of the institutions. Theft, fraud, corruption or maladministration in the affairs of the DRDLR in relation to the lodging and processing of deeds on the Deeds Registration System of the Pretoria, Johannesburg, Cape Town, Vryburg and Bloemfontein Deeds Registries or in the processes of requesting for or the giving-out of deeds information, in a manner that was contrary to applicable (a) legislation; or (b) manuals, guidelines, policies, procedures, practice notes, instructions, prescripts or practices of or applicable to the DRDLR including the causes of such fraud, corruption or maladministration and any loss, damage or prejudice actually or potentially suffered by the DRDLR or the State. The procurement of and contracting for the ICT systems/projects or any goods, works or services in respect of the ICT systems/projects by or on behalf of the Institutions and payments made in relation thereto, in a manner that was (a) not fair, equitable, transparent, competitive or cost-effective; or (b) contrary to applicable (i) legislation; (ii) manuals, guidelines, practice notes or instructions issued by the National Treasury or the applicable Provincial Treasuries; or (iii) manuals, guidelines, codes, policies, procedures, instructions or practices of, or applicable to the Institutions; Losses or prejudice actually or potentially suffered by the Institutions as a result of the mismanagement of the assets, finances or other resources in respect of the ICT systems/projects, including any (a) overspending, mismanagement, misspending or misappropriation of funds; (b) payments which were made to agents of the Institutions or the Institutions' suppliers and service providers (i) prematurely; (ii) despite non-performance, uncertified, incomplete or poor quality performance or defective performance; (iii) despite late performance; or (iv) in excess of amounts agreed or tendered or at rates disproportionate to the value, nature or scope of goods, works or services supplied or rendered; ( c) payments made for goods not supplied or works or services not rendered; or (d) duplication of payments. Losses or prejudice actually or potentially suffered by the Institutions as a result of unlawful conduct or irregular practices of the personnel or agents of the Institutions, the Institutions' suppliers and service providers or third parties in respect of the ICT systems/projects, including any premature, false or inflated claims for payment. The incurrence of unauthorised expenditure, irregular expenditure, fruitless and wasteful expenditure or expenditure not due, owing and payable, as a result of payments which were made by the Institutions to the agents of the Institutions, the Institutions' suppliers and service providers or third parties for or in respect of the ICT systems/projects. Fraud, corruption or maladministration regarding the affairs of the Institutions in respect of the ICT systems/projects in respect of (a) budget preparations, the allocation, implementation or use of the applicable budgets or budget items, including but not limited to any overspending or misappropriation of the applicable budgets or budgeted items; (b) supply chain management policies; (c) procurement processes; (d) contract management, including but not limited to (i) contracting for the ICT systems/projects or any goods, works or services in respect of the ICT systems/projects; (ii) the monitoring, management or verification of goods delivery, services rendered or works performed or any failure in this regard; (ii) the monitoring, management or verification of the quality and /or quantity of goods delivered, services rendered or works performed or any failure in this regard; (iv) any breach of contract, late performance, enforcement of contracts or cancellation of contracts; or (e) logistics management, including the causes of such fraud, corruption or maladministration and any loss, damage or prejudice actually or potentially suffered by the Institutions or the State. The failure of the Institutions to (a) recover premature or excessive payments made to agents of the Institutions or the Institutions' suppliers and service providers; or (b) collect monies due, owing and payable to the Institutions, for or in respect of the ICT systems/projects. Unlawful or irregular conduct by agents of the Institutions, the Institutions' personnel, suppliers and service providers or third parties relating to any one or more of the allegations set out above, and any loss, damage or prejudice actually or potentially suffered by the State or Institutions as a result thereof.

Proclamation R24 of 2017: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform: GG 41000 dated 24 July 2017

Schedule to the Proclamation

The acquisition by the Department of the Bekendvlei, Nirwanda, Wonderhoek, Mont Piquet and Appelkloof farms, Mikes Chicken (Pty) Ltd, immovable assets and animals for Project Harmonie, Project Uitkyk and Project Dipalemo in terms of the Department's Proactive Land Acquisition Strategy, and the identification, selection and appointment of strategic partners and beneficiaries for such farms in a manner that was (a) not fair, competitive, transparent, equitable or cost-effective; (b) contrary to applicable (i) legislation; (ii) manuals, guidelines, practice notes, circulars or instructions issued by the National Treasury; or (iii) manuals, policies, procedures, prescripts, instructions or practices of or applicable to the Department; (c) conducted by or facilitated through the improper or unlawful conduct of (i) officials of the Department; or (ii) any other person or entity, to corruptly or unduly benefit themselves or others; or (d) fraudulent, and related unauthorised, irregular or fruitless and wasteful expenditure incurred by the Department. Misappropriation of recapitalization funds in terms of the Recapitalization and Development Programme of the Department relating to the allegations referred to in paragraph 1 of this Schedule. Corruption, irregularities, malpractices or maladministration in the affairs of the Department relating to the allegations referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Schedule, including the causes of such and any losses, damages or actual or potential prejudice which the Department may have suffered.

(c) (i) and (ii)

Proclamation R8 of 2011: National Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (Land Reform): GG: 34031 of 18 February 2011
Action taken	Details of the outcomes of each investigation finalised	Value
Number of referrals made to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)	Evidence obtained in respect of 43 matters investigated has been referred to the NPA, including the AFU with a view to instituting criminal action and/or recovery of the proceeds of crime and/or unlawful activities in terms of the provisions of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act, 1998 (Act No. 121 of 1998)
Number of referrals made for disciplinary action against officials	In respect of 33 matters investigated, evidence obtained against 23 officials was referred to the Department with recommendations to the effect that disciplinary action be instituted against the officials concerned.
Rand value of actual cash and/or assets recovered	Final asset forfeiture/confiscation orders have been obtained in 24 of the matters referred to the AFU.	R362 000 000
Rand value of potential cash and/or assets to be recovered	In respect of 4 matters referred to the AFU, preservation orders have been obtained.	R45 528 094
Rand value of matters in respect of which evidence was referred for the institution or defence/opposition of civil proceedings	In respect of 2 of the matters, civil proceedings have been instituted and the SIU is pursuing recoveries of R7.6 million. The SIU is awaiting a trial date for these 2 matters.	R9 200 000
(ii) Final Presidential Report submitted on 28 March 2018.

Proclamation R53 of 2012: National Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and its agents (Land Restitution): GG: 35691 of 21 September 2012
Action taken	Details of the outcomes of each investigation finalised	Value
Number of referrals made to the National Prosecuting Authority	Evidence obtained in respect of 166 matters investigated has been referred to the NPA, including the AFU with a view to instituting criminal action and/or recovery of the proceeds of crime and/or unlawful activities in terms of the provisions of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act, 1998 (Act No. 121 of 1998). In 70 matters the NPA declined to prosecute; in 4 matters the accused were found guilty of theft, fraud and money laundering.
Referrals made for disciplinary action against officials	Evidence obtained against 24 officials (in total) was referred to various government departments with recommendations that disciplinary action be instituted against them for misconduct related to applications for irregular and/or unlawful claims.
Rand value of actual cash and/or assets recovered	A final asset forfeiture/confiscation order has been obtained in one the matter referred to the AFU.	R5 359 248
Rand value of potential cash and/or assets to be recovered	A preservation order has been obtained in one matter referred to the AFU. Signed Acknowledgements of Debts have been obtained from 90 individuals in respect of undue payments made to them for claims that they did not qualify for.	R45 015 000 R5 197 490
(ii) Final Presidential Report submitted on 27 November 2019.

Proclamation R7 of 2014, amended by R599 of 2015 and R32 of 2017: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (formerly known as the Department of Land Affairs) in its national department, its provincial departments, its trading entities and their respective agencies (herein referred to as the DRDLR) and the State Information Technology Agency (PTY) Ltd (herein referred to as SITA): GG: 37346 dated 14 February 2014; GG: 38985 dated 10 July 2015; GG: 41165 date 6 October 2017
Action taken	Details of the outcomes of each investigation finalised	Value
Number of referrals made to the National Prosecuting Authority	Evidence obtained in respect of 1 matter investigated has been referred to the NPA, with a view to instituting criminal action for gross financial misconduct in terms of the PFMA. Evidence obtained in respect of 7 matters investigated has been referred to the NPA, with a view to instituting criminal action for fraud, contravention of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, 2001 (Act No. 38 of 2001) theft, forgery and/or uttering.
Number of referrals made for disciplinary action against officials	Evidence obtained against 7 officials was referred to the Department with recommendations that disciplinary action be instituted against them for misconduct. Evidence obtained against 10 officials was referred to the Department with recommendations that disciplinary action be instituted against them for negligence and non-compliance with statutory prescripts.
Number of referrals made for executive and/or administrative action	Evidence against 1 conveyancer (as reflected in Table 3 below) has been referred to the relevant body at the time, being the Law Society of the Northern Provinces (which has since been replaced by the Legal Practice Council), to use in support of an application to strike the conveyancer from the roll of Admitted Attorneys. The application was successful and he was struck from the roll on 15 June 2017.
The value of contract(s) and/or administrative decision(s)/action(s) set aside or deemed invalid	On 13 September 2016, the High Court declared the decision by the SITA to recommend, and by the Department to award the Tender to Gijima to be unlawful and invalid ab initio as a result of a pricing error made by the SITA during the bid evaluation and adjudication processes of the Tender. The Court further declared all contracts that resulted directly or indirectly from the award of the Tender concluded between the Department and Gijima to be unlawful and invalid ab initio and the Court set aside all such contracts.	R651 225 770
Rand value of matters in respect of which evidence was referred for the institution or defence/opposition of civil proceedings	The Department and the SIU have jointly instituted new civil proceedings against Gijima in order to recover monies on the basis of unjust enrichment. The matter is on-going.	R208 025 174
(ii) Final Presidential Report submitted on 26 March 2020 for Proclamation R7 of 2014 and R599 of 2015. Proclamation R32 of 2017 is still ongoing, and expected to be finalised by the end of the 2020/21 financial year.

Proclamation R24 of 2017: Department of Rural Development and Land Reform: GG 41000 dated 24 July 2017
Action taken	Details of the outcomes of each investigation finalised	Value
Rand value of matters in respect of which evidence was referred for the institution or defence/opposition of civil proceedings	Civil proceedings have been instituted in the Special Tribunal in respect of one matter and the SIU is seeking to declare invalid and set aside a lease agreement entered into between the Department and a service provider.	R3 037 647
(ii) Investigation is still ongoing, and expected to be finalised by the end of the 2020/21 financial year.

2. No, it is the President’s prerogative to release SIU’s final reports.

Reply:

I have been informed by the National Prosecuting Authority and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, that statistics relating to (a) cases of illegal invasion of land owned by the State which were prosecuted and (b) the number of specified successful prosecutions in each (i) province and (ii) of the past five financial years, are not kept.

Such invasion of State property would normally constitute the civil offence of trespass. Complaints in this regard, would be submitted by Municipalities. There is no record of cases opened by Municipalities against trespassers in this regard.

The usual practice is that Municipalities would initiate civil proceedings and seek a court order for the eviction of unlawful land invaders. These cases would normally be enrolled on the civil case roll in various Magistrates’ Districts.

Some of these civil cases are often also settled out of court with the result that no case is actually registered on the court roll, in such circumstances. It is for this reason that the statistics of these civil cases, are not readily available.

Reply:

The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and the National Prosecuting Authority, define backlog cases as cases being in the backlog based age analysis of the court roll. For the district courts, cases that are older than six months will be regarded as being in the backlog, while for the regional courts, cases which are older than nine months will be regarded as being in the backlog.

At the end of March 2020, a total of 194 225 cases were carried forward to the next financial year that commenced in April 2020. In addition to the cases carried forward, a total of 70 667 cases were enrolled during the lockdown period in April and May 2020, the majority of which were postponed to a date after the lockdown period.

The disruption in the optimal use of courts resulted in an increase in the number of outstanding cases in the lower courts. At the end of May 2020, compared to the outstanding roll and backlog cases at the end of March 2020, the outstanding case-loads in (a) Regional Courts, increased by 1%, and (b) in District Courts, by 18%.

A similar increase was noted in the backlog of cases. At the end of May 2020, the backlog of cases in (a) the Regional Courts, increased by 14%, and (b) in the district courts, by 63%.

END

Reply:

(1) The NPA, in line with the modernization approach enunciated by the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, monitored the enrolment of all Covid-19 cases from the integrated electronic case management dataset. During the lockdown period up to 9 June 2020 (date of response), the courts dealt with 18 355 first appearance cases related to Covid-19 contraventions, with 39 089 accused.

(2)(a) A total of 776 cases were withdrawn during the said period, which represents 4% of the total first appearance cases.

(2)(b) A total of 12 354 (67.3%) cases are still open and postponed for future date. Further investigation is directed by the prosecutors to ensure that the case may be finalised on the next court appearance date.

3(a) A total of 18 355 first appearance cases were enrolled. The integrated system only includes cases enrolled. Cases referred for decision are not yet electronically recorded but this model is being developed. The data relating to decision dockets is therefore not yet available from the said integrated system.

However, during the Lockdown Alert Level 5 period (27 March 2020 – 30 April 2020), a manual collation process of information pertaining to Covid-19 contraventions indicated that almost 25% of first appearance cases were not enrolled, due to insufficient evidence. These dockets were referred for decision and further investigation, where applicable.

3(b) The majority of Covid-19 related cases (99%) were enrolled in the district courts and only one percent was directly enrolled in the regional courts.

Reply:

The Settlement agreement 01 of 2016 on OSD for Correctional officials was concluded on 21 November 2016 and had a life span of three (03) years for implementation.

All serving officials on the system of Correctional Services were paid on the agreed preventatives measures for each specified year.

The status of payments to officials whose services were terminated through resignation or a dismissal are as follows:

• Officials who resigned and were reappointed as ex officials in terms of the special recruitment became active on the system i.e. Persal and as such all outstanding monies owed to the officials were accordingly paid.
• Partial payments have been finalised in respect of audited cases of terminated officials;
• Approximately two thousand (2000) cases remain and payments are made when relevant documents have been received, captured and audited.

END

Reply:

1. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has informed me that no tender was awarded since procurement of Personal Protective Equipment (PPEs) was lower than the tender threshold of R500 000.00. Senior Managers and Court Managers use their existing delegations to procure PPEs from the service providers already in the Central Supplier Database.
2. Falls away, due to the response above.
3. Falls away.
4. Falls away.

Reply:

The projects regarding the establishment of Sexual Offences Courts in the Regional Courts, are yielding results, as part of the mechanisms to respond to and assist victims of gender based violence, in particular sexual offences. To date, 106 Sexual Offences Courts and 55 Thuthuzela Care Centres have been established.

With regards to the implementation of the Femicide Watch, the first phase to create a Dashboard of Femicide cases which assists the Department and Justice, Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS) Cluster to have the necessary information available regarding these heinous crimes, has been completed. The subsequent phases to assist in combating these horrendous crimes, are still work in progress.

(a) Until the society deals with the core drivers of Gender-Based Violence and Femicide (GBVC), the court system might continue to fight a losing battle. The GBVF pandemic has direct bearings on strong patriarchal social norms, complex gender inequalities, socio-economic inequalities and its ailments, poor women empowerment, family dysfunction and unaccountability, and the low social value attached to female life; hence the upward spiral of femicide in the country. With the persistent downward spiral of the economy and the unemployment rate, and together with their harsh ramifications on families, efforts made by the court system may continue to struggle to reach the expected impact.

Therefore, the solution to GBVF does not lie with courts alone. It has been proven that greater incarceration and retributive justice often focus on symptomatic relief; hence the need for interventions with society at large to act collectively against the social ills that continue to breed violence against women and children. Until then, our courts may continue to fight a losing battle.

As it is said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The country needs to boost up its efforts on intervention. However, the focus on prevention cannot be placed primarily on the court system as courts are positioned in the criminal justice system to get involved after the fact.

b The Department has immensely contributed in the development of globally-competitive pieces of legislation on GBVF. These include the Domestic Violence Act, 1998 (Act No. 116 of 1998), Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act, 2007 (Act No. 32 of 2007), Protection from Harassment Act, 2011 (Act No. 17 of 2011), and the Prevention and Combating of Trafficking in Persons Act, 2013 (Act No. 7 of 2013). Despite the wealth of this legal framework, South Africa has been criticised by the United Nations for struggling to bridge the gulf between paper law and action. However, it must be noted that poor implementation is a widespread challenge that many progressive countries are battling with, but with the recent introduction of the 2019 Presidential Summit Declaration against GBVF and its National Strategic Plan, South Africa is set to change this scenario. With the request of the Presidency, the Department led the process of developing this Declaration with government and civil society.

The abuse of women and children continues to increase and there are various reasons for this. At the heart of this challenge, is the patriarchal orientation of society which is fermented by gender prejudices and other forms of gender stereotypes.

The fight against the scourge of gender-based violence and other forms of women abuse is a battle that the society as a whole must embrace. Therefore, the Department’s efforts through for example, Sexual Offences Courts and awareness campaigns, should be seen as part of a bigger societal campaign to eradicate women and child abuse.

Reply:

a) The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development embarked on a process of reprioritizing vacant posts in line with the National a) Treasury Instruction No. 2 of 2016/17 issued on 30 September 2016 and Notice 3 of 2017/18 published on 15 May 2017 as a result of the Cost Containment Measures (reduction of wage bill). The overall vacancy rate, as at 31 March 2020, was at 14% which translates to 2 567 vacant posts. However, after the reprioritization process, the vacancy rate of critical posts stood at 6.6%, which translates to 1 118 critical vacant posts.

b) (i) Regarding the number of critical posts which are vacant, Human Resources Management indicates that there are 1 118 vacant critical posts on PERSAL.

(ii) There are 44 Senior Management Services (SMS) vacant positions, which translates to a 25% SMS vacancy rate.

(iii) The information regarding vacant Senior Management Services’ posts and where acting appointments have been made, is as follows:

• Acting Chief Master: Mrs T Bezuidenhout has been appointed until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Deputy Director-General: Corporate Services: Mr D Mpholo has been appointed until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Director: Human Resources Customer Management Centre: Ms N Jacobs until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Director: Employee Relations: Mr T Sadiki until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Director-General: Advocate JB Skosana was appointed until 31 July 2020 –
• Acting Chief State Law Advisor: Advocate SM Masapu has been appointed until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Head of Justice College: Advocate B Makhene-Gadini has been appointed until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Regional Head: Western Cape: Mr R Isaacs has been appointed until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Regional Head: Mpumalanga: Mr P M Mthimunye has been appointed until 30 June 2020;
• Acting Regional Head: North-West: Mr J Makutle has been appointed until 30 June 2020.

(iv) (aa) There are 151 vacant posts at Offices of the State Attorney, wherein 58 vacant posts have been reprioritized as critical, which translates to a 7.1% vacancy rate.

(bb) The numbers of vacancies at the Masters’ Office, are as follows:

There are currently 156 vacant posts in the Masters’ Office, 79 of which became vacant as from 1 April 2018. This translates to a vacancy rate of

12.1%.

Furthermore, the following SMS positions have been advertised for filling:

(i) Chief Master: Advertised on 29 November 2019 and re-advertised on 20 January 2020. Process to fill the post, has commenced.

(ii) Deputy Director-General: Corporate Services: Advertised on 29 November 2019. Process to fill the post, has commenced.

(iii) Director: Employee Relations: Advertised on 20 January 2020. The post has been filled by transfer from the Department of Correctional Services.

(iv) Director-General of the DoJ&CD: Advertised on 20 January 2020, and awaiting the Presidency’s permission to go ahead with the filling of the post.

(v) Chief State Law Advisor: Advertised on 23 March 2020.

I further wish to inform the Honourable Member that I regard the filling of these vacant senior management services’ posts as crucial. The Acting Director-General has appointed a designated official in his office to accelerate the filling of these posts and co-ordinate the process of reviewing the organizational structure of the Department, in consultation with my office, the relevant Managers of the Branches concerned, and the Human Resources Management unit. The advertising and filling of vacant posts will be done in compliance with the Department of Public Service and Administration Circular No. 19 of 2020, dated 14 May 2020.

Reply:

(1)(a)(b) Yes, profile reports submitted to the Head of Correctional Centres (HCC) or Correctional Supervision and Parole Board (CSPBs) have to meet the requirements of sections 42(2)(d) and 42(2)(e) of the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998.

Remarks and orders given by sentencing court are adhered to, it is however worth mentioning that there are challenges in obtaining documents such as sentence remarks, SAP62 and SAP69 in some cases from courts and SAPS.

Sentence remarks are mandatory in determining an effective intervention and treatment plan targeting offending behaviour based on accurate assessment of individual offender risks and needs. In the absence of sentence remarks the documents, reports by professionals are to a larger extent one sided and based on known events leading to misdiagnosis that doesn’t target offending behaviour. Reporting and management of risks can be compromised by non-availability of the same sentence remarks and previous convictions which inform the risk reports.

Where these documents were not provided by the abovementioned stakeholders, a report is attached on the profile report explaining attempts made to obtain the documents and the courts as well as SAPS response thereto. The implementation of the Integrated Criminal Justice System (ICJS) by the JCPS cluster value chain will ensure this is avoided.

It is also important to mention that upon admission offenders are assessed, Correctional Sentence Plans are compiled and updated during the serving of sentence. The Correctional Sentence Plans prescribe programmes that offenders must be subjected to and whether such programmes are to be offered by Correctional Intervention Officials, Social Workers or Psychologists. Therefore, some profile reports will not have a report of Psychologist if there was no need identified; in particular offenders serving short sentences and non-violent offences and this does not mean that the profile report is incomplete.

As prescribed by Section 42(2) (e) of the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998 (‘the CSA”), the Case Management Committees (CMCs) do submit reports as contemplated in paragraph (d) to the Head of Correctional Centre in respect of any offenders sentenced to incarceration for 24 months or less. The submission is a short version of a profile report due to short period of time to be served. In this category, offenders can only be exposed to life skills programmes and pre-release programmes depending on the length of sentence, meaning not all information per reports may be available and this does not mean that the profile report is incomplete.

2. No, incomplete profile reports are not considered. Offenders do not apply for parole as the parole consideration process is initiated by the Case Management Committees (CMCs) by compiling profile reports about 6 months before offenders reach their legislated minimum detention periods. The Heads of Correctional Centre (to whom the National Commissioner has delegated his powers consider offenders serving 24 months or less) or Correctional Supervision and Parole Boards (CSPBs) quality check profile reports received from the CMCs and those with short comings are referred back to the CMCs for rectification.

Where documents such as sentence remarks cannot be provided by some courts, a report is attached to the profile reports explaining attempts made to obtain the sentence remarks and courts’ response thereto. Where a CSPB approves placement on parole based on an incomplete profile report or before an offender attends a prescribed programme, such a decision will be subject to review by the Correctional Supervision and Parole Review Board.

END

Reply:

(1) Yes.

(a) Offender was serving a sentence of imprisonment for kidnapping, child molestation and culpable homicide.

(b) He was sentenced on 07 April 2008.

(c) He was sentenced for the crimes as follows:

• count 1: 2 years imprisonment
• count 2: 6 months imprisonment
• count 3: 10 years imprisonment

The court ordered that sentences on counts 1&2 to run concurrently with the sentence on count 3. Therefore he is serving an effective sentence of 10 years imprisonment.

(d) He was placed on parole on 3 April 2013. On 18 November 2013 he was declared an absconder and re-admitted on 12 August 2015 after being arrested for driving without drivers’ licence and possession of stolen goods.

The offender received a suspended fine on both charges. He was again placed on parole on 17 October 2016 until18 May 2019 wherein he absconded again on 6 February 2019.

(e) The offender was subjected to the following parole conditions in line with section 52 of the Correctional Services Act, 1998 (Act 111 of 1998):

• Monitoring – high risk
• Placed under house detention;
• Restricted to magisterial district;
• Reside at a fixed address which has been approved after consultations with the Head Community Corrections;
• Refrains from using alcohol or illegal drugs;
• Refrains from committing a criminal offence;
• Refrains from visiting a particular place;
• Refrains from making contact with a particular person or persons or threatening a particular person or persons by word or action.

(2) No, the offender attended restorative justice programme but victims were not invited to participate in the Parole Board meeting when the offender was considered for placement. Victim/offender dialogue was not compulsory in 2013 April when the offender was released on Parole, thus was not done. In October 2016, the offender was placed on parole for the second time and thereafter treated as a parole violator which led to his parole being revoked.

(3)(a) Yes, he violated his parole conditions by absconding from the system of community corrections and driving without drivers’ licence as well as possession of stolen goods after he was placed on parole on 3 April 2013. He absconded again on 6 February 2019 after he was placed on parole on 17 October 2016. He is also alleged to have kidnapped and killed an 8 year old girl from Ravensmead.

(b) After he was re-arrested on 12 August 2015 for absconding, he was denied parole for a period of 1 year and 2 months and was again placed on parole on 17 October 2016.The Goodwood Management Area revoked his parole and he is currently serving hundred and twenty seven (127) days which was the remainder of the ten (10) years sentence he was initially serving on 07 April 2008. He started serving the hundred and twenty seven (127) days on 21 February 2020.

A high risk profile assessment will be conducted to determine the placement of the offender in the facility as well as to determine the risk that he still poses.

A psycho- social assessment will also be conducted to determine further rehabilitation. If found guilty with the new crime, previous sentence and new sentence will it be concurrent or separated? This office is not in a position to respond to this question as the court will determine how the sentence should be served.

END

Reply:

(1)(a)(i)(ii)(iii)

Crime Category	Regions
	EC	GP	KZN	LMN	FSNC	WC	Total
(Culpable Homicide and Related offences) (Murder and related offences)		3		1	1	2	7
(Culpable Homicide and Related offences) (Murder and related offences) (Offences against freedom of movement)		1	1				2
(Culpable Homicide and Related offences) (Murder and related offences) (Sexual offences)	1						1
(Culpable Homicide and Related offences) (Offences against freedom of movement) (Sexual offences)				1			1
(Culpable Homicide and Related offences) (Sexual offences)		1				1	2
(Murder and related offences)	144	338	299	118	66	41	1 006
(Murder and related offences) (Offences against freedom of movement)	7	13	8	4	3	4	39
(Murder and related offences) (Offences against freedom of movement) (Sexual offences)	3	5	2	1	2	1	14
(Murder and related offences) (Sexual offences)	8	13	11	5	5		42
(Offences against freedom of movement)		1					1
(Offences against freedom of movement) (Sexual offences)	4	3	4	2			13
(Sexual offences)	19	16	28	30	11	9	113
Grand Total	186	394	353	162	88	58	1 241

(iv)

*Note that Parole Boards only have recommendation powers in respect of lifers since the approval rests with the Minister.

Region/Management Area/Parole Board	Number who received parole
EASTERN CAPE	186
Amathole Area	27
East London Area	11
Kirkwood Area	17
Mthatha Area	64
Sada Area	8
St. Albans Area	59
GAUTENG	394
Baviaanspoort Area	3
Boksburg Area	48
Johannesburg Area	85
Krugersdorp Area	15
Leeuwkop Area	126
Modderbee Area	20
Pretoria Area	93
Zonderwater Area	4
KWAZULU-NATAL	353
Durban Area	115
Empangeni Area	36
Glencoe Area	11
Kokstad Area	8
Ncome Area	21
Pietermaritzburg Area	146
Waterval Area	16
LIMPOPO, MPUMALANGA AND NORTH WEST (LMN)	162
Barberton Area	40
Bethal Area	10
Klerksdorp Area	9
Polokwane Area	26
Rooigrond Area	20
Rustenburg Area	28
Thohoyandou Area	22
Witbank Area	7
NORTHERN CAPE AND FREE STATE (FS&NC)	88
Goedemoed Area	1
Groenpunt Area	38
Grootvlei Area	16
Kimberley Area	10
Kroonstad Area	16
Upington Area	7
WESTERN CAPE	58
Allandale Area	1
Brandvlei Area	1
Drakenstein Area	14
George Area	10
Helderstroom Area	5
Malmesbury Area	6
Pollsmoor Area	13
Voorberg Area	2
Worcester Area	6
GRAND TOTAL	1 241

(b)

Year served by offenders serving life sentence, before released on parole	Number of offenders serving life sentence, released on parole, after serving from 13 to 33 years in a correctional facility.
13 Years	14
14 Years	54
15 Years	131
16 Years	189
17 Years	205
18 Years	184
19 Years	107
20 Years	106
21 Years	94
22 Years	58
23 Years	36
24 Years	23
25 Years	17
26 Years	11
27 Years	4
28 Years	3
29 Years	3
30 Years	1
33 Years	1
GRAND TOTAL	1 241

*Please take note: The totals in this table is for revocation, which includes offenders who committed crime and/or violated their parole conditions.

(c) LIFER REVOCATIONS
REGION	2015/2016	2016/2017	2017/2018	2018/2019	2019/2020	TOTAL
EC	2	1	2	3	1	9
GAUTENG	2	2	2		1	7
FS/NC		1			2	3
KZN					2	2
WC				1		1
LMN		2				2
TOTAL	4	6	4	4	6	24

(2) In ensuring compliance to conditions of monitoring, offenders are monitored through telephonic contact, physical visits at work if discussed and agreed upon by offender and employer and physical visit at home, during the week, weekends and public holidays (after hours visits included)

Compulsory visits by offender to the community corrections offices / sub-office /service points and where physical monitoring cannot be done due to certain circumstances; alternative measures are made or taken by the Head of Community Corrections to ensure that the offender is monitored.

All offenders placed under the system of community corrections are subjected to the Admission Risk Reclassification tool to determine the level of supervision unless stated otherwise by Court/ CSPB. Monitoring is therefore conducted in line with the offender’s categories and monitored as follows:

Condition	High Risk category	Medium Risk category	Low Risk Category
Minimum Number of contacts	Eight (08) contacts per month	Four (04) contacts per month	Two (02) contacts per month
Physical visit at home	A minimum of one face-to-face visits per week to the offender by the Reintegration Case Official	A minimum of one face-to-face visit per month	A minimum of one face-to-face visit every two months
Physical visit at work	A minimum of one monthly face-to-face visit	A minimum of one face-to-face visit every two months	Minimum of one quarterly face-to-face visit
Physical visit at community service	A minimum of one face-to-face visits per month	A minimum of one face-to-face visits per month	A minimum of one face-to-face visits per quarter
Compulsory visit by offender to the community corrections office	Minimum of one monthly face-to-face contact (office consultation)	A minimum of one face-to-face contact every two months (office consultation	A minimum of one face-to-face visit every two months (office consultation

(3)(a) The following are programmes available:

Correctional Programmes:

There are thirteen (13) Correctional Programmes aimed at addressing specific offending behaviour of offenders, aimed at creating awareness and improving the life skills of offenders. The programmes are namely:

1. New Beginnings Orientation (orientation programme to offenders newly admitted to a Correctional Centre)  
2. Anger Management
3. Cross Roads (focusing on life skills)
4. Restorative Justice Orientation
5. Sexual Offences
6. Substance Abuse
7. Behaviour Modification Programme on Gangsterism
8. Economic Crime Programme (fraud related)
9. Economic Crime Programme (theft related)
10. Programme on Murder and related offences
11. Programme on Robbery and related offences
12. Correctional Programme for Female Offenders
13. Pre-Release

Correctional Programmes are non-therapeutic in nature and are rendered in the group mode. 

 

Social Work Programmes:

The Social Workers render the following therapeutic programmes to offenders in individual or groups settings:

1. Anger Management Programme
2. Sexual Offender Treatment Programme
3. Substance Abuse Programme
4. Youth Resilience Enhancement Programme
5. Youth Resilience Enhancement Programme
6. Cool and Fit for Life (Youth Programme)
7. Elderly Offender Programme
8. Sisonke Family and Marriage Care Programme
9. Parenting Skills Programme

Psychological Services:

Psychologists render individual therapeutic services to sentenced offenders. These services are based on the offender’s risks and needs identified. A treatment plan is compiled to outline the specific intervention that will be best suited to the offender. When needed, a psychotherapeutic process will be initiated to address the identified risks and needs with the aim of developing better mental health, correcting offending behaviour, and assisting with movement towards successful rehabilitation.

Some offenders whose profiles are being compiled for parole purposes sometimes need to have a psychological report on their profile. These offenders are usually offenders who pose higher risks, offenders with longer sentences, and offenders who committed serious aggressive and sexual crimes (robbery, rape and murder).

(3)(b) For 2019/20 financial year an amount of R51, 155 mil is allocated for Community Reintegration programmes.

END

Reply:

(1) Yes.

(1)(a)(i) The mentioned official was suspended on 16 August 2019 for unrelated misconduct and re-instated on instruction of the Minister after PSC recommendation in November 2019. The mentioned official was again suspended on 02 December 2019.

(1)(a)(ii) The official was suspended due to him being implicated in investigations conducted by the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) under Proclamation10of2018. The Department received multiple disciplinary referrals from the SIU with regards to the official.

(1)(b) The cost to the State in terms of remuneration since the person was suspended is R528367.50

(2) Yes

(2)(a) MrJ.G Smalberger is the name of the official appointed to act in this capacity.

(2)(b) The cost of the post to the Statefrom01November2019todateisR1 014 393.92

(2)(c) The specified official has been employed in the specified post on contract basis since 01 November 2019.

(3) Yes, however due to the fact that the official is implicated in multiple disciplinary referrals the date of conclusion cannot be determined at this stage.

Reply:

(1)(a) and (b)Total Number of mentally ill persons (inmates) and centres

(1)(a) Total Number of mentally ill persons (inmates)	(1)(b) Name of Correctional Centre
02	Fort Beaufort
03	Grahams town
33	King Williams town
19	Middle drift
25	East London (EL) Medium A
19	EL Medium B
16	EL Medium C
20	Mdantsane
18	Kirkwood
70	Mthatha medium
36	Mthatha Remand
19	Burgers Dorp
18	Butterworth
02	Dutywa
11	Middleburg
03	Ngcobo
07	Queenstown
08	Sada
01	Sturkspruit
37	St Albans Medium A
43	St Albans Medium B
63	St Albans Maximum
08	Patensie
21	Port Elizabeth
73	Grootvlei Medium A
11	Grootvlei Medium B
02	Winburg
01	Brandfort
245	Mangaung
42	Groenpunt Maximum
22	Groenpunt Medium
03	Groenpunt Youth
24	Vereeniging
11	Sasolburg
01	Heilbron
01	Frankfort
63	Tswelopele
16	Kimberley
30	BizzahMakhate Centre A
06	BizzahMakhate Centre B
41	BizzahMakhate Centre C
02	Bethlehem
03	Ficksburg
09	Harrismith
01	Hennenman
03	Odendaalsrus
06	Virginia
01	Colesberg
01	Hopetown
05	De Aar
02	Richmond
07	Victoria West
20	Upington
7	Springbok
10	Kuruman
4	Goedemoed Medium A
17	Goedemoed Medium B
03	Emthonjeni Youth
35	Baviaanspoort Medium Centre
24	Baviaanspoort Maximum Centre
55	Boksburg Centre A
06	Boksburg Juvenile
09	Heidelberg
62	Johannesburg (JHB) Centre A
94	JHB Centre B
42	JHB Centre C
60	JHB Female Centre
105	KgošiMampuru II (KM II) Central
55	KM II Local
18	KM II Female Centre
24	KM II C-Max
14	Atteridgeville
30	Odi Centre
40	Krugersdorp Medium Centre
44	Leeuwkop Medium A
22	Leeuwkop Medium B
33	Leeuwkop Medium C
61	Leeuwkop Maximum
141	Modderbee
07	Nigel Centre
74	Zonderwater Medium A
50	Zonderwater Medium B
77	Durban Medium A
97	Durban Medium B
10	Durban Medium C
7	Durban Medium D
15	Umzinto
27	Durban Female
55	Qalakabusha
1	Empangeni Medium
18	Eshowe
1	Maphumulo
1	Mthunzini
1	Bergville
1	Dundee
6	Estcourt
24	Glencoe
14	Ladysmith
9	Ebongweni
5	Kokstad Medium
2	Portshepstone
17	Ncome Medium A
25	Ncome Medium B
15	Vryheid
1	Nongoma
2	Nkandla
65	Pietermaritzburg Medium A
2	Pietermaritzburg Medium B
4	New Hanover
13	Sevontein
3	Ixopo
39	Waterval Medium A
19	Waterval Medium B
6	Ekuseni
6	Newcastle Male
2	Newcastle Female
29	Barberton Maximum
20	Barberton Medium B
4	Barberton Medium A
6	Town Youth
5	Lydenburg
23	Nelspruit
16	Bethal
20	Ermelo
5	Piet Retief
3	Volksrust
12	Standerton
23	Klerksdorp
29	Potchefstroom
02	Wolmaransstad
04	Christiaana
56	Polokwane
08	Modimolle
01	Tzaneen
28	Rooigrond Medium A
06	RooigrondMedium B
04	Lichtenburg
04	Zeerust
07	Mafikeng
24	Losperfontein
12	Mogwase
10	Rustenburg Med A
02	Rustenburg COE
46	Thohoyandou Medium A
64	Thohoyandou Medium B
12	Thohoyandou Female/Juvenile
13	Makhado
40	Witbank
12	Middelburg
172	Kutama-Sinthumule
27	Allandale
6	Hawequa
10	Obiqua
18	Paardeberg
42	Brandvlei Maximum
10	Brandvlei Medium
07	Brandvlei Youth Centre
26	Drakenstein Medium A
3	Drakenstein Medium B
63	Drakenstein Maximum
2	Stellenbosch
66	Goodwood
6	Buffeljagsrivier
2	Caledon
34	Overberg Medium
40	Overberg Maximum
89	Pollsmoor Remand Detention
50	Pollsmoor Medium A
18	Pollsmoor Medium B
4	Pollsmoor Medium C
33	Pollsmoor Female
3	Beaufort West
31	George
4	Knysna
1	Ladismith
3	Mosselbay
5	Oudtshoorn Male
11	Oudsthoorn Female
1	Prince Albert
1	Uniondale
47	Malmesbury Med A
19	Malmesbury Med B
2	Voorberg Medium A
67	Voorberg Medium B
8	Vanrhynsdorp
18	Worcester Males
38	Worcester Females
2	Robertson
10	Dwarsrivier
14	Warmbokkeveld
TOTAL: 4 453

(2) (a) Social Work Services and Psychological Services are provided on a needs basis to all inmates including the mentally ill:

• SOCIAL WORK SERVICES:NATURE OF SERVICES:
• Intake services: Mentally ill inmates participate in intake processes where a SocialWorker engages them in the initial interview to determine the need as referred or at own request.

• Assessment:Comprehensive assessments are conducted with individual mentally ill offenders to establish the real needs and for appropriate intervention plans to be compiled and implemented.

• Support services: These services are rendered to mentally ill inmates and may range from information sharing to assistance with building and or maintaining family tieswhile incarcerated.

These offenders participate in either group or individual therapeutic programmes according to theneeds. Social Workers provide on-going psychosocial support to inmates and their families.

• Referral services:These inmates are referred on a needs basis by Social Workers to other internal and or external professionals and service providers for further psychosocial assistance which includes specialized services.

• Progress reports:Progress reports in respect of individual offenders including the mentally ill who participated in needs-based therapeutic Social Work services programmes are compiled and kept in the individual files.

• PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES:
• All new admissions with mental illness and those diagnosed with mental illness whilst incarcerated are referred to the psychologist by nursing staff or unit managers for assessment and management.

• Psychologists assess mentally ill inmates and develop individualisedtreatment plans which may involve among others referral to other stakeholders (i.e. social workers, correctional officials, nurses and psychiatrists).

• Psychologists run support groups that address mental health issues (i.e. anxiety and depression, psychological adjustment and suicide prevention).

• Mentally ill inmates are at liberty to request for psychological services at any given time without referral.

• Inmates that are actively mentally ill are assessed by the psychologist and referred to a psychiatrist.

• Psychologists provide psycho-education to mentally ill inmates on understanding their diagnosis, treatment regime and management of their overall mental health. Psychologists provide on-going psychotherapy to mentally ill inmates.

• Psychologists provide reports to the parole board regarding offender’s mental status and risks for recidivism.

• Psychologists conduct awareness campaigns on mental health and recognize calendar events on mental health promotion (i.e. World Mental Health Day, Suicide Prevention Week and Mental Health Awareness Month).

(2) (b) Since 2019 a project was initiated by DoH (mental health unit) in collaboration with Department of Correctional Services and Justice to remove forensic cases especially state patients to designated mental health hospitals. Provincial Observation Panels, consisting of Psychologists, psychiatric nurses and mental health Social Workers have been established by the Department of Health to fast track observation processes to finalise court processes.

Inmates with acute mental health conditions are referred to Department of Health facilities for management and decision for admission to Mental Health institutions or returned to Department of Correctional Services.

Inmates with stable mental health conditions are managed by Department of Correctional Services in terms of the Mental Health Act 17 of 2002 which constitute the 4,453 inmates in Correctional Sentences

END

Reply:

Special Remission refers to a reduction of the sentences of incarcerated offenders, probationers and parolees with a period as determined by the President. On
16 December 2019 the President of the Republic, Mr M.C Ramaphosa announced the reduction of sentence for all sentenced offenders including probationers and parolees by 12 months. An additional 06 months special remission was granted for categories with non-violent crimes.

The special parole dispensation due to COVID-19 means that the selected low risk offenders’ minimum detention periods were advanced for consideration for placement.

(a) None. The 14 647 inmates referred to are those whose sentences (due to the remission), expired resulting in them exiting the correctional services system.

(b) Due to long sentences imposed by the courts, a total of 9 617 offenders benefitted from the 2019 Special Remission and they did not qualify for release and placement on parole. However, the 2020 COVID-19 Special Parole Dispensation has advanced their dates for consideration of parole placement.

As indicated, only low-risk offenders who meet all the requirements and conditions for placement on parole, will be placed on parole. The requirement that only offenders who have undergone relevant rehabilitation programmes aimed at addressing their offending behaviour would qualify for placement as this would minimise the risk of re-offending.

Every qualifying sentenced offender’s profile will be assessed and considered individually by the Parole Boards before they make their recommendations for placement on parole. This will include affording victims the opportunity to make representations why an offender should not be placed on parole. All relevant factors will be taken into consideration during this process, which will include any prior convictions for violent offences committed.

END

Reply:

(a) All cases referred to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) are screened and if a reasonable prospect of success is determined by the screening prosecutor, the case is enrolled and registered on the Integrated Case Management System. The total number of first appearance cases relating to the contravention of regulations in terms of the Disaster Management Act and registered during the period 26 March 2020 to 30 June 2020 is indicated in the table below:

ALERT LEVEL	CASES	ACCUSED
L5 (26 March - 30 April)	12 768	27 947
L4 (May)	8 487	14 275
L3 (June)	2 837	4 590
TOTAL	24 092	46 812
Data extracted from the integrated case management system

(b) (i) The number of convicted cases per Alert Level is indicated in the table below:

ALERT LEVEL	CASES CONVICTED	ACCUSED
L5 (26 Mar - 30 Apr)	910	1 567
L4 (May)	591	899
L3 (Jun)	71	96
TOTAL	1 572	2 562
Data extracted from the integrated case management system

(ii) A breakdown of the total of 1 572 convicted cases per contravention and per Alert

Level, is tabulated below. The majority of convicted cases relate to the failure to confine to residence during the lockdown period:

ALERT LEVEL AND CONTRAVENTION	CASES	ACCUSED
Level 3 (June)	71	96
Convening a gathering or hindering, interfering with, or obstructing an enforcement officer in the exercise of his or her powers, or the performance of his or her duties for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	1	1
Disclosing any information contained in the COVID-19 Tracing Database or any information obtained during the duration of the national state of disaster without authority	1	1
Failure by any business or other entity other than a business or entity involved in the manufacturing, supply, or provision of an essential good or service to cease operations during the lockdown	1	1
Failure to be confined to one's place of residence for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	5	11
Failure to be confined to one's place of residence from 20H00 until 05H00 daily for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4, other as permitted by law	10	10
Failure to comply with a prohibition of movement between provinces during the period of the lockdown	4	6
Failure to confine oneself to his or her place of residence during the period of the lockdown	27	36
Failure to keep closed a listed place or premises normally open to the public or where people may gather for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	1	1
Moving between provinces, metropolitan areas and districts of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4, other than as provided for in law	6	14
Operating a commuter transport services, passenger rail services, bus services, taxi services, e-hailing services, maritime and air passenger transport contrary to Disaster Management Regulations	5	5
Operating a retail store or shopping mall during the lockdown period other than for selling essential goods and/or failure to comply with prescribed safety measures	2	2
Selling of tobacco, tobacco products, e- cigarettes and related products for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	5	5
Selling tobacco, tobacco products, e-cigarettes and related products, other than for export during the duration of the national state of disaster under Alert Level 3	2	2
Selling, dispensing and distribution of liquor during the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	1	1
Level 4 (May)	591	899
Convene and/or attend a gathering as defined during the period of lockdown	7	7
Convening a gathering in contravention of the Disaster Management Act Regulations	15	57
Convening a gathering or hindering, interfering with, or obstructing an enforcement officer in the exercise of his or her powers, or the performance of his or her duties for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	5	5
Failure by a place not involved in the provision of essential goods or service to remain closed to all persons during the duration of the lockdown	6	6
Failure by an electronic communications service provider to comply with a directive by the Director-General: Health to provide information for inclusion in the COVID-19 Tracing Database	1	1
Failure by any business or other entity other than a business or entity involved in the manufacturing, supply, or provision of an essential good or service to cease operations during the lockdown	7	7
Failure to be confined to one's place of residence for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	92	124
Failure to be confined to one's place of residence from 20H00 until 05H00 daily for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4, other as permitted by law	27	33
Failure to comply with a prohibition of movement between provinces during the period of the lockdown	29	43
Failure to comply with a prohibition of movement between the metropolitan and district areas during the period of the lockdown	19	23
Failure to confine oneself to his or her place of residence during the period of the lockdown	323	527
Failure to keep closed a listed place or premises normally open to the public or where people may gather for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	3	3
Issuing of special or events liquor licensing during the duration of the national state of disaster	1	3
Leaving one's place of residence during the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4 other than as permitted by law	11	11
Misrepresenting that one is or any other person is infected with COVID -19	1	1
Moving between provinces, metropolitan areas and districts of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4, other than as provided for in law	9	9
Natural Persons: Failure to comply with request made by National Disaster Management Centre / Provincial Disaster Management Centre / Municipal Disaster Management Centre	1	1
Operating a commuter transport services, passenger rail services, bus services, taxi services, e-hailing services, maritime and air passenger transport contrary to Disaster Management Regulations	3	5
Operating a retail store or shopping mall during the lockdown period other than for selling essential goods and/or failure to comply with prescribed safety measures	10	10
Selling of tobacco, tobacco products, e- cigarettes and related products for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	15	16
Selling other goods by a retail store that are not permitted to be sold in terms of the Table 1 duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	1	1
Selling, dispensing and distribution of liquor during the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	2	3
Transporting liquor during the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4 other than where alcohol is required for an authorised purpose	3	3
Level 5 (26 March - 30 April)	910	1 567
Convene and/or attend a gathering as defined during the period of lockdown	12	13
Convening a gathering in contravention of the Disaster Management Act Regulations	52	234
Corporation(s)/Firm(s) : Failure to comply with request made by National Disaster Management Centre / Provincial Disaster Management Centre / Municipal Disaster Management Centre	1	1
Evicting a person(s) from his/her/their formal or informal residence or a farm dwelling place of residence during the lockdown period	1	1
Failure by a place not involved in the provision of essential goods or service to remain closed to all persons during the duration of the lockdown	11	11
Failure by an electronic communications service provider to comply with a directive by the Director-General: Health to provide information for inclusion in the COVID-19 Tracing Database	3	3
Failure by any business or other entity other than a business or entity involved in the	19	22
manufacturing, supply, or provision of an essential good or service to cease operations during the lockdown
Failure by premises selling liquor which provide accommodation to implement measures to stop the spread of COVID-19	1	1
Failure to be confined to one's place of residence for the duration of the national state of disaster in Alert Level 4	2	2
Failure to close a place or premises normally open to the public where religious, cultural, sporting, entertainment. recreational, exhibitional, organisational or similar activities may take place, during the duration of the national state of disaster in	2	2
Failure to comply with a prohibition of movement between provinces during the period of the lockdown	11	11
Failure to comply with a prohibition of movement between the metropolitan and district areas during the period of the lockdown	8	10
Failure to confine oneself to his or her place of residence during the period of the lockdown	750	1 215
Misrepresentation of own or any persons infected status with COVID-19	1	1
Natural Persons: Failure to comply with request made by National Disaster Management Centre / Provincial Disaster Management Centre / Municipal Disaster Management Centre	3	3
Operating a commuter transport services, passenger rail services, bus services, taxi services, e-hailing services, maritime and air passenger transport contrary to Disaster Management Regulations	5	5
Operating a retail store or shopping mall during the lockdown period other than for selling essential goods and/or failure to comply with prescribed safety measures	27	31
Permitting more than 50 persons at premises where liquor is sold and consumed in contravention of the Disaster Management Act Regulations	1	1

(iii) The courts imposed the following sentences in the 1 572 convicted cases:

Alert Level and Sentence	Total Cases
Level 3 (June)	71
Cautioned	7
Court Fine	36
Deferred Fine	7
Fine Option	14
Imprisonment	3
Suspended Wholly	4
Level 4 (May)	591
Cautioned	58
Correctional Supervision	1
Court Fine	94
Deferred Fine	92
Diversion	1
Fine Option	202
Imprisonment	24
Sentence Postponed	3
Suspended Partially	3
Suspended Wholly	113
Level 5 (26 March - 30 April)	910
Cautioned	118
Community Service	1
Court Fine	141
Deferred Fine	91
Diversion	1
Fine Option	319
Habitual Criminal	1
Imprisonment	61
Suspended Partially	9
Suspended Wholly	168
Total	1 572

END

Reply:

During the period of the lockdown, both at Risk Alert Levels 3, 4 and 5, courts dealt with a minimal number of trials. Most cases were postponed in order to limit the number of people going to courts and thereby risking the spread of the virus. Such postponements led to further increases in the already existing criminal case backlogs.

A case backlog is a case which has remained open on the roll:

(a) in case of a district court case, for a period in excess of six (6) months or more; and

(b) in case of a regional court, a case which has been on the roll for nine (9) months or more.

The statistics for backlog cases as verified with the NPA for both (a) and (b) above, are as follows:

DISTRICT COURTS		District Courts		REGIONAL COURTS		Regional Courts
EASTERN CAPE		6 796		EASTERN CAPE		2 148
FREE STATE		1 715		FREE STATE		1 086
GAUTENG		6 451		GAUTENG		6 339
KZN		4 815		KZN		3 205
LIMPOPO		3 216		LIMPOPO		1 404
MPUMALANGA		2 876		MPUMALANGA		1 816
NORTH WEST		2 081		NORTH WEST		1 800
NORTHERN CAPE		1 083		NORTHERN CAPE		685
WESTERN CAPE		10 733		WESTERN CAPE		3 912
TOTAL BACKLOG CASES		39 766		TOTAL BACKLOG CASES		22 395

There are continuous engagements between the Department and Regional Court Presidents as well as Chief Magistrates to develop mechanisms to address the escalating backlogs. The engagement has led to the establishment of the Integrated Case-Backlog Plan through which cases are being arranged for trial in terms of their priority.

It is however difficult to effectively implement the plan at this particular time due to the spikes in COVID-19 infections, which in turn lead to constant closure of courts due to positive cases of infections being confirmed randomly. The implementation of the plan will become more effective once the country has reached its peak and subsequent decline in the infection number.

Reply:

1 (a) The MojaPay system crashed on the evening of 4 May 2020. It unfortunately crashed during the Alert Level 4 lockdown, and as a result, several maintenance beneficiaries did not receive their maintenance benefits.

(b) All provinces were affected by the crash. However, the Eastern Cape (EC) and KwaZulu Natal (KZN) provinces were severely affected by the crash as the disruption was further exacerbated by the migration from the old payment system known as Justice Department of Accounting System (JDAS) to the new MojaPay system.

2. Approximately 1 500 beneficiaries were affected from 1 April 2020, and this resulted in several maintenance beneficiaries not receiving their monthly payments. The reasons for non-receipt of payments are two-fold:

(a) The closure of legacy JDAS system on 31 March 2020 interrupted the processing of payments for some courts primarily in the EC and KZN. In EC, the crash affected 622 maintenance beneficiaries, whereas in KZN only 47 beneficiaries were affected as at the end of June 2020. The closure of the JDAS system was due to the decision taken by the Department that all the beneficiaries who are not on Direct Payment, will have been migrated to MojaPay by 31 March 2020. However, it transpired that there were some courts that had not been able to migrate the beneficiaries’ data to MojaPay by 31 March 2020. The old JDAS system was closed in respect of the EC and KZN despite the fact that not all courts in the two (2) provinces had been successfully migrated to the MojaPay system.

(b) However, it must be noted that beneficiaries are still being migrated from the legacy system JDAS to MojaPay on daily basis. The total number of beneficiaries still to be migrated is approximately 6 500, mainly Eastern Cape and Western Cape compared to 245 000 beneficiaries migrated when the new system (MojaPay) started.

3. Yes, the database on MojaPay is accurate insofar as it reflects the data captured by end users as part of migration to the new system.

4. The MojaPay application has been restored incrementally from 12 May 2020 and is fully functional from 28 May 2020.

In conclusion, it is important to note that the migration from the old JDAS to the new MojaPay system is part of the Department’s endeavour to prevent possible duplicated payments and potential risks to the department’s financial accountability. The decision to nonetheless close the old system has severely affected the livelihoods of the maintenance beneficiaries. It is for this reason that I have directed the Acting Director-General to investigate this matter further. The investigation will include the cause of the crash and its wider impact, besides the maintenance payments. The investigation is with a view of ensuring that an appropriate corrective action is taken to avoid recurrence in the future.

 

Reply:

I have been informed by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) that Proclamation R7 of 2014 published in the Government Gazette No. 37346 on 14 February 2014, was amended by Proclamation R599 of 2015 published in the Government Gazette No. 38985 on 10 July 2015 and again amended by Proclamation R32 of 2017 published in the Government Gazette No. 41165 on 6 October 2017.

Proclamation R7 of 2014 and certain amendments of Proclamation R599 of 2015 investigated matters: (1) at the Bloemfontein, Cape Town and Pretoria Registrar of Deeds Offices; and also investigated (2) irregularities by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform in relation to the e-Cadastre Project (Gijima).

The investigations into matters (1) and (2) above have been concluded and the final

reports were submitted to the Presidency on 26 March 2020.

Proclamation R599 of 2015 mandated the SIU to investigate matters at the Johannesburg Registrar of Deeds. Proclamation R32 of 2017 mandated the SIU to investigate matters at the Vryburg Registrar of Deeds. Both investigations are still ongoing and they are expected to be completed by the end of the 2020/2021 financial year.

Reply:

Question	Total Number
(a)(i)(aa) since 10 May 1994 total male (The 16 active + 13 inactive male = Total 29, death sentence converted to life is already included in this number)	20 167
(a)(i)(bb) since 10 May 1994total female (The 2 inactive female death sentence converted to life is already included in this number)	254
Grand Total (The 16 active males + 13 inactive male (29) + 2 inactive female = (Total 31), death sentence converted to life is already included in this number)	20 421
(a)(ii) total death converted to life (Total death converted to life imprisonment is calculated as follows; (16) Active + (15) Inactive = Total 31	31 Stand alone
Active Death sentences converted to life (The16 active death sentence converted to life is already include within the Grand Total of life sentenced after 10 May 1994 it is therefore NOT counted again)	16 Not counted again
Inactive Death sentences converted to life (The 15 inactive death sentence converted to life are no longer forming part of the remaining number of those who are still serving life imprisonment and is therefore SUBTRACTED from the Grand Total)	15 Minus from grand total
(b)(i) since 10 May 1994 total died whilst serving sentence	1 268 Minus from grand total
(b)(ii) since 10 May 1994 released due to successful appeals against sentence or conviction	0
(b)(iii) since 10 May 1994 released on parole	1 174 Minus from grand total
(b)(iv) since 10 May 1994 life sentences converted to correctional supervision and released from prison	0
(b)(v) since 10 May 1994 currently still serving sentences of life imprisonment	16 798

Take note: 1166 offenders are reflected as ‘other’, because their statuses fall outside the questions asked. It is however necessary to reflect the number as to ensure the alignment with the current number of offenders who are still serving sentences of life imprisonment.

Other (Inactive, not returned from court, bail pending appeal etc.)

1 166 Minus from grand total

END…

Reply:

Community Corrections is ready to admit and monitor all 19 000 cases to be placed on parole. Prior to the special remission in 2019 the number of offenders was 71523, Community Corrections had 1854 personnel entrusted with the monitoring of parolees and probationers. After the remission the number of parolees and probationers decreased to 56632, the ratio of a member to parolee is currently one is to 30 (1:3). The release of 19000 would not have an impact on the current resources since it will be reverting to the same resources.

 

Caseloads used	Month	Filled	Caseloads	Ratio No Offenders per Official	Ratio No Offenders per Social Worker
02-Apr-20	April	1851	55515	1:29	1:474
23-Apr-20	May	1855	55350	1:29	1:477
28-May-20	June	1854	55882	1:30	1:485
18-Jun-20	June	1854	56632	1:30	1:492

Reply:

In September 2019, the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) initiated a process to consider possible review of the parole policy with the purpose of tightening the consideration process in respect of offenders sentenced for sexual and aggressive offences.

A discussion document on the review of the minimum detention period to be served by offenders who have committed offences relating to gender based violence, sexual and aggressive offences was drafted and submitted to State Law Advisers during September 2019 for an opinion. This document proposed that such category of offenders should be considered for parole after serving two thirds of sentence instead of half of sentence as prescribed by Section 73 of the Correctional Services Act, 1998 (Act 111 of 1998).

It is therefore important to indicate that any legislation or legislative amendment which adversely affects subjects cannot be applied retrospectively. This means that any amendment to the current minimum detention periods will not impact offenders already serving their sentences or persons who would have committed offences before coming into operation of the amended minimum detention period.

In addition, the Department is also considering enforcing compliance with placement conditions by ensuring that offenders whose parole has been revoked will have to serve the remainder of their sentence in a Correctional Centre. If the remainder of the sentence is more than 05 years or if the offender is serving a sentence of life imprisonment, placement on parole must be considered on completion of 05 years of the portion of the sentence which remained after parole was cancelled.

This proposal will serve as a deterrent to parolees from violating placement conditions as failure to comply will result in them serving the remainder of the sentence in a Correctional Centre as opposed to the maximum two years further profile as prescribed by Section 75 (6) Act 111 of 1998.

Parole forms part of the total rehabilitation programme in correcting offending behaviour and may include continuation of programmes aimed at reintegration whilst in the system of community corrections. It is regarded as an aid to the social re-integration of an offender and a mechanism to manage the risk an offender may pose to the community through monitoring by Community Corrections.

Upon re-admission the offender will be assessed to establish the reason(s) for his/her violation of parole conditions and/or repeat offending. The following selection of Correctional Programmes is available to address the reason(s) for violation of parole conditions and/or repeat offending:

• New Beginnings Orientation

The New Beginnings Orientation Programme aims to empower newly admitted offenders to become more aware of themselves as well as the surrounding of the correctional setting in order to cope in the correctional centre.

• Anger Management (“Anger In Anger Out”)

Raises offender awareness on the causes and symptoms of anger and how to manage anger. The programme assists offenders to unlearn old habits associated with aggression and learn healthy ways of dealing with and expressing anger.

• Cross Roads

Equips offenders with the necessary knowledge and skills to enable them to become responsible, law-abiding and productive citizens in order to facilitate their successful reintegration into society.

• Restorative Justice Orientation

Orientate offenders on the Restorative Justice System. Prepare Offenders

for involvement in Restorative Justice programmes options.

• Preparatory programme on Sexual Offences (“Think before you act”)

The programme assists offenders to identity the possible causes of their deviant sexual behaviour and to empower them with information on the biological development and sexual development of human beings.

• Substance Abuse (“Stop to start”)

The main purpose of the Substance Abuse programme is to help offenders gain insight into the negative effects of substance abuse.

• Behaviour Modification Programme on Gangsterism

The main objective is to raise awareness amongst offenders on gang related activities and specifically the negative consequences thereof.

• Economic crime (fraud related) Programme

The Economic Crime Programme (fraud category) targets fraud and related offences, which are more organized in nature (e.g. syndicates).

• Economic Crime (theft related) Programme

The Economic Crime Programme (theft category) targets theft and related offending behaviour (e.g. stolen food from a supermarket).

• Murder and Related Offences (“Changing lanes”)

It targets behaviour of offenders serving sentences for Murder and Related Offences. The programme aims to assist offenders to understand contributing factors towards aggressive behaviour. It further aims to create understanding of human behaviour and emotions as well as to motivate offenders to strive towards emotional intelligence by developing their own individual coping plans.

• Robbery and Related Offences (“Change is possible”)

The programme targets Robbery and Related Offences. The crime category of Robbery and Related Offences is an “umbrella” for all the following crimes (armed robbery hijacking aeroplane, hijacking truck, hijacking Motor Vehicle). The programme aims to assist the offender to develop insight into his/her own situation that contributed to the crime, to develop insight into the impact of the offence and thereafter to develop a personal plan with specific goals without any involvement in crime.

• Pre-Release Programme

The objective of the Pre-Release Programme is to prepare offenders for successful reintegration into society by providing them with skills and information to enable them to cope with possible challenges they may face after their release. The programme is compulsory to offenders with Correctional Sentence Planss who are to be released.

• Programme for Female Offenders

The programme is divided into four sub-programmes due to comprehensive information. It empowers women with general life skills like, emotional health and wellbeing, learning from own mistakes, parental skills and problem solving skills. It addressed addictive behavior, give knowledge about relationships and help offenders with information to build their careers.

The release of an offender on the expiry of his/ her sentence (unconditionally) is not the ideal manner of release for the majority of offenders because of the following:

• No management of risk takes place as the offender is released into the community without any control or supervision whatsoever, and
• No phased re-integration under controlled circumstances takes place with the result that support systems can easily fail however the Department of Correctional Services would have no mandate to provide further support.

Although some parolees have committed serious offences in the recent past, it should be noted that Community Corrections has a caseload of 52 736 parolees and probationers of which 99.27% are complying with their placement conditions.

END

Reply:

1. I have been informed that all procurement to date at individual transaction level, was below R500 000 and guided by departmental delegations to various post levels. Regional and court level procurement started on 20 February 2020 and National Office centralised bulk procurement on 21 April 2020.

(a), (b) and (c) The total expenditure for bulk centralised procurement at national level amounted to R3, 073 million; and the total procurement at Regional Office level amounted to R9, 927 million.

The following is a list of commodities procured nationally and the relevant service provider after competitive procurement processes were followed, through quotations.

Service provider a)	Value b)	Commodity c)	Quantity
Okp Technologies	R494 200.00	Gloves	280 000
Fenpot Direct Cc	R445 200.00	Face Masks - Durable/ Reusable	30 000
Orca Autobody And Restoration	R 378 320.65	Surgical Face Visor	3 348
Betaclean Chemicals &Cleaning Services	R 308 016.00	Hand Sanitizers Spray Bottles 1 litres	6 696 1 litres
Givy's Cuisine	R488 000.00	Hand Sanitizers 5 litres	1600 5 litres
Kaprivi Generals (Pty) Ltd-	R460 000.00	Hand Liquid Soap 5 Litres	4000 5 litres
Motsweding Medical Suppliers	R499 750.00	Non-Contact Infrared Thermometer	250

The following table summarises the expenditure at Regional Office level:

Free State	R696 592
KwaZulu-Natal	R893 269
Western Cape	R1 506 986
Eastern Cape	R986 233
Mpumalanga	R943 575
Northern Cape	R707 156
North West	R1 010 144
Limpopo	R1 818 870
Gauteng	R1 364 545
Total	R9 927 370

2. This procurement was in full compliance with departmental prescripts and delegations. A formal circular on emergency procurement was issued which guided procurement.

3. The reason for procurement at a specific service provider was guided by the outcome of a competitive process (minimum 3 quotations). In the case of emergency procurement, some commodities were procured through petty cash at local pharmacies or suppliers.

Reply:

1. No, I have not been informed of such meeting. Any individual meetings between a Judge and/or members of the public, would not be reported to my office.
2. Neither have I been informed of any appointment to any position, accordingly.
3. I have no power to take disciplinary action against Judges. This is done by the Judicial Service Commission.

Reply:

I wish to inform the Honourable Member that I regard the finalization of the organizational re-alignment process of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development as of critical importance, and I have therefore directed the Acting Director-General to appoint a designated official in his office to manage this in consultation with the Human Resources Management Unit, which has done a lot of incremental work in this regard.

It is a worrying fact that the Departmental organisational structure has not been reviewed for a period of decade. This has had a negative effect in the Department’s ability and capability to meet its performance targets. I have discussed sharply with the Acting Director-General regarding the delay in reviewing the structure and the high vacancy rate in the Senior Management echelon which I have explained in a separate related Parliamentary Question.

I can report that several critical Senior Management vacancies were in the process of being filled or advertised immediately before the processes were halted due to the declaration of the national state of disaster and the subsequent national lockdown. Amongst these is the acting appointment of the Solicitor-General which we were able to conclude just few days before the announcement of the lockdown by the President. Mr Fhedzisani Pandelani has been appointed for three (3) years, and this will allow the Department enough time to reconfigure the Offices of the Solicitor-General and those of the State Attorneys to address the current capacity challenges in this important institution which are well documented.

We have also resumed some of the processes to fill some of the vacant posts which we are able to do during the current level four (4) lockdown phase. The Department has also solicited services of the Government Technical Assistance Centre (GTAC), an agency of the National Treasury, to provide the requisite technical skills to review the Department’s structure.

In terms of the Project Charter which the Department received from GTAC, the complete review of the structure will be finalised by November 2020. This will enable the Department to implement the new structure from the beginning of 2021.

Reply:

Yes, the Department procured personal protective equipment in an effort to combat the spread of the COVID19 virus.  All details of the purchases are provided in Annexure 01.

Reply:

1. The upsurge in the number of domestic violence cases has been globally reported as one of the serious ramifications of the COVID-19 lockdown. As expounded by the Executive Director of UN Women, Ms Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, ‘Confinement is fostering the tension and strain created by security, health, and money worries. It is increasing isolation for women with violent partners, separating them from the people and resources that can best help them. It’s a perfect storm for controlling and violent behaviour behind closed doors. And in parallel, as health systems are stretching to breaking point, domestic violence shelters are also reaching capacity, a service deficit made worse when centres are repurposed for additional Covid-19 response.’

2. In anticipation of domestic violence cases taking a dramatic upswing during the national lockdown, on 30 March 2020, I have issued Alert Level 5 of COVID-19 Directions for court operations, which listed domestic violence applications for protection orders among the justice essential services. However, the Level 5 Directions restricted courts from conducting criminal proceedings, unless for bail applications and reviews thereof. During the period 26 March to 30 April 2020, the district courts dealt with the following applications:

PROTECTION ORDERS APPLICATIONS IN TERMS OF THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 1998 (ACT NO. 116 OF 1998): PERIOD 26 MARCH TO 30 APRIL 2020
Province	Total Caseload Considered	Outcome
	Number of New Applications Registered (26 March – 30 April 2020)	Number of Applications Pending before 26 March 2020	Number of Interim Protection Orders Granted	Number of Summons Issued	Number of Final Orders issued	Total Number of Applications Considered
EC	1 580	507	1 143	565	379	2 087
FS	762	379	466	363	312	1 141
GP	3 159	284	1 632	810	1 001	3 443
KZN	1 474	268	1 108	110	524	1 742
LIMP	982	861	750	287	806	1 843
MP	626	297	528	175	220	923
NC	165	163	229	43	56	328
NW	706	214	375	42	75	492
WC	810	252	545	317	200	1 062
TOTAL	10 264	3 225	6 776	2 712	3 573	13 061

 

3. As against the global trend, it has been recently reported that South Africa has in fact taken a divergent experience in this area. In April 2020, the South African Medical Research Council modelling suggested that the hospital trauma admissions have declined by 66% since the alcohol-free national lockdown[1]. The rate of patients admitted for injuries inflicted as a result of violent crimes has drastically gone down in South Africa. Just recently, SAPS also reported a steep decline in the number of reported domestic violence cases. On 22 April 2020, the Minister of Police, Mr Bheki Cele announced that ‘The national picture reflects a decrease by 69.4% from 9 990 cases between 29 March and 22 April last year (2019) to 3,061 since the lockdown until 20 April 2020, meaning a difference of 6,929.’[2]

 

4. Similarly, our courts registered a further decline in the number of new applications for domestic violence protection orders received during the COVID-19 Lockdown:

New Applications for the Domestic Violence Protection Orders
All Provinces	January 2020	February 2020	March 2020	26 March to 30 April 2020
	22 211	18 112	14 404	10 264

Note: From these figures, since January 2020, our courts have been experiencing a persistent drop in the number of these new applications. Therefore, the ban of alcohol during the lockdown may not be the only contributor to the decrease of domestic violence cases.

5. Despite this sudden unexplainable drop in the domestic violence cases, the Department has introduced in our courts a number of measures to address the domestic violence epidemic:

a) In March 2020, shortly before the national lockdown, the Department introduced the Justice Rapid Results Initiative (RRI) to fast-track the finalisation of domestic violence matters and most importantly, to provide a catalogue of victim-support services aimed at creating a victim-centric justice experience, which is more caring, fast and effective. Due to the COVID-19 National Lockdown restrictions, the RRI is currently in operation, but in a minimal scale. The RRI is championed by the Deputy Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mr John Jeffery, and the plan is to increase its footprint to more district courts post-COVID-19 epidemic.

b) There’s a chronic tendency among certain victims of domestic violence to minimize the experience of abuse due to a number of emotional challenges which include denial, shame, embarrassment and fear of exposure. Ambivalence often drives these victims out of the court system back into the cycle of violence where they would stay trapped until they die. In curbing potential femicide cases, the Department has introduced the Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Tool in courts which provides a set of questions intended to open the eyes of the victim to the harmful realities and the fatal consequences of violence in his/her relationship, and to take appropriate actions. The tool was developed with government stakeholders, including SAPS, and also with the participation of the civil society. It is also available in our website.

c) It is often not easy for a victim of domestic violence to leave an abusive relationship. In an effort to protect their lives whilst leaving with their abusers during this Lockdown period, the Department has distributed to courts the booklet titled: My Safety Plan against Domestic Violence, which encourages the victims to make their personalized safety plans. The Plan guides the victims in identifying measures of safety, i.e. at the shared residence, during a violent attack, when planning to escape from the shared residence, etc. These include identifying trustworthy rescue persons, removing items from the house which might be used as dangerous weapons, packing an escape bag, identifying the safe escape route from the house, and selecting a safe house or shelter to where the planned escape will be made. The Department is in a process of distributing the Safety Plan to shelters to ensure that no survivor leaves the shelter without having planned. The Safety Plan can also be accessed from the Department’s website.

d) With the increasing figures of reported cases of violence in domestic relationships and femicide, the need for the review of the Domestic Violence Act, 1998 (Act No. 116 of 1998) became more pressing. The Department has published the Domestic Violence Act (DVA) Amendment Bill for public comments. The Bill seeks to amend the DVA to, inter alia, tighten safety measures of a protection order, and to introduce obligations to other government functionaries so as to increase stakeholder support and cooperation in the implementation of the Act.

The closing date for comments was on 24 April 2020. The Department is now considering comments for incorporation into the Bill. The Bill will be introduced in Parliament in the current financial year.

1. Prof Charles Perry, SAMRC: Opinion by Bhekisisa: ‘Could SA’s Lockdown ‘Experiment’ help chart a path to a sober, les violent country?’ ↑

2. Daily Maverick: Gender-based violence during lockdown in SA: Looking for answersWhy is South Africa not showing the rise in domestic violence cases reported elsewhere in the world? Chandre Gould is a Senior Research Fellow, Justice and Violence Prevention, ISS Pretoria; 11 May 2020 ↑

Reply:

1. (a) The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) does not keep crime statistics specifically for crimes committed by children or crimes against children. The NPA only collate diversion statistics with respect to offences committed by children in line with the Child Justice Act.

(b) The registrars or clerks of the court have submitted 2458 names to the Department of Social Development in terms of section 114 of the Children’s Act, 2005 (Act 38 of 2005) for placement onto Part A of the Child Protection Register (Form 25).

Year	Number of Form 25s submitted
2013/2014	70
2014/2015	330
2015/2016	453
2016/2017	412
2017/2018	424
2018/2019	411
2019/2020 to date	358
Total	2458

The Children’s Act, 2005 came into operation on 1 April 2010 expecting clerks of the court to forward the names of children in terms of section 114 of the Children’s Act, 2005 for placement onto Part A of the Child Protection Register (Form 25) to the Registrar of the National Child Protection Register. The Department of Social Development reported that this section was not fully implemented by the courts. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development issued Circular 61of 2013 in 2013 to the courts to ensure compliance and to perform quality checks on the information submitted to the Registrar of the National Child Protection Register for placement on the Register. There may be instances where the numbers submitted by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to the Registrar differ from the numbers recorded on the Register and this is due to the fact that the Registrar receive information from various sources as provided for in section 114(1)(a) of the Children’s Act, 2005).

(2) The Registrars or clerks of the court have submitted 662 names to the Department of Social Development in terms of section 122 of the Children’s Act, 2005 (Act 38 of 2005) for placement onto Part B of the Child Protection Register (Form 28).

Year	Number of Form 28s submitted
2013/2014	44
2014/2015	69
2015/2016	59
2016/2017	67
2017/2018	145
2018/2019	135
2019/2020 to date	143
Total	662

There may be instances where the numbers submitted by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to the Registrar of the National Child Protection differ from the numbers recorded on the Register and this is due to the fact that the Registrar receive information from various sources, such as the South African Council of Educators (SACE) as provided for in section 120(1)(c) of the Children’s Act, 2005).

The Registrar of the National Child Protection Register reported in 2017/18 to the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development that some courts were submitting information on Forms 28 in instances where no finding was made in relation to unsuitability to work with children. The Department responded by conducting refresher training in 2018/19 on the submission of information to the Registrar of the National Child Protection Register in conjunction with the Registrar of the National Child Protection Register, the latter conducted the training. The training sessions were conducted as follows:

Province	Date
Western Cape	26 and 27 July 2018
Limpopo	7 August 2018
Gauteng	10 October and 13 August 2018
Eastern Cape	23 August 2018
Mpumalanga	21 August 2018
Northern Cape	23 October 2018
Free State	25 and 26 October 2018
North West	31 October 2018
KwaZulu-Natal	2017/2018

Reply:

1. The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)’s position is that criminal investigations and consideration for prosecution is a parallel process and is not reliant on the completion of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into State Capture (“Zondo Commission”). There have been some challenges regarding the sharing of evidence, which the NPA is trying to address.

2. There are considerations to amend the regulations of the State Capture Commission to facility the sharing of information between the Commission and the Independent Directorate.

The NPA would welcome interim reports from the Commission so that the Investigating Directorate (ID) would be able to assess the evidence, relevant to ID investigations, that has been collected by the Commission.

3. Several investigations are currently underway and there are matters that are under consideration for prosecution. The following matters are before courts:

i. State Owned Enterprises (SOE) Cases

Eskom (Kusile Power Station) – Former Eskom executives (Mr Hlakudi and Mr Masango) and co-accused were arrested and appeared in court in December 2019. Their next court appearance date is 25 May 2020.

ii. High Level Public and Private Corruption

Bosasa – Mr Angelo Agrizzi and Mr Andries van Tonder (former Chief Operations Officer (COO) and COO of Bosasa, respectively), Mr Linda Mti (former National Commissioner of Correctional Services) and Mr Patrick Gillingham (former Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the Department of Correctional Services [DCS]), were arrested and charged with corruption, money laundering and fraud related to tender contracts at the DCS in February 2019.

iii. Security Sector Cases

a) SAPS – Manthata and Others - appeared before the Specialised Commercial Crimes Court in Palm Ridge on 17 March 2020, on charges of fraud and corruption as well as contravention of the PFMA. Case postponed to 5 May 2020 for disclosure. The case relates to allegations of fraud and corruption committed towards the SAPS during procurement of blue lights.

b) SAPS – S v T Khoza (Shezi Matter) Lt Gen Shezi was arrested and the matter was placed on the roll in the Pretoria Specialised Commercial Crime Court in Pretoria in December 2019. The matter will be before court on 27 March 2020 to set a trial date. Disclosure has been made and charges have been drafted. The matter relates to allegations of corruption.

c) NPA – Ms Jackie Lepinka appeared before court and matter postponed to 24 April 2020. The accused is charged with Theft, Fraud, Unauthorised access to or modification of computer material, in contravention of section 40(a)(2)(a) of the NPA Act; and unlawful disclosure in contravention of section 41 (6)(b) of the NPA Act.

Reply:

1. There were a number of prosecutions conducted under the provisions of Section 173 of the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA), Act No. 56 of 2003 in the period from 1 January 2006, as outlined in the table below:

(a)(i) Number of persons prosecuted in terms of section 173 of the MFMA	67
ii) Names of Municipalities involved	Eastern Cape a) Mbizana Local Municipality b) Cacadu Municipality c) Senqu Local Municipality d) Koukamma Municipality e) Amahlati Local Municipality f) Buffalo City Municipality g) Nelson Mandela Bay Metro h) Ikwezi Local Municipality 2. Northern Cape Hoogland Municipality 3. Gauteng West Rand District Municipality 4. Western Cape a) Oudsthoorn Municipality b) George/ Eden Municipality c) ClanWilliam/Cederberg Municipality d) Swellendam Municipality e) Paarl Municipality 5. Free State a) Maluti-A-Phofung Local Municipality b) Dihlabeng Local Municipality c) Moqhaka Local Municipality d) The Nala Local Municipality
(b)(i) Municipalities where prosecutions were withdrawn	a) Mbizana Local Municipality b) Oudtshoorn Municipality c) ClanWilliam Municipality d) Swellendam Municipality e) Paarl Municipality
(ii) and c) Municipalities and cases where convictions were attained, and sentences imposed	a) Cacadu Municipality, in S v Khanyisa Majokweni and another i The 2 accused were convicted for contravening section 173 of the MFMA. ii.  Accused 1 was sentenced to a fine of R 1 500.00 or 90-days imprisonment, which was wholly and conditionally suspended for 5 years. iii. Accused 2 was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment, wholly and conditionally suspended for 5 years. b) Senqu Local Municipality in re S v Mxolisi Yawa and 6 others i. 5 of the 7 accused were convicted for contravening section 173 of the MFMA ii. Accused 1 was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment wholly and conditionally suspended for 5 years iii. Accused 2 was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment wholly and conditionally suspended for 5 years iv. Accused 5 was sentenced to a fine of R5000 wholly and conditionally suspended for 5 years v. Accused 6 was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment wholly and conditionally suspended for 5 years vi. Accused 7 was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment wholly and conditionally suspended for 5 years c) Hoogland Municipality, in re S v Marius Botha i. The accused was convicted for contravening section 173 of the MFMA ii. He was sentenced to a fine of R5 000.00 or 12 months imprisonment. d) Oudtshoorn Municipality, in re S v Pietersen i. The accused was convicted for contravening section 173 of the MFMA ii. He was sentenced to 5 direct years imprisonment, which was reduced to 2 years direct imprisonment on appeal to the Western Cape High Court iii. Applications to appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court were dismissed.
Municipalities and cases where there were acquittals	a) Senqu Local Municipality, in re S v Mxolisi Yawa and 6 others (2 persons were acquitted) b) Koukamma Municipality, in re S v Sinaw Amandla Construction and 3 others c) Oudtshoorn Municipality, in re S v Pietersen and 5 others
Municipalities and cases which are partly heard before court	a) Hoogland Municipality, in re S v Marius Botha b) West Rand Municipality, in re S v TZ Mokhatla and 2 others c) George/ Eden Municipality, in re S v Cecil Afrika d) Amahlati Local Municipality, in re S v Mlonzi and 2 others e) Buffalo City Municipality, in re i S v Zambodla and another, and ii. S v Ndzele and 5 others f. Nelson Mandela Bay Metro, in re S v Mkaza and 5 others g. Ikwezi Local Municipality, in re S v Gutas h. Cacadu Municipality, in re S v Diniso and 5 others i. Maluti-A-Phofung Local Municipality, in re S v Tsupa and 8 others j. Dihlabeng Local Municipality, in re S v Molatseli and 2 others k) Moqhaka Local Municipality, in re S v Mqwati and 3 others l) The Nala Local Municipality, in re S v Christopher Mokomela and 3 others

2. No person has been prosecuted under the provisions of section 119 of the Municipal Systems Act, Act 32 of 2000.

Reply:

I wish to inform the Honourable Member that I am not aware of any business transaction involving the purchase of shares through a loan advanced by Public Investment Corporation.

Reply:

(1)(a) The first infection was confirmed on 06 April 2020.

(1)(b) From 30 to 31 March 2020 the index official reported sick to the supervisor and was admitted to hospital on 01 April 2020. The index-official was accompanied by two colleagues also working at the same Centre and was tested for COVID-19 on arrival and result were to be available on 04 April 2020. However, the doctor immediately referred the two colleagues as well for self-quarantine pending the outcome of the results of the admitted patient.

(2)(a)(i) The East London Correctional Centre implemented Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for Preparedness, Detention and Response to Coronavirus diseases (COVID-19) as approved by the National Commissioner on 14 March 2020. The SOP was implemented together with the Department’s COVID-19 National Disaster Response and Mitigation Plan for prevention, containment and recovery or re-integration. All officials and offenders, were trained both internally by the Department and the Provincial Department of Health on COVID-19 on how to prevent infection and handle infected cases.

In addition, the Management Area procured Personal Protective Equipment (PPEs) in order to prevent the spread of the virus and continued to maintain a virus free environment through proper use of PPEs.

The Management Area COVID-19 response plan was activated resulting in mass screening and testing of both officials and inmates. Identified cells within the correctional centre were utilised to quarantine and isolate presumptive cases during the mass screening. These cells were already identified and prepared for this purpose as required by the SOP. Guest houses and isolation sites were also identified through the assistance of the Department of Health.

(2)(aa) The index official was tested for COVID-19 on 01 April 2020, where the medical doctor immediately referred the two colleagues for self-quarantine pending the outcome of the results. Furthermore, one of the two officials tested positive upon testing and was subsequently isolated. The other colleague who tested negative is back at work after having been quarantined.

The 56 inmates who tested positive for COVID-19 were moved to the other section of the Centre as it is not overcrowded. The following processes in the management of inmates were followed:

• COVID-19 Response team with clear Roles at all levels (Centre, Area, Regional level) was established;
• Conducted awareness sessions to all inmates on COVID-19;
• Continuous screening of all inmates;
• All inmates with COVID-19 signs and symptoms are identified and referred for testing;
• Partner Departments (SAPS, DoH, NICD etc) are involved in this process;
• Presumptive, positive and negative cases are separated and monitored according to the three cohorts;
• Inmates awaiting COVID-19 results are quarantined / isolated;
• All positive cases are monitored for complications and referred to secondary hospital for treatment;
• Vulnerable inmates (i.e above 60, diabetics, HIV positives, TB patients, Asthmatics, cancer patients, pregnant females), are identified, classified and monitored as per risk factors;
• Isolated/Quarantine inmates are retested for COVID-19 before exit out of quarantine;
• Psychological, Spiritual care are provided to confirmed inmates;

(2)(bb) The three officials were interviewed in line with Disease Outbreak guidelines of Department of Health to establish places that they visited in order to determine possible point of contamination. Identification and tracing of contacts was done resulting in the testing of 268 inmates of which 56 being positively diagnosed with COVID-19. Furthermore, identified officials on the same shift as the index official were immediately quarantined and 92 officials from Med C, where the index official is working, were tested and 23 were positive including the index patient who recently recovered and has tested negative.

(2)(cc) Contacts of first patient were tested through assistance from Department of Health and National Health Laboratory Services (NHLS) from 08 to 09 April 2020. Subsequent to the tracing, Department of Health initiated mass screening and testing at the Port St Johns area.

(2)(b)(i) Implementation of the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for Preparedness, Detention and Response to Coronavirus diseases (COVID-19) and the Department’s COVID-19 National Disaster Response and Mitigation Plan for prevention, containment and recovery were implemented on 15 March 2020.

(2)(b)(ii) All these measures are still applicable to date as per the availability of NHLS or the Department of Health testing team. The Correctional Centre continues to implement containment and recovery measures while also intensifying prevention measures. The recent date for testing conducted by NHLS was on 24 April 2020.

END

Reply:

Offenders released on parole or after completion of their sentences are screened for coronavirus infection in terms of the Departmental Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the Preparedness, Detection and Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

All presumptive and confirmed COVID-19 offenders who are due for parole or release are quarantined and isolated in DCS and parole suspended until confirmed negative.

Should the home environment allow for home quarantine or isolation (based on their individual health status) as determined by the Social Workers in Community Corrections, the offender may be paroled and linked with the District Tracer Teams.

These offenders will be subjected to a pre-release programme which includes information about their health condition (e.g. self-care and prevention measures) and provided with a two (2) months’ supply of medication.

Offenders whose sentences have ended are released and linked with the District Tracer Teams and referred in terms of the departmental health care referral procedures.

END

Reply:

The number of sentenced inmates housed in the Republic’s correctional centres as at 15 April 2020 is as follows:

Management Area	Correctional Centre	(a) Number of HIV positive offenders	HIV/TB Co-infection (HIV Entry)	(b) Number of TB offenders	TB/HIV Co-infection (TB Entry)
EASTERN CAPE (EC) REGION
Amathole	Fort Beaufort	5	0	0	0
	Grahamstown	28	1	2	1
	King Williams Town	5	1	1	1
	Middledrift	155	3	13	3
	Stutterheim	3	0	0	0
	TOTAL	196	5	16	5
East London	Med B	6	0	0	0
	Med C	29	0	1	0
	Maximum	224	1	14	1
	Mdantsane	127	7	32	7
	TOTAL	386	8	47	8
Kirkwood	Graaff-Reinet	0	0	14	4
	Jansenville	0	0	0	0
	Kirkwood	135	4	0	0
	Somerset East	22	0	2	0
	TOTAL	157	4	16	4
Mthatha	Bizana	2	0	0	0
	Elliotdale	8	0	0	0
	Flagstaff	19	1	1	1
	Lusikisiki	45	1	2	1
	Mt Ayliff	9	0	1	0
	Mt Fletcher	25	0	2	0
	Mt Frere	15	0	0	0
	Mqanduli	31	0	3	0
	Ngqeleni	15	0	0	0
	Tabankulu	18	0	0	0
	Medium	309	1	13	1
	Remand	3	0	0	0
	TOTAL	499	3	22	3
Sada	Barkley East	11	0	0	0
	Burgersdorp	22	0	0	0
	Butterworth	8	0	0	0
	Cofimvaba	0	0	0	0
	Cradock	19	0	0	0
	Dordrecht	0	0	0	0
	Dutywa	18	0	0	0
	Lady Frere	5	0	0	0
	Middelburg	130	0	0	0
	Ngcobo	0	0	0	0
	Nqamakwe	0	0	0	0
	Queenstown	0	0	0	0
	Sada	32	0	0	0
	Willowvale	4	0	0	0
	Sterkspruit	0	0	0	0
	TOTAL	249	0	0	0
St Albans	Medium A	9	0	1	0
	Maximum	329	2	23	2
	Medium B	172	9	33	9
	Patensie	44	0	0	0
	Port Eli	18	0	3	0
	TOTAL	572	11	60	11
EC REGIONAL TOTAL	2 059	31	161	31
FREE STATE & NORTHERN CAPE (FS&NC) REGION
Colesberg	Colesberg	20	0	1	0
	De Aar	35	1	3	1
	Richmond	3	0	0	0
	Hopetown	5	0	1	0
	Victoria West	9	0	0	0
	Total	72	1	5	1
Goedemoed	Goedemoed Med A	155	0	1	0
	Goedemoed Med B	104	0	2	0
	Bethulie	10	0	1	0
	Edenburg	10	0	0	0
	Fauresmith	2	0	0	0
	Zastron	6	0	0	0
	Total	287	0	4	0
Grootvlei	Grootvlei Med A	236	2	6	2
	Grootvlei Med B	84	2	5	1
	Boshof	4	0	0	0
	Brandfort	15	0	0	0
	Ladybrand	9	0	0	0
	Wepener	6	0	0	0
	Winburg	23	0	0	0
	Mangaung	700	0	13	1
	Total	1077	4	24	4
Kimberley	Barkly West	4	0	0	0
	Douglas	17	0	2	0
	Kimberley	105	0	8	0
	Tswelopele	390	3	12	1
	Total	516	3	22	1
Upington	Kuruman	46	1	3	2
	Springbok	6	0	6	0
	Upington	95	4	9	0
	Total	147	5	18	2
Groenpunt	Groenpunt Med.	179	0	0	0
	Groenpunt Max.	536	2	9	0
	Groenpunt Youth	31	0	1	0
	Frankfort	16	0	0	0
	Heilbron	5	0	0	0
	Parys	8	0	0	0
	Sasolburg	25	0	0	0
	Vereeniging	104	0	0	0
	Total	904	2	10	0
Bizzah Makhate	Centre A	279	4	4	0
	Centre B	77	0	1	0
	Centre C	120	0	0	0
	Centre D	0	0	0	0
	Bethlehem	33	2	2	0
	Ficksburg	5	0	0	0
	Harrismith	33	2	2	2
	Hennenman	18	0	0	0
	Hoopstad	5	0	0	0
	Lindley	14	0	0	0
	Odendaalsrus	94	0	0	0
	Senekal	10	0	1	0
	Ventersburg	29	0	0	0
	Virginia	110	2	3	2
	Total	827	10	13	4
FS&NC REGIONAL TOTAL	3 830	25	96	12
GAUTENG REGION
Baviaanspoort	Emthonjeni	6	0	0	0
	Medium	175	0	0	0
	Maximum	138	2	3	0
	Total	319	2	3	0
Kgoši Mampuru II	Local	20	1	1	1
	Female	76	0	0	0
	Central	569	13	20	2
	C max	70	0	0	0
	Atteridgeville	174	2	3	0
	Odi	324	4	6	1
	Total	1233	20	30	4
Johannesburg	Med A	39	0	0	0
	Med B	487	2	8	0
	Med C	107	0	0	0
	Female	128	0	3	0
	Total	761	2	11	0
Krugersdorp	Krugersdorp	320	1	8	2
	Total	320	1	8	2
Modderbee	Modderbee	526	5	11	1
	Nigel	89	0	3	0
	Devon	47	0	1	1
	Total	883	3	2	1
Zonderwater	Medium A	356	1	2	0
	Medium B	207	2	4	1
	Total	563	3	6	1
Leeuwkop	Med A	213	1	1	0
	Med B	123	0	0	0
	Med C	226	0	1	0
	Maximum	321	2	0	1
	Total	883	3	2	1
Boksburg not included due nursing staff on quarantine
GAUTENG REGIONAL TOTAL	4 741	36	75	10
KWAZULU-NATAL REGION (KZN)
Durban	Medium B	1003	0	19	5
	Medium C	94	2	5	2
	Youth	29	0	1	0
	Female	228	0	0	0
	Umzinto	143	0	1	0
	Total	1497	2	26	7
Empangeni	Qalakabusha	605	6	12	0
	Empangeni Medium	60	2	4	0
	Eshowe	316	3	6	0
	Mthunzini	21	0	0	0
	Stanger	30	0	0	0
	Maphumulo	14	0	1	0
	Ingwavuma	9	0	0	0
	Total	1055	11	23	0
Gloencoe	Bergville	6	1	1	0
	Dundee	8	0	0	0
	Estcourt	84	0	1	0
	Glencoe	236	0	0	0
	Greytown	22	1	1	0
	Kranskop	17	1 MDR	1	0
	Ladysmith	64	0	0	0
	Pomeroy	11	0	0	0
	Total	448	3	4	0
Kokstad	Ebhongweni	324	3	8	3
	Kokstad Medium	158	2	2	2
	Portshepstone	28	0	0	0
	Matatiele	18	0	0	0
	Total	528	5	10	5
Ncome	Medium A	155	1	1	1
	Medium B	343	4	5	4
	Melmoth	20	0	0	0
	Nkandla	9	0	0	0
	Nongoma	23	0	0	0
	Vryheid	22	0	0	0
	Total	572	5	6	5
Pietermaritzburg	Medium A	1055	1	45	4
	Medium B	59	2	2	0
	Ixopo	50	2	2	2
	New Hanover	98	0	2	0
	Sevontein	387	1	4	1
	Total	1649	6	55	7
Waterval	Medium A	273	0	2	0
	Medium B	148	0	0	0
	Ekuseni	11	0	1	0
	Newcastle	60	0	0	0
	Utrecht	2	0	0	0
	Total	494	0	3	0
KZN REGIONAL TOTAL	6 243	32	127	24
LIMPOPO MPUMALANGA AND NORTH WEST REGION (LMN)
Thohoyandou	Medium A	110	2	4	0
	Medium B	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
	Female/Juvenile	19	0	0	0
	Makhado	28	1	1	0
	Total	157	03	05	0
Polokwane	Polokwane	61	0	3	0
	Modimolle	70	2	4	0
	Tzaneen	6	0	0	0
	Total
Klerksdorp	Potchefstroom	91	2	3	0
	Klerksdorp	360	2	4	0
	Christiana	20	0	0	0
	Wolmaransstad	14	0	0	0
	Total	485	4	7	0
Kutama-Sinthumule	Kutama-Sinthumule	637	1	2	0
	Total	637	1	2	0
Witbank	Witbank	258	5	6	0
	Middelburg	69	2	3	0
	Carolina	4	0	0	0
	Belfast	3	0	0	0
	Total	334	7	9	0
Rusternburg	Losperfontein	212	2	11	2
	Mogwase	105	0	3	0
	Rustenburg Med A	56	1	1	1
	Rustenburg COE	7	0	0	0
	Total	380	3	15	3
Rooigrond	Medium A	256	1	1	0
	Remand Det	0	0	0	0
	Medium B	86	0	0	0
	Lichtenburg	27	0	0	0
	Zeerust	27	0	0	0
	Total	396	1	1	0
Bethal	Bethal	180	2	4	2
	Ermelo	82	0	0	0
	Piet Retief	33	0	0	0
	Standerton	149	2	1	1
	Volksrust	27	0	0	0
	Total	471	4	5	3
Barberton	Maximum	315	5	11	0
	Nelspruit	32	6	8	1
	Medium B	215	1	1	0
	Town youth	15	0	0	0
	Medium A	54	0	0	0
	Lydenburg	35	0	0	0
	Total	666	12	20	1
LMN REGIONAL TOTAL	3 663	37	71	7
WESTERN CAPE REGION
Allendale	Allandale	62	0	5	0
	Paardeberg	30	1	4	0
	Hawequa	4	0	0	0
	Obiqua	31	0	0	0
	Total	127	1	9	0
Brandvlei	Medium	47	1	2	1
	Maximum	85	1	1	1
	Youth	18	1	5	1
	Total	150	3	8	3
Breederiver	Worcester Male	44	0	10	0
	Worcester Female	48	1	3	0
	Robertson	14	0	1	0
	Warmbokkeveld	50	0	1	0
	Dwarsrivier	41	0	5	0
	Total	197	1	20	0
Drakenstein	Medium A	67	0	1	0
	Medium B Youth	21	0	2	0
	Maximum	70	1	5	1
	Stellenbosch	9	0	0	0
	Total	167	1	8	1
Goodwood	Goodwood	145	06	33	02
	Total	145	6	33	2
Overberg	Medium	109	0	2	0
	Maximum	120	1	7	1
	Caledon	1	0	0	0
	Buffeljagsrivier	0	0	0	0
	Swellendam	109	0	2	0
	Total	339	1	11	1
Pollsmoor	Female	19	0	3	0
	Maximum	9	1	1	1
	Medium A	3	0	0	0
	Medium B	82	1	17	1
	Medium C	18	0	6	0
	Total	131	2	27	2
Southern Cape	George Male	38	1	3	0
	George Female	22	0	0	0
	Oudtshoorn Med A	21	0	1	0
	Oudtshoorn Med B	22	0	0	0
	Beaufort West	2	0	0	0
	Ladismith	3	0	0	0
	Prince Albert	10	0	0	0
	Uniondale	6	0	0	0
	Mosselbay	0	0	0	0
	Knysna	10	0	1	0
	Total	134	1	5	0
Voorberg	Medium A	16	2	3	2
	Medium B	185	2	9	2
	Van Rhynsdorp	38	0	18	0
	Calvinia	2	0	0	0
	Total	241	4	30	4
West Coast	Medium A	98	0	0	0
	Medium B	3	0	1	0
	Riebeeck West	3	0	1	0
	Total	104	0	2	0
WESTERN CAPE REGIONAL TOTAL	1735	20	153	13
GRAND TOTAL	22 271	181	683	97

END