Questions and Replies

Filter by year

29 April 2016 - NW1128

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(a) What are the reasons for the current shortages of (i) food and (ii) stationery in the Leeuwkop Medium C Correctional Facility in Gauteng and (b) why have horticulture courses been put on hold?

Reply:

a) (i) (ii) There is no shortage of food and stationery in the Leeuwkop Medium C Correctional Facility in Gauteng.

b) The Service Provider was not quality assured and therefore cannot provide training.

25 April 2016 - NW1106

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Is the Special Investigating Unit currently involved in conducting any investigations into his department; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

The President issued, in a government gazette no.39935, two Proclamations (Number R.18 and R.20) on 15 April 2016 in respect of the affairs of the Department of Correctional Services. The details of the proclamations relate to procurement irregularities.

21 April 2016 - NW538

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)(a) How many (i) natural and (ii) unnatural deaths of inmates have occurred in the past 12 months in the Kgoši Mampuru II Correctional Services facility in Pretoria, (b) when did each death occur and (c) what was the reason in each specified case; (2) whether any of the specified deaths were reported to the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS); if not, why not in each case; if so, when was each case reported; (3) whether the JICS investigated any of the specified deaths; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?

Reply:

(1)(a)(i) There were thirty three (33) reported cases of natural deaths

(1)(a)(ii) There were five (5) reported cases of unnatural deaths (known and unknown causes)

Information for (1)(b),(c)and (2) is reflected in the tables below:

(1)(b) Date of death

(1)(c) Reason of death

(2) Date reported to JICS –if not give reason

NATURAL DEATHS

2015.03.13

Respiratory Failure

2015.08.24

2015.04.09

Heart Problem

2016.02.23

2015.04.26

Respiratory Failure

2015.05.25

2015.05.11

Respiratory Failure

2015.05.17

2015.08.24

Nephrotic Syndrome

2015.08.27

2015.08.27

Broncho Pneumonia

2015.09.06.

2015.08.29

Acute Liver Failure

2015.08.30

2015.10.15

Respiratory Failure

2015.10.29

2015.11.20

Cardio Pulmonary Arrest

2015.12.13

2015.05.17.

Retro Viral Disease

2015.05.20

2015.05.26.

Plasma Blastic Lymphoma

2015.05.28

2015.06.08

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.24

2015.06.11

Idiopathic Thrombo Cytopenia

2015.06.17

2015.06.11

Kaposi Sarcoma

2015.06.17

2015.06.10

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.17

2016.01.29

Respiratory Failure

2016.01.29

2016.02.20

Opportunistic Infection /Diabetes

2016.03.07

2016.02.28

Electrolyte Imbalance

2016.02.28

2015.05.27

Epilepsy

Hypertension

Previous Cerebro vascular accident

2015.05.28

2015.11.10

Retro Viral Disease

2015.11.12

2015.11.13

Retro Viral Disease

2015.11.13

2015.12.08

Diabetes

Hypertension

Asthma

2015.02.09

2016.02.24

Hepatitis

2016.02.24

2015.09.09

Acute asthmatic attack

2015.09.09

2015.06.15

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.22

2015.06.16

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.18

2015.06.18

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.26

2015.07.06

Meningitis

2015.07.10

2015.07.26

Hypertension

2015.07.31

2015.09.01

Retro Viral Disease

2015.09.03

2015.09.13

Retro Viral Disease

2015.09.16

2015.11.30

Sepsis renal failure

2015.12.01

2016.01.19

Jaundice

2016.01.26

UNNATURAL DEATHS

2015.08.26

Suicide: Medication overdose

2015.08.27

2015.11.08

Unnatural: Post mortem outstanding. Death register number 1619/15: Steve Biko Forensic Pathology Laboratory

2015.11.08

2015.11.12

Assault: Inmate on Inmate: Stabbed in the heart

2015.11.12

2015.11.19

Suicide: Hanging

2015.11.19

2015.12.12

Stab wound of the chest.

Injury to the pulmonary artery.

Blood in the pericardial sack around the heart.

Massive haemothorax of the left chest cavity.

Superficial incised wounds of the right flank and back

2015.12.12

(3) The JICS does not investigate all deaths reported to it, due to lack of capacity; it does however follow a process to confirm that deaths did occur and this is done via the Independent Correctional Centre Visitor.

Natural Deaths – when a natural death is reported the Independent Correctional Centre Visitor will fill in a record of confirmation to confirm that the death has taken place.

Unnatural Deaths - when an unnatural death is reported the Independent Correctional Centre Visitor will be required to conduct an enquiry on the death and depending on the severity of the case it will then be referred to the JICS investigating unit to investigate

The last enquiry conducted was at Kgoši Mampuru Local in November 2015 where it was alleged that the inmate committed suicide by hanging himself. The Independent Correctional Centre Visitor did the enquiry and found that indeed the inmate had committed suicide by using his shoes laces and a piece of bed sheet as a rope.

20 April 2016 - NW1074

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether the policy on the use of personal computers by inmates studying toward formal educational qualifications was recently amended; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) why and (b) what (i) are the relevant details and (ii) is the effect of the specified amendment(s) on the specified inmates’ usage of personal computers in their studies?

Reply:

(a) The Department is in the process of amending the Formal Education Policy and Procedures.

(b) The relevant details will be communicated as soon as the policy is approved.

20 April 2016 - NW1051

Profile picture: Malatsi, Mr MS

Malatsi, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether he has been requested to commission legal advice with regard to certain persons (names furnished) about possible legal consequences of travelling to Zurich, Switzerland for Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) related business; if not, has he volunteered legal advice to the specified persons in this regard; if so, (a) who requested him to commission such advice, (b) what was the detailed request in respect of each specified person, (c) on what date(s) were such requests submitted to his department, (d) what was the department’s advice and (e) what were the reasons for providing such advice in each case; 2) whether his department has been in contact with FIFA regarding questions that they sent to the specified persons in relation to the US$10 million paid for the Diaspora Legacy Programme; if not, why not; if so, (a) when did his department contact FIFA, (b) what requests and submissions did his department make to FIFA and (c) what was FIFA’s response in each case; 3) whether his department has contacted (a) the office of the United States Attorney-General (USAG), (b) the Federal Bureau of Investigation and/or (c) any other US-based law enforcement authority about the identity of the two South African nationals identified as co-conspirators in the USAG’s indictment on corruption and vote-buying in FIFA World Cup bids; if not, why not; if so, what was the (i) nature and (ii) content of the interactions he had with any of the US-based law enforcement authorities?

Reply:

  1. No. I was neither approached by the Minister of Sports and Recreation nor volunteered to commission legal advice about possible legal consequences of travelling to Zurich, Switzerland for Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) related business.
  2. To date, the Department only received a copy of an indictment against fourteen (14) accused persons. No South African is listed as an accused person. Twenty five (25) persons are referred to, in the indictment, as co-conspirators. The co-conspirators are referred to as #1 to #25. Their names are not revealed in the indictment. It is stated that their names are known to the Grand Jury. The following details of the alleged South African co-conspirators are provided in the indictment:
  • #15 was a high-ranking official of the 2006 and 2010 South African World Cup Bid Committee and member of the local South African Organizing Committee; and
  • #16 was also a high-ranking official of the 2006 and 2010 South African World Cup Bid Committee and member of the local South African Organizing Committee.

To date, the Department did not receive any further communication regarding the matter from the authorities of the United States of America.

The Department is not aware of any questions sent to any persons.

3. The Department did not contact the authorities of the United State of America. The indictment was forwarded to the Ministers of Sports and Recreation, International Relations and Cooperation, and Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation, as well as Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation for their information and consideration for the way forward.

20 April 2016 - NW938

Profile picture: Brauteseth, Mr TJ

Brauteseth, Mr TJ to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Has (a) he and/or (b) his Deputy Ministers ever (i) met with any (aa) member, (bb) employee and/or (cc) close associate of the Gupta family and/or (ii) attended any meeting with the specified persons (aa) at the Gupta’s Saxonwold Estate in Johannesburg or (bb) anywhere else since taking office; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, in each specified case, (aaa) what are the names of the persons who were present at each meeting, (bbb)(aaaa) when and (bbbb) where did each such meeting take place and (ccc) what was the purpose of each specified meeting?

Reply:

Neither I nor my Deputy Ministers have met with any member, employee or close associate of the Gupta family and/or attended a meeting with the specified persons at the Gupta’s Saxonwold Estate in Johannesburg.

20 April 2016 - NW916

Profile picture: Gardee, Mr GA

Gardee, Mr GA to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Has he earned any additional income from businesses, in particular businesses doing work for the Government, since his appointment as Minister; if so, (a) when, (b) how much did he earn, (c) from which businesses and (d) for what work; 2) whether his (a) spouse, (b) children and (c) close family earned income from businesses, in particular businesses doing work for the Government, through his appointment as Minister; if so, in respect of each case, (i) when, (ii) how much did each earn, (iii) from which businesses and (iv) for what work?

Reply:

  1. No
  2. No

12 April 2016 - NW746

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether, with reference to allegations (details furnished) of rhino poaching syndicates infiltrating the justice system, particularly the magistrates court benches in KwaZulu-Natal, he is considering instituting a commission or panel to review magisterial judgments handed down in respect of all rhino poaching matters in the provinces?

Reply:

No, the matter was referred to the Magistrate Commission for further handling and investigation.

12 April 2016 - NW538

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)(a) How many (i) natural and (ii) unnatural deaths of inmates have occurred in the past 12 months in the Kgoši Mampuru II Correctional Services facility in Pretoria, (b) when did each death occur and (c) what was the reason in each specified case; (2) whether any of the specified deaths were reported to the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS); if not, why not in each case; if so, when was each case reported; (3) whether the JICS investigated any of the specified deaths; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details in each case?

Reply:

(1)(a)(i) There were thirty three (33) reported cases of natural deaths

(1)(a)(ii) There were five (5) reported cases of unnatural deaths (known and unknown causes)

Information for (1)(b),(c)and (2) is reflected in the tables below:

(1)(b) Date of death

(1)(c) Reason of death

(2) Date reported to JICS –if not give reason

NATURAL DEATHS

2015.03.13

Respiratory Failure

2015.08.24

2015.04.09

Heart Problem

2016.02.23

2015.04.26

Respiratory Failure

2015.05.25

2015.05.11

Respiratory Failure

2015.05.17

2015.08.24

Nephrotic Syndrome

2015.08.27

2015.08.27

Broncho Pneumonia

2015.09.06.

2015.08.29

Acute Liver Failure

2015.08.30

2015.10.15

Respiratory Failure

2015.10.29

2015.11.20

Cardio Pulmonary Arrest

2015.12.13

2015.05.17.

Retro Viral Disease

2015.05.20

2015.05.26.

Plasma Blastic Lymphoma

2015.05.28

2015.06.08

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.24

2015.06.11

Idiopathic Thrombo Cytopenia

2015.06.17

2015.06.11

Kaposi Sarcoma

2015.06.17

2015.06.10

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.17

2016.01.29

Respiratory Failure

2016.01.29

2016.02.20

Opportunistic Infection /Diabetes

2016.03.07

2016.02.28

Electrolyte Imbalance

2016.02.28

2015.05.27

Epilepsy

Hypertension

Previous Cerebro vascular accident

2015.05.28

2015.11.10

Retro Viral Disease

2015.11.12

2015.11.13

Retro Viral Disease

2015.11.13

2015.12.08

Diabetes

Hypertension

Asthma

2015.02.09

2016.02.24

Hepatitis

2016.02.24

2015.09.09

Acute asthmatic attack

2015.09.09

2015.06.15

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.22

2015.06.16

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.18

2015.06.18

Retro Viral Disease

2015.06.26

2015.07.06

Meningitis

2015.07.10

2015.07.26

Hypertension

2015.07.31

2015.09.01

Retro Viral Disease

2015.09.03

2015.09.13

Retro Viral Disease

2015.09.16

2015.11.30

Sepsis renal failure

2015.12.01

2016.01.19

Jaundice

2016.01.26

UNNATURAL DEATHS

2015.08.26

Suicide: Medication overdose

2015.08.27

2015.11.08

Unnatural: Post mortem outstanding. Death register number 1619/15: Steve Biko Forensic Pathology Laboratory

2015.11.08

2015.11.12

Assault: Inmate on Inmate: Stabbed in the heart

2015.11.12

2015.11.19

Suicide: Hanging

2015.11.19

2015.12.12

Stab wound of the chest.

Injury to the pulmonary artery.

Blood in the pericardial sack around the heart.

Massive haemothorax of the left chest cavity.

Superficial incised wounds of the right flank and back

2015.12.12

(3) The JICS does not investigate all deaths reported to it, due to lack of capacity; it does however follow a process to confirm that deaths did occur and this is done via the Independent Correctional Centre Visitor.

Natural Deaths – when a natural death is reported the Independent Correctional Centre Visitor will fill in a record of confirmation to confirm that the death has taken place.

Unnatural Deaths - when an unnatural death is reported the Independent Correctional Centre Visitor will be required to conduct an enquiry on the death and depending on the severity of the case it will then be referred to the JICS investigating unit to investigate

The last enquiry conducted was at Kgoši Mampuru Local in November 2015 where it was alleged that the inmate committed suicide by hanging himself. The Independent Correctional Centre Visitor did the enquiry and found that indeed the inmate had committed suicide by using his shoes laces and a piece of bed sheet as a rope.

04 April 2016 - NW711

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)Whether, with reference to his reply to question 4197 on 10 December 2015, he has received the National Council of Correctional Services` (NCCS) recommendation regarding a certaiin offender`s application for parole (details furnished), if not, why not, if so, what was the NCCS` recommendation; (2) whether the specified offender was afforded the opportunity to participate in Victim Offender Dialogues as a prerequisite for the granting of parole, if not why not; if so, on what dates didi teh dialogues occur; (3) what progress has been made siince his reply to question 4197 on 10 December 2015 with regard to (a) the process to tracing teh specified offender`s victims and (b) positively confirming teh specified offender`s support sysytem should he be granted parole?

Reply:

  1. Yes, the mentioned Offender`s profile report was presented before the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS). After having considered the profile of the offender, the NCCS resolved not to recommend the offender`s placement on parole, and to reconsider the matter within twelve (12) months. It was recommended that the offender should be subjected to individual psychotherapy to further address his anger and aggressive behaviour.

(2) No, the offender did not participate in Victim Offender Dialogue as the means to locate his victims were unsuccessful..

(3)(a) in an effort to trace the victims it was discovered that victims relocated and cold not be traced.

(3)(b) His address was confirmed to be positive.

04 April 2016 - NW630

Profile picture: Malema, Mr J

Malema, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether, with reference to his reply to question 45 for oral reply on 04 March 2015, there are different criteria that are used in the consideration of applications for parole of white apartheid assassins and black freedom fighters; if so, what criteria are used; if not; why (a) was a certain person (details furnished) is still treated like a common criminal and refused unconditional release?

Reply:

No, it is important however to note that there is difference between consideration for parole and the Special Dispensation (which was adopted on 21 November 2007) for individuals who have committed offences they believe were in pursuit of a political objective.

a) The mentioned offender was placed on parole under certain conditions as provided for in section 52 of the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998 (the Act) as amended, after his placement was approved by the Minister in terms of section 78 (1) of the Act.

b) The offender in question is currently a beneficiary of day parole. On 01 December 2015, in line with section 78 (1) of the Act, the Minister approved that the offender be placed on day parole for six (6) months and thereafter on full parole under certain conditions.

According to section 73(5) (b) of the Act, a sentenced offender be placed on day parole or parole subject to that offender accepting the conditions for placement.

Section 78 (1) of the Act provides that all offenders serving lifer sentence that are placed on day parole or parole, are released conditionally as contemplated in section 52 of the Act.

The offender could previously not be placed on day parole as he did not accept placement conditions.

18 March 2016 - NW372

Profile picture: Steenkamp, Ms J

Steenkamp, Ms J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

With reference to President Jacob G Zuma’s undertaking in his State of the Nation Address delivered on 12 February 2015, that the Government will set aside 30% of appropriate categories of state procurement for purchasing from Small, Medium and Micro-Sized Enterprises (SMMEs), co-operatives, as well as township and rural enterprises, what percentage of the total procurement of (a) his department and (b) every entity reporting to him went to (i) SMMEs and (ii) co-operatives from 1 April 2015 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

Reply:

1. (i) and (ii) The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DoJ&CD) including the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), procures within the current framework in terms of the Preferential Procurement Regulations (PPR). The PPR was developed to support BBBEE and government specific goals.

94% of the departmental procurement supports government initiatives of which approximately 31% (R139 million) relates to SMMEs.

The department is awaiting the approval of the revised PPR that will provide for full implementation of the commitments made in the recent State of the Nation Addresses’ delivered.

 

The Office of the Chief Justice is submitting information in terms of the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment scoring points system as prescribed by the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 5 of 2000. Information is submitted as follows:

Total amount spent on procurement from 1 April 2015 to 22 February 2016 by the Office of the Chief Justice amounts to R38 647 064.18. Of this amount R29 173 393.99 was spent on Black Economic Empowerment procurement (all Black Economic Empowerment levels). Therefore the Office of the Chief Justice spent 75.49% on Black Economic Empowerment procurement.

(b)(i) The Special Investigating Unit has indicated that the percentage of total procurement spend on SMME is sixty (60%) percent.

(ii) The SIU further indicated that no procurement was made from or in support of co-operatives and rural enterprises.

  1. (i) Legal Aid South Africa issued instructions to 11,831 judicare practitioners from 1 April 2015 to 31st January 2016 to the value of R96 million. These are all small law firms.

A total amount of R1.35 million, covering 1 April 2015 to 31st December 2015, was paid to five (5) law firms that are all based in rural areas and have Agency Agreements with Legal Aid SA.

An amount of R95,7 million constituting other procurements of services and goods by different suppliers were paid out for the period 01 April 2015 to 31st January 2016. Legal Aid SA awaits National Treasury’s comprehensive review of the existing Supply Chain Management legislative framework in respect of various specific goals, i.e., Small, Medium and Micro-sized Enterprises (SMMEs), co-operatives, as well as township and rural enterprises to classify procurements services going forward.

(a) (i) The Department of Correctional Services has not set aside 30% of its procurement for purchasing from SMMEs, co-operatives as well as

township and rural enterprises as this is not yet supported by procurement legal framework.

Currently contracts are awarded in accordance with the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 2000 and its Regulations, 2011 to the bidder scoring the highest points.

The information regarding the contracts awarded with values above R30 000.00 from 1 April 2015 to 19 February 2016 is as follows:

BEE Level

Total Contracts

Total Current Contract Value

Percentage

Level 1

470

R 144 136 872.30

17.67%

Level 2

110

R 426 205 448.05

52.21%

Level 3

496

R 109 626 423.40

13.43%

Level 4

149

R 94 095 598.66

11.53%

Level 5

17

R 3 065 779.70

0.37%

Level 6

16

R 4 504 798.52

0.55%

Level 7

3

R 265 269.30

0.03%

Level 8

2

R 381 480.00

0.04%

Non-compliant contributor

203

R 34 042 967.57

4.17%

Total

1466

R 816 324 637.50

 

National Treasury’s Summary Report: Contract(s) Awarded does not make provision for distinguishing of contracts awarded to Small, Medium and Micro-sized Enterprises, co-operatives as well as township and rural enterprises.

(ii) As above

  1. Not applicable

 

18 March 2016 - NW539

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)Whether the Boksburg Correctional Centre has experienced high levels of gang violence in the last six months; if so, what gangs are involved; (2) whether (a) inmates and/or (b) officials (i) died and/or (ii) were injured due to the high levels of gang violence during the specified period; if so, what are the relevant details in each case; (3) what steps have been taken to (a) contain the situation and (b) to eradicate gangs in the facility, if any?

Reply:

1. Yes, gang related incidents were experienced during the last six (6) months at Correctional Centres A, B and C at Boksburg Management Area. Prevalent gangs involved in gang incidents include the RAF 3, Big 5, 26 and 28 Gangs.

(2)(a)(i) One (1) inmate died in November 2015 in Boksburg Medium A following an assault of an “inmate on inmate” with a sharpened object.

  1. (a)(ii) – Yes, see table below.

(2)(b)(i) No officials died due to the violence.

(2)(b)(ii) – No officials were injured due to the violence.

(2) date of incident and centre

(2)

Description

Number of inmates involved

2(a)(ii) number of inmates injured

(1) gangs involved

2015.10.10 Centre A

Inmate assaulted two (2) other inmates. Both victims sustained laceration injuries.

3

2

26 and 28 gang

2015.10.13 Centre A

Two (2) inmates assaulted one (1) inmate by hitting him with padlocks on his head.

3

1

26 and 28 gang

2015.10.15 Centre A

Two (2) inmates were stabbed by two (2) inmates with sharpened objects.

4

2

26 gang

2015.11.09 Centre C

Five (5) inmates assaulted one (1) inmate.

6

1

26 gang

2015.11.12 Centre A

Three (3) inmates fought amongst themselves with self-made knives.

3

3

RAF 3

2015.11.14 Centre B

Four (4) inmates stabbed two (2) inmates.

6

2

26 and 28 gang

2015.11.16 Centre A

Two (2) inmates assaulted one (1) inmate with a sharpened object and one (1) of the perpetrators was also injured.

3

2

28 gang and Big 5

2015.11.16 Centre B

Three (3) inmates assaulted one (1) inmate with a sharpen objet.

4

1

28 and 26 gang

2015.12.25 Centre C

Three (3) inmates assaulted each other

3

3

26 and 28 gang

2016.02.18 Centre A

Two (2) inmates stabbed one (1) inmate.

3

1

RAF 4 and Big 5

2016.02.29 Centre C

Ten (10) inmates assaulted each other.

10

10

  1. and 28 gang

(3)(a) There is ongoing gang profiling in order to ensure improved management of gang dynamics in the correctional centre. The awareness of officials is raised on a regular basis to ensure constant vigilance and emphasis is placed on the effective management of offender complaints and requests. The utilisation of the gang management tools – especially the gang management checklist for utilisation at correctional centre level – is encouraged.

(3)(b) All inmates are made aware of the negative consequences of gangs in a correctional setting as part of the induction process and through ongoing engagement at unit level. As a matter of standard procedure all acts of violence (including those that arise due to gang activities) are investigated internally and this results in the guilty parties having their privileges reviewed. Offenders who pose a risk to the safety of other inmates are placed in single cells for closer monitoring.

It is also normal procedure that where there are injuries the cases of attempted assault, assault, assault with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm and attempted murder or murder are reported to the South African Police Service (SAPS) for investigation and pursuit of criminal charges. In many instances, however, most victims refuse to press criminal charges. Offenders who are found guilty of criminal offences will have their sentences prolonged or parole and release dates reviewed accordingly.

The Department is also working hard at ensuring that gang activities in correctional centres are dealt with in terms of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (where possible and in liaison with the SAPS) as has been the case in regions like the Western Cape. The Department will also explore how the provisions of the Dangerous Weapons Act 15 of 2013 can be applied to gangs in correctional centres.

18 March 2016 - NW542

Profile picture: Vos, Mr J

Vos, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether, with reference to his reply to question 2968 on 7 September 2015, he has finalized his consideration of the Law Reform Commission Report on sex work; if not, why not; if so, when will he make an announcement in this regard?

Reply:

I wish to inform the Honourable Member that I have considered the South African Law Reform Commission Project 107 Report on Sexual Offences (Adult Prostitution). It will be released on a date to be announced shortly.

11 March 2016 - NW516

Profile picture: Alberts, Mr ADW

Alberts, Mr ADW to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1) How many complaints were laid (a) altogether and (b) against (i) the Government, (ii) government departments and (iii) any government body from 1 January 2015 up to and including 31 January 2016 individually with the SA Human Rights Commission; (2) How many of the (a) total number of complaints and (b) complaints against (i) the Government, (ii) government departments and (iii) any government body were (aa) finalized, (bb) rejected on technical grounds, (cc) refused on merit, (dd) succeeded on merit and (ee) have still not been finalized; (3) What is the percentage of each of the different categories of complaint of the (a) total number of complaints and (b) complaints against the Government?

Reply:

Firstly, I wish to inform the Honourable Member that in terms of section 181 (5) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the State Institutions supporting Constitutional Democracy, including the South African Human Rights Commission, are accountable to the National Assembly, and must report on their activities and the performance of their functions to the Assembly at least once a year.

Therefore, the South African Human Rights Commission does not report to the Ministry of Justice and Correctional Services, but directly to Parliament.

However, because of the well-established working relationship between the South African Human Rights Commission and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the South African Human Rights Commission has reported as follows regarding the questions raised by the Honourable Member:

Kindly find attached hereto, a consolidated compilation of data, sourced from the South African Human Rights Commission’s (the Commission) nine provincial offices in response to the Parliamentary Question:

(a) List of complaints laid altogether and against the Government, government departments and any government body from 1 January 2015 up to and including 31 January 2016;

(b) An indication of which of the above matters were finalised, rejected, referred or pending (in terms of the Commission’s Complaints Handling Procedures); and

(c) An indication of the different categories of complaints against the Government.

Due to the large volume of information sought, the data appears in its raw format. However, the SA Human Rights Commission has indicated that should a consolidated report of statistics and the generation of graphs be necessary, the Commission would require additional time in that regard.

Such a consolidated Report has been requested and will be submitted once received.

 

11 March 2016 - NW522

Profile picture: Alberts, Mr ADW

Alberts, Mr ADW to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1) (a) What is the percentage of each of the different categories of complaints laid against, (i) government departments and (ii) any government body from 1 January 2015 up to and including 31 January 2016 with the SA Human Rights Commission; (2) how many complaints were laid against the President in the period from 1 January 2015 up to and including 31 January 2016; (3)(a) what is the percentage of each of the different categories of complaints against the President and (b) how many of the complaints were (i) finalized, (ii) rejected on technical grounds, (iii) refused on merit, (iv) succeeded on merit and (v) have still not been finalized?

Reply:

Firstly, I wish to inform the Honourable Member that in terms of section 181 (5) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the State Institutions supporting Constitutional Democracy, including the South African Human Rights Commission, are accountable to the National Assembly, and must report on their activities and the performance of their functions to the Assembly at least once a year.

Therefore, the South African Human Rights Commission does not report to the Ministry of Justice and Correctional Services, but directly to Parliament.

However, because of the well-established working relationship between the South African Human Rights Commission and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the South African Human Rights Commission has reported as follows regarding the questions raised by the Honourable Member:

Kindly find attached hereto, a consolidated compilation of data, sourced from the South African Human Rights Commission’s (the Commission) nine provincial offices in response to the Parliamentary Question:

(a) Complaints laid against the President in the period from 1 January 2015 up to and including 31 January 2016;

(b) An indication of which of the above matters were finalised, rejected, referred or pending (in terms of the Commission’s Complaints Handling Procedures; and

(c) An indication of the different categories of complaints against the Government.

Due to the large volume of information sought, the data appears in its raw format. However, the SA Human Rights Commission has indicated that should a consolidated report of statistics and the generation of graphs be necessary, the Commission would require additional time in that regard.

Such a consolidated Report has been requested and will be submitted once received.

 

11 March 2016 - NW448

Profile picture: Lekota, Mr M

Lekota, Mr M to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

“Whether, in view of the fact that the fiscus was severely constrained and that every single rand for the public good had to be protected from being corruptly siphoned off as has been happening for a long time, the Government was taking very urgent and decisive steps to enhance protection and encouragement to a considerable level for whistleblowers to lift the lid on corruption and allow no opportunity for corrupt politicians, officials and individuals to escape exposure and rapid prosecution; If not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?”

Reply:

1.1 The Protected Disclosures Act, 2000 (“the Act”), aims to protect employees from being subjected to occupational detriment on account of having made protected disclosures. The Act also establishes procedures in terms of which employees may disclose information regarding workplace improprieties. The Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill, 2015 (“the Bill”), which was introduced into Parliament on 8 December 2015 aims, among others, to extend the ambit of the Act beyond the traditional employer and employee relationship and to grant an employee who makes a protected disclosure immunity from criminal and civil liability.

1.2 The proposed amendment of section 1 of the Act aims to bring about an extension of the ambit of the Act. The ambit of the Act is determined in terms of the definition of “employee” which essentially restricts the application of the Act to the traditional employer and employee relationship. Independent contractors are expressly excluded from the provisions of the Act. Since there is a notable increase in the use of part-time and temporary workers coupled with the trend of outsourcing, the restricted definition of “employee” excludes a growing number of people from the ambit of the Act. The aforementioned category includes independent contractors, persons employed by temporary employment services and former employees.

1.3 The proposed new sections 3A and 3B aim to introduce joint liability and a duty to inform employees who make disclosures whether such disclosures will be investigated or not. As far as joint liability is concerned the introduction of the definition of “worker” gives rise to the situation that a worker who is rendering services to a client will have two ‘employers’. This will mean that if a protected disclosure is made by a worker who is employed by an agency to either the agency or to the institution where he or she works and the entity to which the disclosure has been made meets the disclosure with an occupational detriment, the worker will be entitled to the remedies provided in terms of the Act.

1.4 A number of employees who make protected disclosures experience difficulties where they, in the absence of an obligation to give feedback or to be notified, are not notified of a decision not to investigate the disclosure or of a decision to refer the matter to another body to investigate, or the outcome of an investigation. The proposed new section 3B aims to give effect to the aforementioned.

1.5.1 The restrictive nature of the remedies currently provided for in terms of section 4 will also, in view of the proposed extension of the ambit of the Act, receive attention. The section 4 remedies, read with the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (Act No. 66 of 1995), are limited to “employees” in the strict sense and do not cater for independent contractors, consultants and agents. The proposed amendment of section 4 therefore aims to ensure that workers (independent contractors, consultants and agents) will also be enabled to exercise certain remedies if they are subjected to occupational detriment as a result of having made protected disclosures.

1.5.2 The proposed new section 4(1B), for example, will make it clear that a court may order an employer to pay compensation or actual damages to an employee or worker and further provides that a court may issue an order directing an employer to take steps to remedy the occupational detriment.

1.6 Clause 10 of the Bill aims to introduce a new section 9A in the Act which deals with the exclusion of civil and criminal liability. Since the Act does not protect persons from criminal or civil liability, it is argued that the introduction of such protection would help achieve one of the aims of the Act, namely, to facilitate and encourage disclosures. It should be noted that the new provision does not introduce blanket immunity. The need to protect certain information either in the national interest of the country or in the interest of the livelihood of an employer militates against granting blanket immunity from liability for disclosures relating to all improprieties provided for in the Act. Exposing an employer to such a risk would only be justified where the content of the disclosure is sufficiently serious, namely, where the disclosure relates to the commission of an offence. Immunity from civil and criminal liability will, in terms of the proposed new section 9A, not be automatic but will be granted subject to the discretion of the court in which an action is brought.

In recognition of Government’s initiatives to protect whistle blowers, the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) has adopted a Whistleblowing Policy (the Policy) that complies with the provisions of the Protected Disclosures Act, 2000 (Act No. 26 of 2000).

This Policy has been widely distributed to all officials in the OCJ and is also available on the departmental intranet. It is aimed at, amongst others, encouraging employees to report and blow the whistle on fraud and corruption by following the established channels; and also enjoins OCJ officials with the responsibility to disclose any matters that are related to fraud and corruption in the workplace. Additionally, the Policy provides that the OCJ is committed to take all necessary steps to ensure that OCJ employees who disclosed fraud and corruption allegations are protected from any reprisals or fear of suffering any occupational related detriment as a result of such disclosure.

OCJ employees may report anonymously any allegation of fraud and corruption to any member of the management of the OCJ, the Fraud Auditing Unit, the Audit and Risk Committee or to the National Anti-Corruption Hotline 0800 701 701 managed by the Public Service Commission. All reported fraud and corruption cases are recorded in the OCJ Fraud Register which is monitored by the Audit and Risk Committee and may, following an investigation, be escalated either to the OCJ’s corporate services branch, the South African Police Services or other relevant law enforcement agencies.

                                                                                                                             

04 March 2016 - NW448

Profile picture: Lekota, Mr M

Lekota, Mr M to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

“Whether, in view of the fact that the fiscus was severely constrained and that every single rand for the public good had to be protected from being corruptly siphoned off as has been happening for a long time, the Government was taking very urgent and decisive steps to enhance protection and encouragement to a considerable level for whistleblowers to lift the lid on corruption and allow no opportunity for corrupt politicians, officials and individuals to escape exposure and rapid prosecution; If not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?”

Reply:

1.1 The Protected Disclosures Act, 2000 (“the Act”), aims to protect employees from being subjected to occupational detriment on account of having made protected disclosures. The Act also establishes procedures in terms of which employees may disclose information regarding workplace improprieties. The Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill, 2015 (“the Bill”), which was introduced into Parliament on 8 December 2015 aims, among others, to extend the ambit of the Act beyond the traditional employer and employee relationship and to grant an employee who makes a protected disclosure immunity from criminal and civil liability.

1.2 The proposed amendment of section 1 of the Act aims to bring about an extension of the ambit of the Act. The ambit of the Act is determined in terms of the definition of “employee” which essentially restricts the application of the Act to the traditional employer and employee relationship. Independent contractors are expressly excluded from the provisions of the Act. Since there is a notable increase in the use of part-time and temporary workers coupled with the trend of outsourcing, the restricted definition of “employee” excludes a growing number of people from the ambit of the Act. The aforementioned category includes independent contractors, persons employed by temporary employment services and former employees.

1.3 The proposed new sections 3A and 3B aim to introduce joint liability and a duty to inform employees who make disclosures whether such disclosures will be investigated or not. As far as joint liability is concerned the introduction of the definition of “worker” gives rise to the situation that a worker who is rendering services to a client will have two ‘employers’. This will mean that if a protected disclosure is made by a worker who is employed by an agency to either the agency or to the institution where he or she works and the entity to which the disclosure has been made meets the disclosure with an occupational detriment, the worker will be entitled to the remedies provided in terms of the Act.

1.4 A number of employees who make protected disclosures experience difficulties where they, in the absence of an obligation to give feedback or to be notified, are not notified of a decision not to investigate the disclosure or of a decision to refer the matter to another body to investigate, or the outcome of an investigation. The proposed new section 3B aims to give effect to the aforementioned.

1.5.1 The restrictive nature of the remedies currently provided for in terms of section 4 will also, in view of the proposed extension of the ambit of the Act, receive attention. The section 4 remedies, read with the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (Act No. 66 of 1995), are limited to “employees” in the strict sense and do not cater for independent contractors, consultants and agents. The proposed amendment of section 4 therefore aims to ensure that workers (independent contractors, consultants and agents) will also be enabled to exercise certain remedies if they are subjected to occupational detriment as a result of having made protected disclosures.

1.5.2 The proposed new section 4(1B), for example, will make it clear that a court may order an employer to pay compensation or actual damages to an employee or worker and further provides that a court may issue an order directing an employer to take steps to remedy the occupational detriment.

1.6 Clause 10 of the Bill aims to introduce a new section 9A in the Act which deals with the exclusion of civil and criminal liability. Since the Act does not protect persons from criminal or civil liability, it is argued that the introduction of such protection would help achieve one of the aims of the Act, namely, to facilitate and encourage disclosures. It should be noted that the new provision does not introduce blanket immunity. The need to protect certain information either in the national interest of the country or in the interest of the livelihood of an employer militates against granting blanket immunity from liability for disclosures relating to all improprieties provided for in the Act. Exposing an employer to such a risk would only be justified where the content of the disclosure is sufficiently serious, namely, where the disclosure relates to the commission of an offence. Immunity from civil and criminal liability will, in terms of the proposed new section 9A, not be automatic but will be granted subject to the discretion of the court in which an action is brought.

The Department of Correctional Services (DCS) has ensured that officials are informed of the protected ways of reporting corruption and fraud through workshops and displayed posters. The DCS Whistle-blowing Policy which is informed by the Protected Disclosure Act provides the whistle-blowers of the process to be followed when reporting, for example, the relevant telephone numbers are provided where one can report, and also one is at liberty to remain anonymous when reporting if she/he fears victimization.

A Departmental Investigation Unit (DIU) was established in terms of Section 95A of the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, as amended by Act 25 of 2008.

                                                                                                                             

26 February 2016 - NW249

Profile picture: Mhlongo, Mr P

Mhlongo, Mr P to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether he and/or his department has bought advertising space in The New Age in the (a) 2012-13, (b) 2013-14 and (c) 2014-15 financial years; if so, (i) what number of times and (ii) for what amount in each specified year?

Reply:

The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has placed advertisements in The New Age Newspaper through the Government Communication and Information Systems (GCIS) (a) 2012/13 and (c) 2014/15.

(b) No advertisement was placed in 2013/14.

(i) 6 times.

(ii) Total amount of R1 409 452.27 which consists of (a) for 2012/13: R526 906.78; (b) for 2013/14: Nil; and (c) for 2014/15, R882 545.49. Media buying has been centralized at the GCIS to take advantage of bulk buying in terms of cost containment measures.

The National Prosecuting Authority indicated that the NPA placed a recruitment advertisement in the New Age in (b) 2013/14, (i) once (1 time); and (ii) for the amount of R18 400.

The Special Investigating Unit confirmed that the SIU has not placed advertisements in the New Age Newspaper for the financial years mentioned.

26 February 2016 - NW372

Profile picture: Steenkamp, Ms J

Steenkamp, Ms J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

With reference to President Jacob G Zuma’s undertaking in his State of the Nation Address delivered on 12 February 2015, that the Government will set aside 30% of appropriate categories of state procurement for purchasing from Small, Medium and Micro-Sized Enterprises (SMMEs), co-operatives, as well as township and rural enterprises, what percentage of the total procurement of (a) his department and (b) every entity reporting to him went to (i) SMMEs and (ii) co-operatives from 1 April 2015 up to the latest specified date for which information is available?

Reply:

a) (i) and (ii) The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has indicated that the Department is submitting information in terms of the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) balanced scorecard as prescribed by the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act, 5 of 2000. For the period 1 April 2015 to 31 January 2016, 86.78% of the Departmental procurement spending was directed to contributor level 1-3.

B-BBEE Level of Contributor

No. of contracts

Total value

Percentage (%)

1

327

40 008 403.52

12.69%

2

215

178 607 300.06

56.67%

3

388

54 912 409.49

17.42%

Furthermore, Government officials can only act within the prescribed regulatory framework and the Department therefore awaits National Treasury comprehensive review of the existing Supply Chain Management legislative framework in respect of various specific goals, i.e., Small, Medium and Micro-sized Enterprises (SMMEs), co-operatives, as well as township and rural enterprises.

The National Prosecuting Authority has indicated that the total spent on contracts with Small Medium and Micro-Enterprises, is R77,5 million out of R94,1 million total spend, i.e., 82.35%.

(b)(i) The Special Investigating Unit has indicated that the percentage of total procurement spend on SMME is sixty (60%) percent.

(ii) The SIU further indicated that no procurement was made from or in support of co-operatives and rural enterprises.

19 February 2016 - NW28

Profile picture: Msimang, Prof CT

Msimang, Prof CT to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether his Ministry has any frozen vacant positions; if so, (a) how many of the specified positions are vacant, (b) what are the designations of the specified positions and (c) for how long have the specified positions been vacant?

Reply:

I wish to inform the Hon Member that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, has 64 LP10 vacant posts that cannot be filled.

(a) 64.

(b) Specialist Production posts on LP 10-level, namely Deputy Chief State Law Advisers on Occupation Specific Dispensation-level.

(c) The LP 10 posts have been vacant since 24 January 2013 when the Department of Public Service and Administration communicated their embargo decision.

Department of Correctional Services

  1. Total = 85 vacant positions
  1. and (C) Please see table below.

(b) POST DESIGNATION

VACANT DATE

(c) PERIOD VACANT

REGION

COMMISSIONER: CORRECTIONAL SERVICES CH DEPUTY=(C)

20110110

5 YEARS 1 MONTH

HEAD OFFICE

CB4 REINTEGRATION MANAGER

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:EMPLOYEE RELATIONS

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:EMPLOYEE ASSISTANT PRACTITIONER

20141031

1 YEAR 3 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNB1 CLINICAL NURSE PRACTITIONER GR 1 PRIM H CARE

20151001

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PROVISIONING ADMINISTRATION OFFICER (PC)

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB5 CENTRE COORDINATOR MEDIUM

20150630

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ARTISAN FOREMAN GRADE A

20150831

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ARTISAN FOREMAN GRADE A

20150531

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

EDUCATIONIST M4 (DCS)

20150630

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PSYCHOLOGIST GRADE 1

20140101

2 YEARS 1 MONTH

GAUTENG

AO:PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION

20150617

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:NETWORK CONTROLLERS(AC)(AC)

20150630

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150723

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:LOGISTICS ADMINISTRATION

20150731

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:LOGISTICS ADMINISTRATION

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:SUPERVISOR MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150921

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB6 CENTRE COORDINATOR LARGE

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB5 CENTRE COORDINATOR MEDIUM

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNA2 PROFESSIONAL NURSE GRADE 1 (GENERAL NURSING)

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150531

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNB2 CLINICAL NURSE PRACTITIONER GR 2 PRIM H CARE

20151001

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNB1 CLINICAL NURSE PRACTITIONER GR 1 PRIM H CARE

20151001

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ASD:MANAGER HUMAN RESOURCE ADMINISTRATION(AC)

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:INVESTIGATIONS

20150301

11 MONTHS

GAUTENG

MR5 LEGAL ADMINISTRATION OFFICER GRADE 5

20140701

1 YEAR 7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ASD:PROGRAM COORDINATION & DEVELOPMENT

20150731

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

MANAGER PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES ASSISTANT

20150301

11 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PSYCHOLOGIST GRADE 1

20150630

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNB1 CLINICAL NURSE PRACTITIONER GR 1 PRIM H CARE

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB5 CENTRE COORDINATOR MEDIUM

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150531

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION(AC:CORPOR SERV)

20151001

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:CAREER MANAGEMENT (FACILITATOR)

20150801

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:TRANSPORT CONTROL(KROONSTAD COLLEGE) /HO

20150701

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 REINTEGRATION MANAGER

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PSYCHOLOGIST GRADE 1

20150701

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION

20151001

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:MESS(CATERERS)

20150701

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

TYPIST GRADE II PRINCIPAL

20151001

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:LOGISTIC ADMINISTRATION

20150731

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ARTISAN PRODUCTION GRADE A

20150701

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB5 CENTRE COORDINATOR MEDIUM

20151001

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SW A4 SOCIAL WORKER GRADE 1

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNB1 CLINICAL NURSE PRACTITIONER GR 1 PRIM H CARE

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNB1 CLINICAL NURSE PRACTITIONER GR 1 PRIM H CARE

20150930

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB1 1 SECURITY OFFICER GRADE 3

20150301

11 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB1 1 SECURITY OFFICER GRADE 3

20150301

11 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB1 1 SECURITY OFFICER GRADE 3

20150301

11 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB1 1 SECURITY OFFICER GRADE 3

20150301

11 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION

20141031

1 YEAR 3 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION

20141001

1 YEAR 4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SAO:EMPLOYEE ASSISTANT PRACTITIONER

20150930

4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:RECRUITMENT & PLACEMENT(MA)

20141001

1 YEAR 4 MONTHS

GAUTENG

NCB1 3 PAROLE BOARD CLERK GRADE 1

20110401

4 YEARS 10 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB5 CENTRE COORDINATOR MEDIUM

20150912

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SW A8 SOCIAL WORK SUPERVISOR GRADE 1

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNA2 PROFESSIONAL NURSE GRADE 1 (GENERAL NURSING)

20150831

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

EDUCATIONIST M3 (DCS)

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PNB1 CLINICAL NURSE PRACTITIONER GR 1 PRIM H CARE

20150301

11 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20120131

4 YEARS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20101001

5 YEARS 4 MOTNHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150202

1 YEAR

GAUTENG

ARTISAN FOREMAN GRADE A

20150831

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:TRANSIT & WAREHOUSE

20150501

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:TRANSIT & WAREHOUSE

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:LOGISTICS ADMINISTRATION

20150701

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:PROCUREMENT

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:VOUCHER CONTROL

20150701

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ARTISAN CHIEF GRADE A

20110401

4 YEARS 10 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PHARMACY SUPERVISOR GRADE 1

20150531

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

NCB1 2 CORRECTIONAL POLICY ADMINISTRATOR GRADE 2

20150801

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ARTISAN CHIEF GRADE A

20150101

1 YEAR 1 MONTH

GAUTENG

SW A6 SOCIAL WORKER GRADE 3

20150831

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

SECTION HEAD (EDUCATIONIST DCS)

20150901

5 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150724

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:CAREER MANAGEMENT (FACILITATOR)

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

ASD:MANAGER SPECIAL PROGRAMMES

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:TRANSIT & WAREHOUSE

20150630

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

PROVISIONING ADMINISTRATION OFFICER (PC)

20150601

8 MONTHS

GAUTENG

AO:VOUCHER CONTROL

20150729

6 MONTHS

GAUTENG

CB4 SECURITY MANAGER

20150630

7 MONTHS

GAUTENG

A total of 85 posts are frozen.

NB: All these posts are in Gauteng Region, except that one of CDC: Central services as it is located in Head Office

19 February 2016 - NW148

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)Whether King Buyelekhaya Dalindyebo is serving a term of imprisonment; if so, (a) for how long, (b) on what date did he start serving his sentence and (c) what is his security classification; (2) whether he (a) receives or (b) has received any special treatment while incarcerated, including (i) a special diet or (ii) accommodation in a single cell; if not, in each case, what is the position in this regard; if so, (aa) why and (bb) what are the further relevant details in each case? NW148E

Reply:

(1) Yes

(1)(a) 12 years imprisonment

(1)(b) 30 December 2015

(1)(c) The offender in question is classified as a Maximum offender

(2)(a) No

(2)(b) No

(2)(b)(i) As directed by the medical practitioner, offender Dalindyebo was admitted in a private hospital on 08th January until 14th January 2016 and again on 15th January 2016 (to date) and therefore receives food provided in the hospital.

(2)(b)(ii) Offender Dalindyebo was accommodated in a single cell in line with the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, as amended.

(2)(b)(aa) An application to be incarcerated in a single cell was considered and approved in terms of section 7(2)(e) of the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, as amended.

(2)(b)(bb) The period the offender was incarcerated at the correctional facility he received the prescribed inmate diet.

19 February 2016 - NW115

Profile picture: Masango, Ms B

Masango, Ms B to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1) What methods and/or processes are followed to track beneficiaries of the Guardian Fund? (2) whether there are any beneficiaries who are not aware of money (a) allocated and (b) payable to them; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details; (3) whether there is any legislation that allows private investigators to work on a commission basis to assist beneficiaries of the specified Fund, as is common practice currently; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) are private investigators allowed to trace eligible beneficiaries and (b) are the specified investigators allowed to receive a percentage-based commission from the specified beneficiaries once they receive their money?

Reply:

  1. I wish to inform the Honourable member that I have been informed that the Master relies on the details submitted at the time funds are paid into the Guardians Fund. The Master ensures that all available details at the time are recorded on the Guardians Fund System. These details are therefore used to track the beneficiaries of the Fund.
  2. (a) and (b) Yes. It is the Master’s experience that the vast majority of beneficiaries are aware of the funds held for them, and most have been receiving regular payments during their minority. However, there are beneficiaries who are not aware of their dues. The funds so due are termed unclaimed moneys. The Master deals with the advertising of unclaimed moneys of beneficiaries in the manner prescribed in terms of Section 91 of the Administration of Deceased Estates Act in the Government Gazette. In addition to the advertisement of unclaimed moneys, a list of such unclaimed moneys is published on the Departmental website under the Masters’ Branch. The Master’s Office has noticed 550 to 600 monthly visits to the advertised unclaimed moneys on the web page. In addition, during Izimbizo the communities are informed on how to claim monies from the Guardian’s Fund. Radio is also used widely to educate.
  3. (a) and (b) No. The tracing of Guardians Fund beneficiaries, has been an area of serious exploitation in the past. Statutory intervention was made through the provisions of Section 51(1)(f) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2008 (Act No 68 of 2008) which deals with some of the challenges experienced. It is the Department’s view that a tracing agent may not charge commission for work relating to a claim against the Guardian’s Fund.

16 January 2016 - NW2714

Profile picture: Waters, Mr M

Waters, Mr M to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether he has taken any action against the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality for allegedly ignoring the court judgment issued on 14 April 2014 with regard to the closing down of an illegal shebeen at 102 Handel Street, Kempton Park West, Kempton Park, Gauteng, if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

No.

I have been informed that (i) the Office of the Chief Justice is not in a position to provide a response, as the Court has done its part by delivering the judgment and to date, there has not been any application for contempt of the relevant court order; and (ii), the Director of Public Prosecutions, Gauteng Local Division, has informed me that this matter was heard in the civil court. No criminal case has been opened.

Therefore, the question should be redirected to the Minister of Safety and Security and/or the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.

10 December 2015 - NW4197

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)Whether, since 1 January 2014, he has received a certain offender’s (Details furnished) parole request file from his department’s Correctional Services Parole Board (CSPB) chairperson; if not, why not; if so, (2) whether he has considered the specified offender’s request for parole; if not, why not; if so, (a) on what date(s) and (b) what were the outcomes; (3) why did (a) he and/or (b) his department’s CSPB deny the specified offender’s previous requests for parole during the period 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2013, even though the specified offender (i) qualified for parole after serving 13 years and four months of the imposed life sentence which commenced in 1999 and (ii) completed all the requisite programmes?

Reply:

  1. Yes, the Correctional Supervision and Parole Board considered the mentioned offender and his profile report was received by Head Office during September 2015 and submitted it to the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS). As soon as the recommendation of the NCCS is available, it will be submitted to the Minister for consideration.

(2)(a) & (b) See (1) above.

(3)(a)&(b) The offender was not denied to be considered for possible parole placement by the (a) Minister and (b) Correctional Supervision and Parole Board.

(3)(i) & (ii) Parole applications are submitted in accordance with and in compliance to section 42(2) (d) of the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, as amended. Amongst others, during the said period the offender did not participate in Victim Offender Dialogue and the Department in collaboration with the offender was in the process of tracing his victims. Furthermore, his support system was also not positively confirmed.

10 December 2015 - NW4198

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)(a) What is the minimum period that an offender sentenced to life imprisonment before 30 September 2004 has to serve before becoming eligible for parole and (b) which (i) section of (ii) which Correctional Services Act is relied upon in this regard; 2) whether a certain offender (details furnished) who is incarcerated at the Qalakabusha Correctional Centre in KwaZulu-Natal is eligible for placement on parole; if not, why not; if so, 3) whether he has received any applications for parole from the specified offender; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (4) whether he considered the specified offender’s application for parole; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of the outcome?

Reply:

(1)(a) According to the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998 offenders sentenced to life incarceration before 1 October 2004 had to serve a minimum detention period of 20 years before being eligible for consideration for placement on parole. However, on 15 July 2011 the North Gauteng High Court handed down a judgment in the Van Wyk case which had the effect to change the minimum detention period for offenders sentenced to life incarceration before 1 October 2004 prior to them being eligible for consideration for placement on parole. The implication was that the previous credit system was also applicable to those offenders sentenced to life sentences from 1 August 1993 up to 30 September 2004 and after allocation of the maximum number of credits advanced their consideration dates from 20 years to 13 years and 4 months.

(1)(b)(i) & (ii) Section 63 of the Correctional Services Act, Act 8 of 1959; and section 136 of the Correctional Services Act, No 111 of 1998 determines the minimum periods of sentence that must be served before consideration may be given for possible placement.

(2) The mentioned offender was sentenced to life imprisonment on 11 January 2002 and is eligible for consideration for possible parole. However, parole applications are submitted in accordance with and in compliance to section 42(2) (d) of the Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, as amended. As soon as the requirements of the aforementioned section are complied with, the Case Management Committee will submit the profile report to the Correctional Supervision and Parole Board (CSPB). The CSPB will then make a submission to the National Council for Correctional Services for a recommendation to the Minister.

(3) See (2) above

(4) See (2) above

08 December 2015 - NW4204

Profile picture: James, Dr WG

James, Dr WG to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(a) How many persons were detained for the possession of marijuana in each correctional facility (i) in the (aa) 2012-13, (bb) 2013-14 and (cc) 2014-15 financial years and (ii) since 1 April 2015 and (b) for what period was each specified person detained?

Reply:

(a)(i)(aa), (bb), (cc) and (ii) Refer to Annexure 1

(b) The sentence length of each of the 21 239 offenders referred to in Annexure 1 is available however, a hard copy of the information will consist of ±433 pages. The Honourable Member may confirm if this high volume information is still required.

04 December 2015 - NW4237

Profile picture: Horn, Mr W

Horn, Mr W to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(a) How many applications for the granting of Senior Consultus status did he receive from each of the Bar Associations in South Africa for each quarter since his appointment on 25 May 2014 and (b) how many of the specified applications did he approve respectively?

Reply:

(a) I wish to inform the Honorable member that I received 64 applications for the granting of Senior Consultus status for each quarter since my appointment on 25 May 2014, which are explained in details as follows:

QUARTER 1 2014

Total Applications received in First Quarter 2014= 0

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

Backlog Applications received in 2013 and Jan-May 2014: 0.

 

QUARTER 2 2014

Total Applications received in Second Quarter 2014= 2

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

KwaZulu-Natal Bar

  1. Adv G R Thatcher

3 June 2014

Application approved

Free State Society of Advocates

  1. Adv L Le Roux Pohl

18 June 2014

Application approved

QUARTER 3 2014

Total Applications received in Third Quarter 2014= 12

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

National Bar Council (formerly the Independent Association of Advocates of South Africa)

  1. Adv DM Abbey
  1. Adv Jan Bekker
  1. Adv J A De Freitus
  1. Adv C Fouche
  1. Adv MAJ Hassim
  1. Adv MA Hawyes
  1. Adv M Klein
  1. Adv J T Marishane
  1. Adv BVL Momoti
  1. Adv T L Mosikatsana
  1. Adv M W Mvune
  1. Adv AH Davey

22 September 2014

Referred back to National Bar Council of South Africa for further information.

QUARTER 4 2014

Total Applications received in Fourth Quarter 2014= 4

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

Free State Society of Advocates

  1. Adv N. Snellenburg

20 October 2014

Application approved

KZN Society of Advocates

  1. Adv J Nxusani
  1. Adv M W Collins
  1. Adv T G Madonsela

27 November 2014

Application approved

 

QUARTER 1 2015

Total Applications received in First Quarter 2015= 21

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

Pretoria Society of Advocates

  1. Adv J G Naudé
  1. Adv T P Krüger
  1. Adv H F Oosthuizen
  1. Adv A J South
  1. Adv T W G Bester
  1. Adv H K Kooverjie
  1. Adv J A Motepe

10 February 2015

Application approved

Gauteng Society of Advocates

  1. Adv J J Hattingh

05 March 2015

Application approved

JHB Bar Council

  1. Adv J J Roestorf
  1. Adv P van der Berg
  1. Adv R M Robinson
  1. Adv D J Joubert
  1. Adv N Konstantinides
  1. Adv F A Boda
  1. Adv L Gcabashe
  1. Adv S Stein
  1. Adv J Wilson
  1. Adv FM Sikhakhane

13 March 2015

Application approved

KZN Society of Advocates

  1. Adv S M Khan
  1. dv G D Goddard
  1. Adv R G Mossop

23 March 2015

Processing Application November 2015.

QUARTER 2 2015

Total Applications received in Second Quarter 2015= 16

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

Eastern Cape Society of Advocates

  1. Adv A G Dugmore
  1. Adv P Kroon
  1. Adv T M Euijen
  1. Adv O Ronaasen
  1. Adv N Mullins

18 June 2015

Processing Applications

National Bar Council (formerly the Independent Association of Advocates of South Africa)

  1. Adv Elizabeth Crouse

18 June 2015

Processing Application

Johannesburg Society of Advocates

  1. Adv Pincus
  1. Adv M T Ohannessian
  1. Adv A M de Kok
  1. Adv H J Smith
  1. Adv C F Van der Merwe
  1. Adv G B Rome
  1. Adv Q G Leech
  1. Adv DL Wood
  1. Adv P G Seleka
  1. Adv A L Platt

25 June 2015

Processing Applications

QUARTER 3 2015

Total Applications received in Third Quarter 2015= 5

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

KZN Society of Advocates

  1. Adv P J Blomkamp
  1. Adv J E Hoowse

2 September 2015

Processing Applications

Church Square Association of Advocates

  1. Adv W F Pienaar
  1. Adv S J J Van Rensburg
  1. Adv W F Nel

8 September 2015

Processing Applications

QUARTER 4 2015

Total Applications received in Fourth Quarter 2015= 4

BAR COUNCIL

NUMBER AND NAME OF APPLICANTS

DATE RECEIVED

STATUS

Bhisho Society of Advocates

  1. Adv PG Beningfield
  1. Adv TM Ntsaluba

22 October 2015

Processing Application

Free State Society of Advocates

  1. Adv J Nel

3 November 2015

Processing Application

Eastern Cape Society of Advocates

  1. Adv B C Dyke

13 November 2015

Processing Application

(b) How many of the specified applications did I approve respectively?

I wish to inform the Honorable member that I recommend applications for Senior Consultus status to the Honorable President for consideration.

As indicated in the table in paragraph (a) above, I have recommended 40 of the mentioned applications to the Hon President for approval, except for 24 applications received from the National Bar Council, which did not have the full information required.

20 November 2015 - NW4105

Profile picture: Vos, Mr J

Vos, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)Whether, with reference to his reply to question 3719 on 06 November 2015, the internal investigation into the escape of a certain person (Name and details furnished) has been concluded; if not, why not; if so, (2) whether any disciplinary hearings have been instituted against the correctional officials involved; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details of the disciplinary actions instituted in each case?

Reply:

  1. Yes, the internal investigation into the escape of a certain person from the Warmbokkeveld Correctional Centre has been concluded and submitted to the delegated authority where decision has been taken for disciplinary measures to be instituted.
  2. Following recommendations of the internal investigation, a chairperson and an initiator for the disciplinary process have been appointed. The disciplinary process is yet to be concluded.

20 November 2015 - NW3962

Profile picture: Carter, Ms D

Carter, Ms D to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether, in view of the concession by the National Commissioner as reported in the Budgetary Review and Recommendation report of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services to the National Assembly that his department had often addressed one qualification at the risk of other risk areas resulting in new qualifications by the Auditor-General and a series of qualified reports, he has (a) taken any steps to ensure that his department’s disregard for the findings and recommendations will never occur again and (b) ordered disciplinary measures to be taken against all officials who had since 2014 been guilty of ignoring the findings and recommendations of the Auditor-General in order to show his resolve; if not, why not; if so, what are the details?

Reply:

Yes, the National Commissioner has taken steps to ensure that the Department of Correctional Services improves on its audit outcomes, in particular to resolve qualifications on its financial statements, eliminate non-compliance to laws and regulations as well as enhancing the system of internal controls. Since 2005/6 until 2013/14 financial years, the department had continually received qualification due to asset management. Internal controls on management of tangible movable assets were enhanced over time, resulting in resolution of this matter during the previous financial year, i.e. 2014/15.

In the same year (i.e. 2014/15), the basis of qualification was a new matter on contingent liabilities. The Auditor General was “unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence for claims against the department because it did not have adequate systems and processes to record and maintain a register for claims against the department”, 2014-15 Report of the Auditor General.

Steps that have already been taken to address emerging qualifications include capacitating the Legal services component. In this regard, a vacancy of Head of Legal Services has been filled during the year.

Operational action plan which seeks to address weaknesses in contingent liability registers is presented below:

Activities

Measure

Timeframes

Review and update of contingent liabilities register

Contingent liabilities register-

  • reflecting all current claims; and
  • corresponding source documents

1 August 2015 –

30 October 2015

Request State Attorneys’ preliminary verification of claims

All claims contained in the Register verified and confirmed by various state attorneys servicing DCS

30 November 2015

Internal auditing of contingent liabilities register

  • Internal Audit Report.
  • Findings of the internal audit addressed.

30 January 2016

Submission of register to AGSA for their preliminary auditing.

Findings of the AGSA’s preliminary audit addressed.

28 February 2016

Request final State Attorneys’ verification of claims

All claims contained in the Register verified and confirmed by various state attorneys servicing DCS.

31 March 2016

Submission of final disclosure note for inclusion in AFS

Complete and verified contingent liabilities submitted timeously.

15 April 2016

In order to improve the departmental system of internal controls, the inadequate capacity within assurance services has been identified as a key root cause to matters of non-compliance with laws and regulations. In this regard the following interventions are either underway or have been finalized:

  • The Internal Control and Compliance (ICC) component has been capacitated through the appointment of Head of ICC;
  • The establishment and capacitation of a risk management unit within ICC will be carried out during the current financial year;
  • Recruitment of additional internal auditors at regional / provincial level

The department has prioritized investigations into irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure as the first step towards effective consequence management. The Inspectorate directorate under ICC is currently investigating backlog of cases of non- compliance to SCM processes which include amongst others, non-disclosure of interest, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure. The National Commissioner also appointed an Investigation Steering Committee to provide oversight on the process of investigation as well as making recommendations to National Commissioner on disciplinary steps to be taken against officials who have failed to comply with policies and procedures.

As at end 31 October 2015, the status of investigations is as follows:

Status of investigations

Total cases

Cases Finalized

Investigations in progress

Investigations not yet started

Total

649

476

41

132

16 November 2015 - NW3774

Profile picture: Malema, Mr J

Malema, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

How does he intend to address weaknesses in the prisoner parole system that allows persons with money and connections, such as certain persons (Shabir Shaik, Tony Yengeni and Oscar Pistorious), to get out of jail without serving their full sentences, while persons who are not well-known spend almost the entirety of their sentences behind bars?

Reply:

All offenders have a right to be considered for placement upon completion of the required minimum detention period, irrespective of their social standing. Offenders who meet the set criteria for consideration of parole will have their placement approved irrespective of whether they have money or not.

Legal representation is not a prerequisite for consideration for parole, medical parole or correctional supervision as such offenders who cannot afford legal representatives are not disadvantaged during consideration for placement. In fact offenders do not have to apply for consideration for placement on parole or under correctional supervision as they are automatically identified as and when they become eligible for consideration.

The two of the three mentioned individuals were both sentenced in terms of section 276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977. In line with the provisions of section 73(7)(a) of the Correctional Services Act, 1998 (Act No. 111 of 1998, they , like all other offenders sentenced under the same provisions, qualified to be considered for placement under correctional supervision after serving 1/6 of sentence. There are a number of other offenders who have been placed under correctional supervision after serving 1/6 of their sentences who have not received media attention.

One of the three mentioned individuals was placed on parole on medical grounds on 3 March 2009 in terms of the provisions of Section 79 of the Correctional Services Act, Act No. 111 of 1998, before it was amended. Therefore, he was considered in terms of the then applicable legislation. The medical parole legislation was reviewed and Section 14 of the Correctional Services Amendment Act, Act No. 5 of 2011, which introduced the new medical parole system, came into effect on 01 March 2012.

Parole, medical parole or correctional supervision does not remit the sentence meted out by a court in that offenders placed out, either on parole, medical parole or correctional supervision, are expected to serve the remainder of their sentences in the community under close supervision of officials of the Department of Correctional Services until expiry of their sentences.

06 November 2015 - NW3851

Profile picture: Mahlalela, Mr AF

Mahlalela, Mr AF to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether he intends to implement the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s amnesty committee dated 27 November 2000 in relation to the application of a certain person (name furnished); if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

I wish to inform the Honourable Member that Mr Voice Morris Sambo was refused amnesty by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) because he failed to make full disclosure.

The TRC nevertheless recommended that despite the refusal of Mr Sambo’s application, the Committee is of the view that in the light of the continued and considerable harassment that the applicant was subjected to and particularly in the light of the extremely harsh sentence that the applicant received, that this is an appropriate case for executive intervention. Accordingly, the TRC recommended that the Ministries of Justice and Correctional Services investigate the matter with a view to affording the applicant an appropriate reduction in sentence.

Sentences are, however, imposed by the courts. I as Minister of Justice of and Correctional Services, have no power to reduce a sentence or to pardon those who have been found guilty and sentenced by the courts.

I would recommend however, that Mr Sambo consider the following two (2) options:

Firstly, applying for a Presidential pardon to the President of the Republic of South Africa, who has the power to pardon offenders sentenced to direct imprisonment. It is the prerogative of the President whether to grant or not to grant pardon.

Secondly, if Mr Sambo meets the minimum requirements for parole, he can submit his application to be considered for parole to the Parole Board.

06 November 2015 - NW3719

Profile picture: Majola, Mr TR

Majola, Mr TR to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services:

Did a certain person (name furnished) escape from the Warm Bokkeveld Prison situated in Ceres, Western Cape, in September 2015, if so, (a) what were the circumstances surrounding the escape, (b) has an investigation into the escape been institueted and (c) what was the outcome of the investigation?

Reply:

Yes, he did escape from the Warmbokkeveld Correctional Centre on 11 September 2015.

  (a) On Saturday morning, 12 September 2015, it was found that the head count of inmates at unlock did not rally with the lockup number. There was a discrepancy of one (1) inmate not accounted for. A roll call was conducted and it was noted that one unsentenced offender, admitted on Friday, 11 September 2015 was not in the Correctional Centre. The case was reported to the local South African Police Services (SAPS) and the offender was re-arrested by the SAPS within an hour of the report.

On further investigation it was established that the inmate had, upon admission, gone to the toilets located next to the doorway leading into and out of the building and close to the parked SAPS vehicle. The inmate then managed to slip through the door unnoticed and he hid himself in the undercarriage of a SAPS vehicle that later exited the centre.

   (b) Yes, an investigation has been launched into the matter and the inmate has been charged for escaping from lawful custody and his next court appearance is on 09 November 2015 (SAPS Ceres Case Number 306/7/15)

  (c) The internal investigation is still continuing and where needed, disciplinary action against Correctional Officials will be instituted.

03 November 2015 - NW3773

Profile picture: Mokgalapa, Mr S

Mokgalapa, Mr S to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

What reasons will the South African Government provide the Assembly of States for non-compliance with the International Criminal Court order to arrest President, Mr Omar Al-Bashir?

Reply:

The South African Government has requested the International Criminal Court for an extension of the time-limit to submit our view on the events surrounding Omar Al Bashir’s attendance of the African Union Summit in Johannesburg from 13 to 15 June 2015, until such time as the ongoing judicial proceedings before the South African Courts are finalized.

The Pre- Trial Chamber of the ICC has granted an extension and has ordered the competent authorities in the Republic of South Africa to report to the Chamber on any developments in the judicial proceedings as they occur; and should no such developments occur prior to 15 December 2015, to submit a report detailing the status of the relevant domestic judicial proceedings not later than 31 December 2015.

The Honourable Member’s request for reasons is therefore premature.

 

03 November 2015 - NW2980

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether his department has made any progress in establishing any prisoner transfer agreements with other countries; if not, what (a) impediments are preventing the negotiation of such agreements and (b) action is her department taking to overcome the specified impediments; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

Yes, progress has been made in that all relevant Justice, Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS) Departments were consulted and a process of approaching Cabinet for a decision on a South African position on prisoner transfer agreements with other countries has been initiated.

(a) and (b). Fall away.

03 November 2015 - NW2978

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(a) How many foreign nationals are currently incarcerated in correctional centres as (i) sentenced offenders, (ii) remand detainees and (iii) detainees awaiting deportation, (b) what is the breakdown of the specified foreign nationals in respect of their country of origin and (c) what services does his department provide to the specified foreign nationals?

Reply:

(a)(i), (ii), (iii) and (b):

NUMBER OF FOREIGN NATIONALS AS ON 10 AUGUST 2015

NATIONALITY

SENTENCE GROUPS

 

REMAND DETAINEES

DETAINEES AWAITING DEPORTATION

SENTENCED

ALL SENTENCE GROUPS

ALGERIA

0

 

1

1

AMERICAN SAMOA

0

 

2

2

ANGOLA

14

 

65

79

ARGENTINA

0

 

2

2

AUSTRALIA

0

 

1

1

AUSTRIA

0

 

2

2

BANGLADESH

14

 

5

19

BENIN

1

 

3

4

BOLIVIA

1

 

44

45

BOTSWANA

4

 

11

15

BRAZIL

2

 

20

22

BRIT. CARRIBEAN FED (JA,WL,WV)

0

 

1

1

BRITISH INDIAN OCEAN TERRITORY

0

 

2

2

BULGARIA

4

 

6

10

BURUNDI

17

 

18

35

CAMEROON

4

 

11

15

CANADA

0

 

1

1

CAPE VERDE

0

 

2

2

CHINA

8

 

15

23

COLOMBIA

0

 

4

4

CONGO

57

 

67

124

CZECH REPUBLIC

1

 

0

1

DENMARK

0

 

1

1

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

0

 

1

1

ECUADOR

0

 

5

5

EGYPT

2

 

1

3

EL SALVADOR

0

 

1

1

ERITREA

0

 

1

1

ETHIOPIA

18

 

13

31

FRANCE

0

 

2

2

FRENCH GUIANA

0

 

1

1

GAMBIA

1

 

0

1

GHANA

3

 

16

19

GUINEA

2

 

3

5

GUINEA-BISSAU

0

 

2

2

GUYANA

1

 

9

10

ICELAND

0

 

0

0

INDIA

3

 

8

11

IRELAND

1

 

0

1

ISRAEL

1

 

0

1

JAMAICA

0

 

2

2

KENYA

7

 

18

25

LATVIA

1

 

0

1

LESOTHO

467

11

1044

1522

LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHIRIYA

0

 

1

1

LIBERIA

2

 

1

3

LIECHTENSTEIN

1

 

0

1

MACAO

1

 

0

1

MALAWI

317

26

218

561

MALI

0

 

1

1

MAURITIUS

0

 

1

1

MOZAMBIQUE

710

8

1665

2383

NAMIBIA

17

 

23

40

NETHERLANDS

0

 

1

1

NIGER

3

 

1

4

NIGERIA

202

 

250

452

NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

0

 

1

1

PAKISTAN

23

 

21

44

PARAGUAY

0

 

4

4

PERU

1

 

23

24

PORTUGAL

0

 

3

3

RWANDA

0

 

1

1

SENEGAL

0

 

3

3

SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO

1

 

3

4

SIERRA LEONE

1

 

1

2

SOMALIA

28

 

17

45

SPAIN

1

 

4

5

SUDAN

1

 

2

3

SWAZILAND

41

 

180

221

TAIWAN, PROVINCE OF CHINA

0

 

3

3

TAJIKISTAN

1

 

0

1

TANZANIA, UNITED REPUBLIC OF

141

2

188

331

THAILAND

0

 

1

1

TOGO

1

 

0

1

TURKEY

0

 

1

1

UGANDA

10

2

20

32

UNITED KINGDOM

0

 

5

5

UNITED STATES

0

 

1

1

VENEZUELA

1

 

3

4

VIET NAM

2

 

4

6

ZAIRE

0

 

5

5

ZAMBIA

4

 

17

21

ZIMBABWE

1324

9

2234

3567

TOTAL

3468

58

6318

9844

(c) Services are provided to all inmates within the South African Corrections System irrespective of their nationality. However, it is internationally accepted that foreign nationals in the correctional system of any country present a challenge due to their unfamiliarity with the language and culture as well as the lack of close contact with their families.

03 November 2015 - NW3830

Profile picture: Malatsi, Mr MS

Malatsi, Mr MS to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Has he or his department contacted or been contacted by any organ of state of the United States of America (USA) in respect of the ongoing investigation and indictment into allegations of corruption with regard to the Fifa 2010 Soccer World Cup Tournament; if not, why has he not contacted any USA organ of state in this regard; if so, in each case, (a) when and (b) what are the relevant details of such communication?

Reply:

I wish to inform the Honourable Member that yes, I and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development have received a communication from the Legal Attaché of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in South Africa in this regard.

(a) During June 2015, the Legal Attaché (FBI) in South Africa, forwarded a letter to the Department, attaching a copy of an indictment related to the FIFA matter.

(b) The purpose of the letter was to bring the contents of the indictment under the attention of the Department. It was also stated in the letter that the FBI was looking forward to the continued partnership between the FBI, the American Department of Justice and the South African Department of Justice and Constitutional Development.

The Department submitted the letter to me in a memorandum, informing me of the contents of the letter as well as the indictment. I was also informed that a formal request for assistance has not yet been received from the American authorities. I noted the contents of the memorandum, including the indictment, and forwarded copies of the indictment to the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Corruption, the Minister of Sport and Recreation, the Department of International Relations and Cooperation and the Chairperson of the Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT).

.

03 November 2015 - NW3813

Profile picture: Kruger, Mr HC

Kruger, Mr HC to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Has the SA Human Rights Commission made a follow-up on their recommendations with regard to report reference number MP/2011/0134, in respect of the Emalahleni Local Municipality in Mpumalanga, to ensure compliance; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

I wish to inform the Honourable Member that I have been informed by the South African Human Rights Commission, that yes, the Commission has made follow-ups in this regard.

I have furthermore been informed that following numerous correspondences (including a letter in February 2015) sent to the Municipality requesting an update on the implementation of the recommendations in the report, the Municipality appealed the Commission’s findings.

In September 2015, the Office of the Chairperson of the South African Human Rights Commission dismissed the Municipality’s appeal and the provincial office is now engaging the Municipality with a view to obtain the Municipality’s time-framed implementation plan aimed at effecting the recommendations in the report.

 

.

03 November 2015 - NW3765

Profile picture: Singh, Mr N

Singh, Mr N to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

In respect of the respect of the recent presidential pardons granted to political prisoners, what are the relevant details of the rehabilitative and reintegrative steps and procedures that are in place to assist those who have received such pardon to successfully reintegrate back into the society?

Reply:

A Special Dispensation was adopted on 21 November 2007 following an announcement by the President addressing a Joint Sitting of Parliament in order to facilitate the granting of Presidential pardon for individuals who have committed offences they believe were in pursuit of political objectives in terms of section 84 (2) (j) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. On 19 January 2008 the President announced the appointment of a Reference Group that will consider applications for pardoning and to advise the President of the "special process" for the pardoning. The Reference Group and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development handled and managed the administration of the process. After consultation with the office of the President, the department has resuscitated this process and it is now at an advanced stage. However, it should be emphasized that only those individuals who applied for the presidential pardon are currently considered by a Ministerial Task Team.

At this stage it can be confirmed that no presidential pardons were granted to sentenced offenders. However, offenders in the above mentioned category who qualifies in terms of the normal parole placement policy are considered for parole placement and only those who comply with all requirements are released on parole. The Ministerial Task Team ensured that offenders who applied in terms of the Special Dispensation and still incarcerated have done the following programs to prepare them for eventual parole release:

  • Life skills with social workers (orientation, defining of self- image, completion of collage presentation, self-knowledge and self- acceptance , development , motivation, future planning).
  • Life skills with psychologists
  • Pre-release (health education, financial management, relationships, restorative justice, finding employment, parole conditions, substance abuse relapse prevention)
  • Cross roads
  • Substance abuse
  • Anger in anger out
  • Heart lines
  • Restorative justice / VOD / VOM
  • Recreational programs
  • Spiritual care
  • Hope Foundation: purple ribbon for peace: (conflict analysis, emotional planning, active listening, assertiveness, problem solving, negotiation, mediation)

03 November 2015 - NW3758

Profile picture: Lekota, Mr M

Lekota, Mr M to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether his department has evaluated the number of requests from citizens and organizations to the Public Protector to investigate complaints of the abuse of authority from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2015, in order to (a) pick out the common threads and deal with it systemically through legislative reform, (b) draw the attention of the President, Mr Jacob G Zuma, and the national executive to deal with such abuse of power, (c) work with the Minister of Police to ensure that hotspots of corruption in the Government are regularly and systematically investigated and transgressors prosecuted to maintain the confidence of citizens in the Government, (d) work with the Minister of Finance and the Auditor-General to ensure that better systems are put in place to prevent the serial and large-scale abuse of state funds and resources by rogue elements in the Government and (e) determine how best to provide the Public Protector’s Office with adequate resources in order to meet the avalanche of requests for the specified office to investigate; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(a), (b), (c) and (d):

As the Honourable member is aware, in terms of section 181(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, all organs of state, through legislative and others measures, must assist and protect all the institutions supporting constitutional democracy, including the Public Protector, to ensure the independence, impartiality, dignity and effectiveness of these institutions.

It is, therefore, the responsibility of all organs of state, including the President, the national executive and Government, as referred to by the Honourable member, to evaluate the number of requests from citizens and organisations to the Public Protector to investigate the complaints of the abuse of authority from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2015, in order to act upon it as indicated in paragraphs (a) to (d) of the Honourable member’s question.

In view of the above, I would kindly advise the Honourable member to scrutinize the relevant findings in all the Public Protector’s reports during the period in question and if necessary address his questions to the organs of state concerned.

As far as could be ascertained from the reports of the Public Protector during the period in question, there were no requests from citizens and organisations to the Public Protector to investigate complaints of the abuse of authority against the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and it was therefore not necessary for the Department to act upon it as indicated in paragraphs (a) to (d) of the Honourable member’s question.

(e) Government has been supportive of the Public Protector’s requests for increasing its investigative capacity as is evident by the significant increase in its budget allocation throughout the previous Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) periods. The Honourable member may also be aware that Parliament approved the revised organizational structure of the Public Protector comprising of 420 posts in the 2012/2013 financial year. At the time, the Public Protector was advised by my colleague the Minister of Finance to develop a multi-year implementation plan to ensure that critical posts are prioritized and filled within the medium term expenditure framework allocations. During his 2015 Medium Term Budget Policy Statement on 21 October 2015, the Minister of Finance also indicated that the Public Protector will receive an additional allocation to address capacity challenges.

It should also be noted that within the current economic climate it is expected of all institutions supporting constitutional democracy, including the Public Protector, to work together to determine how to deal with matters in a more economic, cost effective and efficient manner and to ensure that there is no duplication as it relates to their mandates.

The Honourable member may further be aware, that the National Assembly is still seized with the report of the Ad hoc Committee on the Review of Chapter 9 and associated Institutions often referred to as the Kader Asmal report. This report contains a number of recommendations that may have far-reaching implications for the institutions supporting constitutional democracy, including the Public Protector. The Speaker of the National Assembly recently convened a workshop of relevant stakeholders in order to exchange views and to finalize the National Assembly’s position in order to help Parliament to adopt the report.

With all the above in mind and given our limited resources, it is my view that the Public Protector should be able to execute its mandate and deliver on its core business responsibilities within the budget allocation and assistance that was provided for by Government.

 

29 October 2015 - NW3705

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1) Whether there was an outbreak of Leptospirosis at the Pollsmoor remand detention facility; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) What actions have been taken to (a) quarantine inmates, (b) fumigate their personal effects, (c) deal with the rat infestation and (d) transfer inmates to other facilities; (3) What long term steps are being taken to improve sanitation, hygiene and overcrowding problems at the specified facility as recently highlighted by the report by the former judge of the SA Constitutional Court, Justice Cameron?

Reply:

  1. Yes, there was an outbreak of Leptospirosis at the Pollsmoor Remand Detention facility.

The details are as follows:

  • Two cases of Leptospirosis have been identified in August 2015.
  • One Leptospirosis case identified in September 2015.
 

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Patient Initials

Patient BC

Patient AM

Patient DV

Age

52

49

44

Race

Coloured

African

Coloured

Gender

Male

Male

Male

Unit

Section A (Cell 591)

Section A (Cell 545)

Section E 2

Date of onset of illness

25.07.2015

Returned to Clinic: 01.08.2015

04.08.2015

Returned to Clinic: 11.08.2015

31.08.2015

Returned

04.09.2015

Referred to Victoria Hospital

01.08.2015

11.08.2015

04.09.2015

Treatment Outcome date

Demised : 02.08.2015 at Victoria hospital

Discharged from Victoria hospital on the 20th August 2015

Discharged from Victoria hospital on the 17.09.2015

N.B. Confirmation of Leptospirosis Diagnosis by the Communicable Disease Control: Department of Health Western Cape was received by DCS on the 20th August 2015 for the first two cases identified at Victoria Hospital. Third case confirmation was received on the 07th September 2015.

2. Actions that had been taken to :

(a) Quarantine inmates,

  • Inmates were not quarantined; however those with moderate to severe signs were transferred immediately to Victoria Hospital as recommended by the National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD).
  • All inmates who presented with nonspecific signs and symptoms were tested and treated empirically for Leptospirosis.

(b) Fumigate their personal effects,

  • Fumigation intervals of the cells have been increased.
  • Personal Protective Clothing and Equipment (PPE) was purchased and distributed for use in all areas that can expose one to risk of infection (e.g. waste handlers, cleaners).
  • All Remand Detainees were issued with the prescribed uniform.
  • Frequent washing and disinfecting of personal clothing was encouraged.

(c) deal with the rat infestation :

Pest Control service providers have been contracted for rodents and other pests control measures.

  • Advanced mechanical rodent traps were placed at access points to eradicate the rodents.
  • Gas fumigation of the tunnel will be implemented as per evacuation plan.
  • The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) was contacted to remove feral rats.
  • Waste Management has been intensified and waste collection has been reviewed from twice a week to daily. Waste storage procedures have been implemented.
  • Environmental hygiene was intensified through identification of additional cleaning teams, increasing the frequency of cleaning programs to twice daily and the entire facility scrub down was conducted as per facility evacuation plan.
  • Weekly inspection is being done by the City of Cape Town Environmental Health Practitioners and DCS officials.

(d) Transfer inmates to other facilities

  • In-service training was provided to clinical staff with regard to clinical presentation, diagnosis and prevention of Leptospirosis by 4th September 2015.
  • Inmates were screened as per NICD guidelines before they were evacuated to other Correctional Centers.
  • Evacuation plan was developed and inmates were transferred to other facilities in the Western Cape as per plan. The evacuation and transfer plan was implemented per schedule to mitigate risk factors.
  • All Provincial Stakeholders were informed about the evacuation plan.

3.Long term steps being taken to improve sanitation, hygiene and overcrowding problems at the specified facility as recently highlighted in the report by the former judge of the SA Constitutional Court, Justice Cameron.

Sanitation and hygiene:

  • Medication available and issued as prescribed.
  • Meals are provided three times per day as per meal plan.
  • Mattresses and blankets are issued on admission for sleeping purposes to all offenders.
  • Cleaning material availability monitored and cleaning procedures intensified.
  • Overcrowding:Comprehensive HIV and AIDS as well as Tuberculosis programmes and services are implemented with the support of external partners. Condoms are distributed however there is malicious misuse of condoms (trafficking of contraband).

The Department of Correctional Services implements a multi-pronged strategy to manage overcrowding .The strategy consists of the following dimensions:

  • Managing levels of remand detainees (RD’s) through IJS Case Management Task Team & Inter-Sectoral Committee on Child Justice;
  • Managing levels of sentenced inmates through improving effective & appropriate use of conversion of sentence to community correctional supervision, release on parole, & transfers between correctional centres to attempt to establish some degree of evenness of overcrowding;
  • Ensuring progress with DCS capital works programme to upgrade correctional facilities & to build new correctional centres that are both cost effective & rehabilitation oriented;
  • Encouraging debate in South Africa about reason for incarceration as a sentence & encouraging an approach to appropriate sentencing that is focused on facilitating rehabilitation;
  • Enhancing community correctional supervision so that it can be better utilized as an appropriate sentence for less serious crimes;
  • Improving correction & development programmes within DCS to ensure enhanced facilitation of rehabilitation that targets offending behaviour;
  • Encouraging improvement of first & second levels of correction in family & social institutions & social & economic sector government departments respectively to decrease rate of entry into criminal justice system; and
  • Encouraging community involvement in social reintegration of offenders back into their community in order to assist in reducing levels of repeat offending
    .

29 October 2015 - NW3706

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)What (a) is the current status of the parole application for a certain person (Mr Nicholas Pike) and (b) are the reasons for the delay in processing the specified application; (2) when are the specified delays expected to be resolved ?

Reply:

(1)(a) The offender was sentenced on 6 December 2006 to four (4) years imprisonment in terms of section 276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977 for driving a motor vehicle without the owner’s permission and theft. He was placed on Correctional Supervision on the 17 August 2007. The offender absconded from the system of community corrections. He committed crimes during this period and was sentenced on the 19th April 2008 to 15 years imprisonment for fraud and forgery and again on 20th April 2010 was sentenced to five (05) years imprisonment for fraud and forgery and the court ordered that the sentence to run concurrently with the 15 years imprisonment. He was considered by the Correctional Supervision and Parole Board (CSPB) for possible placement on parole on the 16th October 2014 and was given a further profile for the 18th February 2015.

(b) During consideration by the CSPB it was discovered that the offender did not complete his Correctional Supervision period and Community Corrections Office of Kgoši Mampuru II Management Area was approached for clarity on the number of outstanding days to be served for parole violation. Clarification was received from the Community Corrections offices that the offender still has to serve an additional 1193 days of his previous sentence. The effective sentence is currently 15 years plus 1193 days imprisonment.

(2) On 20 October 2015 the Community Corrections Office at Kgoši Mampuru II Management Area visited the CSPB at Leeuwkop Management Area, explained to the offender the period to be served for his absconding. Subsequently, he appeared before the CSPB on the 20th October 2015 and it was decided that he will be reconsidered on the 21st July 2016.

29 October 2015 - NW37720

Profile picture: Breytenbach, Adv G

Breytenbach, Adv G to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(a) What progress has been made in moving the corporate services component of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) into the Department of Justice and (b) what functions of corporate services are still left with the NPA?

Reply:

a) I wish to inform the Honourable Member that the Senior Management of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development [DoJ&CD] and the National Prosecuting Authority [NPA] are continuing to engage with a view to ensuring alignment and continued cooperation within the corporate support services environment. This will ensure that a single set of policies and systems are in place by the end of the current financial year, which would be applicable to both the DoJ&CD and the NPA.

The 2014/2015 Annual Report of the DoJ&CD submitted to Parliament was a consolidated document, which also included NPA information and henceforth the planning and reporting processes will also be integrated.

I as the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, the Director-General [DG] and the National Director of Public Prosecutions [NDPP] have agreed that the NDPP will shortly submit a proposal to the Minister for discussion, such proposal addressing a possible way forward with regards to administrative support services which will remain in the NPA in order for the NDPP to fulfill the administrative legislation requirements, including reporting. This proposal will then also address issues of structure within the NPA and post provisioning associated with such structure of support.

b) Currently the NPA still performs the corporate support services as previously, until the matters in the response to [a] above, have been finalized.

27 October 2015 - NW3490

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)How many persons who are sentenced to life imprisonment and who qualify for consideration for parole are still incarcerated; (2) whether any case of the specified persons has not yet been considered by the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS); if so, (a) why have the specified cases not been considered and (b) how many such persons are affected; (3) whether the NCCS has put in place measures to deal with any backlogs that exist; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

1. As at 10 September 2015 there was a total of two thousand two hundred and fifty eight (2258) persons who are sentenced to life imprisonment and who qualify for consideration for parole.

2. Yes, at the outset it is important that the Honourable member takes note that members of the National Council for Correctional Services are professionals appointed by the Minister in terms of Section 83 of the Correctional Services Act, 1998 (Act 111 of 1998). They are not in full time employment of Correctional Services.

As a result of the backlog created by the Van Wyk Judgment (case nr: 40915/10 in the North Gauteng High Court Pretoria) the newly appointed NCCS meets on a regular basis; meetings have been scheduled on a two weekly basis.

The consideration of offenders for parole is not a matter that can be dealt with lightly. Considerable time and effort is put into the deliberation of individual cases before a recommendation is made to the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services. Approximately thirty (30) cases are considered during a one day meeting and fifty (50) during a two day meeting. As at 10 September 2015 a total of three hundred and eighty eight (388) of the specified persons has not yet been considered by the National Council for Correctional Services.

3. Yes; Regular meetings are scheduled in an attempt to deal with the backlog.

27 October 2015 - NW3706

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1)What (a) is the current status of the parole application for a certain person (Mr Nicholas Pike) and (b) are the reasons for the delay in processing the specified application; (2) when are the specified delays expected to be resolved ?

Reply:

(1)(a) The offender was sentenced on 6 December 2006 to four (4) years imprisonment in terms of section 276(1)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977 for driving a motor vehicle without the owner’s permission and theft. He was placed on Correctional Supervision on the 17 August 2007. The offender absconded from the system of community corrections. He committed crimes during this period and was sentenced on the 19th April 2008 to 15 years imprisonment for fraud and forgery and again on 20th April 2010 was sentenced to five (05) years imprisonment for fraud and forgery and the court ordered that the sentence to run concurrently with the 15 years imprisonment. He was considered by the Correctional Supervision and Parole Board (CSPB) for possible placement on parole on the 16th October 2014 and was given a further profile for the 18th February 2015.

(b) During consideration by the CSPB it was discovered that the offender did not complete his Correctional Supervision period and Community Corrections Office of Kgoši Mampuru II Management Area was approached for clarity on the number of outstanding days to be served for parole violation. Clarification was received from the Community Corrections offices that the offender still has to serve an additional 1193 days of his previous sentence. The effective sentence is currently 15 years plus 1193 days imprisonment.

(2) On 20 October 2015 the Community Corrections Office at Kgoši Mampuru II Management Area visited the CSPB at Leeuwkop Management Area, explained to the offender the period to be served for his absconding. Subsequently, he appeared before the CSPB on the 20th October 2015 and it was decided that he will be reconsidered on the 21st July 2016.

27 October 2015 - NW3705

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

(1) Whether there was an outbreak of Leptospirosis at the Pollsmoor remand detention facility; if so, what are the relevant details; (2) What actions have been taken to (a) quarantine inmates, (b) fumigate their personal effects, (c) deal with the rat infestation and (d) transfer inmates to other facilities; (3) What long term steps are being taken to improve sanitation, hygiene and overcrowding problems at the specified facility as recently highlighted by the report by the former judge of the SA Constitutional Court, Justice Cameron?

Reply:

  1. Yes, there was an outbreak of Leptospirosis at the Pollsmoor Remand Detention facility.

The details are as follows:

  • Two cases of Leptospirosis have been identified in August 2015.
  • One Leptospirosis case identified in September 2015.
 

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Patient Initials

Patient BC

Patient AM

Patient DV

Age

52

49

44

Race

Coloured

African

Coloured

Gender

Male

Male

Male

Unit

Section A (Cell 591)

Section A (Cell 545)

Section E 2

Date of onset of illness

25.07.2015

Returned to Clinic: 01.08.2015

04.08.2015

Returned to Clinic: 11.08.2015

31.08.2015

Returned

04.09.2015

Referred to Victoria Hospital

01.08.2015

11.08.2015

04.09.2015

Treatment Outcome date

Demised : 02.08.2015 at Victoria hospital

Discharged from Victoria hospital on the 20th August 2015

Discharged from Victoria hospital on the 17.09.2015

N.B. Confirmation of Leptospirosis Diagnosis by the Communicable Disease Control: Department of Health Western Cape was received by DCS on the 20th August 2015 for the first two cases identified at Victoria Hospital. Third case confirmation was received on the 07th September 2015.

PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

2. Actions that had been taken to :

(a) Quarantine inmates,

  • Inmates were not quarantined; however those with moderate to severe signs were transferred immediately to Victoria Hospital as recommended by the National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD).
  • All inmates who presented with nonspecific signs and symptoms were tested and treated empirically for Leptospirosis.

(b) Fumigate their personal effects,

  • Fumigation intervals of the cells have been increased.
  • Personal Protective Clothing and Equipment (PPE) was purchased and distributed for use in all areas that can expose one to risk of infection (e.g. waste handlers, cleaners).
  • All Remand Detainees were issued with the prescribed uniform.
  • Frequent washing and disinfecting of personal clothing was encouraged.

(c) deal with the rat infestation :

Pest Control service providers have been contracted for rodents and other pests control measures.

  • Advanced mechanical rodent traps were placed at access points to eradicate the rodents.
  • Gas fumigation of the tunnel will be implemented as per evacuation plan.
  • The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) was contacted to remove feral rats.
  • Waste Management has been intensified and waste collection has been reviewed from twice a week to daily. Waste storage procedures have been implemented.

PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

  • Environmental hygiene was intensified through identification of additional cleaning teams, increasing the frequency of cleaning programs to twice daily and the entire facility scrub down was conducted as per facility evacuation plan.
  • Weekly inspection is being done by the City of Cape Town Environmental Health Practitioners and DCS officials.

(d) Transfer inmates to other facilities

  • In-service training was provided to clinical staff with regard to clinical presentation, diagnosis and prevention of Leptospirosis by 4th September 2015.
  • Inmates were screened as per NICD guidelines before they were evacuated to other Correctional Centers.
  • Evacuation plan was developed and inmates were transferred to other facilities in the Western Cape as per plan. The evacuation and transfer plan was implemented per schedule to mitigate risk factors.
  • All Provincial Stakeholders were informed about the evacuation plan.

3. Long term steps being taken to improve sanitation, hygiene and overcrowding problems at the specified facility as recently highlighted in the report by the former judge of the SA Constitutional Court, Justice Cameron.

Sanitation and hygiene:

  • Medication available and issued as prescribed.
  • Meals are provided three times per day as per meal plan.
  • Mattresses and blankets are issued on admission for sleeping purposes to all offenders.
  • Cleaning material availability monitored and cleaning procedures intensified.

PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

  • Comprehensive HIV and AIDS as well as Tuberculosis programmes and services are implemented with the support of external partners. Condoms are distributed however there is malicious misuse of condoms (trafficking of contraband).

Overcrowding:

The Department of Correctional Services implements a multi-pronged strategy to manage overcrowding .The strategy consists of the following dimensions:

  • Managing levels of remand detainees (RD’s) through IJS Case Management Task Team & Inter-Sectoral Committee on Child Justice;
  • Managing levels of sentenced inmates through improving effective & appropriate use of conversion of sentence to community correctional supervision, release on parole, & transfers between correctional centres to attempt to establish some degree of evenness of overcrowding;
  • Ensuring progress with DCS capital works programme to upgrade correctional facilities & to build new correctional centres that are both cost effective & rehabilitation oriented;
  • Encouraging debate in South Africa about reason for incarceration as a sentence & encouraging an approach to appropriate sentencing that is focused on facilitating rehabilitation;
  • Enhancing community correctional supervision so that it can be better utilized as an appropriate sentence for less serious crimes;
  • Improving correction & development programmes within DCS to ensure enhanced facilitation of rehabilitation that targets offending behaviour;

PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

  • Encouraging improvement of first & second levels of correction in family & social institutions & social & economic sector government departments respectively to decrease rate of entry into criminal justice system; and
  • Encouraging community involvement in social reintegration of offenders back into their community in order to assist in reducing levels of repeat offending.

27 October 2015 - NW3704

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

What (a) are the reasons for the delay in the submission of periodic reports as required by the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) and (b) corrective measures have been taken to avoid future delays in submitting reports as required by UNCAT?

Reply:

a) Government is dealing with a delay in submitting country reports due to a huge backlog of outstanding reports, lack of capacity and coordination mechanism over the years.

b) As a response, Government in early 2012 committed itself to make a positive turn- around in this regard. An Inter-departmental Committee on Treaty Obligations (IDC) has been established to work, amongst others, on the backlog of country reports. The IDC reports to the Directors- General of the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS), International Cooperation, Trade and Security (ICTS) and Social Protection Community and Human Development (SPCHD) Clusters. The Ministers of Justice and Correctional Services, International Relations and Co-operation and Minister in the Presidency responsible for Performance, Monitoring and Evaluation have oversight on compliance with treaty obligations. Officials are undergoing training on report writing; and a Government Manual on Treaty Obligations has been prepared by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, which co-chairs the IDC with the Department of International Relations and Co-operation. The report under the Convention Against Torture, although there was a delay, has been submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC). This report is being summarized currently as requested by the HRC.

27 October 2015 - NW3758

Profile picture: Lekota, Mr M

Lekota, Mr M to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether his department has evaluated the number of requests from citizens and organizations to the Public Protector to investigate complaints of the abuse of authority from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2015, in order to (a) pick out the common threads and deal with it systemically through legislative reform, (b) draw the attention of the President, Mr Jacob G Zuma, and the national executive to deal with such abuse of power, (c) work with the Minister of Police to ensure that hotspots of corruption in the Government are regularly and systematically investigated and transgressors prosecuted to maintain the confidence of citizens in the Government, (d) work with the Minister of Finance and the Auditor-General to ensure that better systems are put in place to prevent the serial and large-scale abuse of state funds and resources by rogue elements in the Government and (e) determine how best to provide the Public Protector’s Office with adequate resources in order to meet the avalanche of requests for the specified office to investigate; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

(a), (b), (c) and (d):

As the Honourable member is aware, in terms of section 181(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, all organs of state, through legislative and others measures, must assist and protect all the institutions supporting constitutional democracy, including the Public Protector, to ensure the independence, impartiality, dignity and effectiveness of these institutions.

It is, therefore, the responsibility of all organs of state, including the President, the national executive and Government, as referred to by the Honourable member, to evaluate the number of requests from citizens and organisations to the Public Protector to investigate the complaints of the abuse of authority from 1 September 2010 to 31 August 2015, in order to act upon it as indicated in paragraphs (a) to (d) of the Honourable member’s question.

In view of the above, I would kindly advise the Honourable member to scrutinize the relevant findings in all the Public Protector’s reports during the period in question and if necessary address his questions to the organs of state concerned.

 

As far as could be ascertained from the reports of the Public Protector during the period in question, there were no requests from citizens and organisations to the Public Protector to investigate complaints of the abuse of authority against the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and it was therefore not necessary for the Department to act upon it as indicated in paragraphs (a) to (d) of the Honourable member’s question.

(e) Government has been supportive of the Public Protector’s requests for increasing its investigative capacity as is evident by the significant increase in its budget allocation throughout the previous Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) periods. The Honourable member may also be aware that Parliament approved the revised organizational structure of the Public Protector comprising of 420 posts in the 2012/2013 financial year. At the time, the Public Protector was advised by my colleague the Minister of Finance to develop a multi-year implementation plan to ensure that critical posts are prioritized and filled within the medium term expenditure framework allocations. During his 2015 Medium Term Budget Policy Statement on 21 October 2015, the Minister of Finance also indicated that the Public Protector will receive an additional allocation to address capacity challenges.

It should also be noted that within the current economic climate it is expected of all institutions supporting constitutional democracy, including the Public Protector, to work together to determine how to deal with matters in a more economic, cost effective and efficient manner and to ensure that there is no duplication as it relates to their mandates.

The Honourable member may further be aware, that the National Assembly is still seized with the report of the Ad hoc Committee on the Review of Chapter 9 and associated Institutions often referred to as the Kader Asmal report. This report contains a number of recommendations that may have far-reaching implications for the institutions supporting constitutional democracy, including the Public Protector. The Speaker of the National Assembly recently convened a workshop of relevant stakeholders in order to exchange views and to finalize the National Assembly’s position in order to help Parliament to adopt the report.

With all the above in mind and given our limited resources, it is my view that the Public Protector should be able to execute its mandate and deliver on its core business responsibilities within the budget allocation and assistance that was provided for by Government.

 

20 October 2015 - NW3625

Profile picture: Selfe, Mr J

Selfe, Mr J to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

Whether he has received a report on conditions in the remand detainee section of the Pollsmoor Prison compiled by Justice Edwin Cameron; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, (a) when did he receive the specified report and (b) what action has he taken arising from the specified report?

Reply:

(a) Yes, a report on conditions in the remand detainee section of the Pollsmoor Prison compiled by Justice Edwin Cameron was received by the Department on 07 August 2015.

(b) A detailed action plan was developed by the Department and progress of the implementation thereof is still to be furnished with the Minister.

20 October 2015 - NW3675

Profile picture: McLoughlin, Mr AR

McLoughlin, Mr AR to ask the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services

What is the (a) total amount spent and (b) breakdown of such expenditure on the compensation of each (i) commissioner, (ii) evidence leader and (iii) forensic auditor working as part of the Commission of Inquiry into allegations of fraud, corruption, impropriety or irregularity in the Strategic Defence Procurement Packages since 27 October 2012?

Reply:

(a)(i) Both Commissioners are Judges from the High Court and are therefore not remunerated by the Commission.

(ii) The total cost for the evidence leaders, the research consultant and the forensic auditor from 27 October 2012 to 31 August 2015, is R73, 240 million, broken down as follows: