ATC080130: Report Southern Cape Prisons oversight visit

Correctional Services

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES ON ITS VISIT TO PRISONS IN THE SOUTHERN CAPE

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

INTRODUCTION

The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services undertook an oversight visit to the Southern Cape from 07 – 11 May 2007 and visited the following prisons: 
 

·         Helderstroom Correctional Centre

 

·         Buffelsjagsrivier Correctional Centre

 

·         Mosselbay Correctional Centre

 

·         Knysna Correctional Centre

 

·         George Correctional Centre

 

DELEGATION

The delegation comprised:

Mr. DV Bloem (ANC) (Chairperson)

Mr. NB Fihla (ANC)

Ms ZN Nawa (ANC)

Ms. W Ngwenya (ANC) 

Mr. LJ Tolo (ANC) 

Mr. ET Xolo (ANC) 

The following Members submitted their apologies: 

Ms LS Chikunga 

Mr I Vadi 

Mr. MJ Phala 

Mr J Selfe 

Mrs. SA Seaton 

OBJECTIVES

The Committee has since 2004 visited most Correctional Services regions and has identified many shortcomings within the DCS. During the hearings on the Department’s 2005/6 Annual Report and its 2007/8 Budget, it was established that the DCS will put in place systems, projects and initiatives to ensure an unqualified audit report for the next financial year. According to the DCS, many of these initiatives are already in place. At the time of the hearings the Committee requested timeframes for many of these projects and intends to keep a close eye on the development and implementation of these activities within the stated timeframes.

Jali Commission Report

As stated in the President’s State–of–the–Nation Address it is imperative that the Committee monitor the implementation of recommendations made in the Jali Commission report. The Minister informed the Committee that many of the recommendations made already formed part of the strategic direction of the DCS and that many plans and structures have been put in place to address those recommendations.

Awaiting Trial Population

The huge awaiting trial population is of grave concern to the Committee. The Committee is convinced that the numbers can only be reduced through intersectoral cooperation between all role players in the Justice Cluster. Firm in this conviction, the Committee interacts with the cluster on all matters so as to ensure that the matter is being addressed and that the Committee’s recommendations are implemented.

The functioning of Correctional Supervision and Parole Boards

Many parole boards have been established across the regions and chairpersons and deputy chairpersons have been appointed. In November 2006, representatives from various parole boards appeared before the Committee. During that interaction parole boards drew attention to the challenges they faced. The Correctional Services Act, Act 111 of 1998, makes provision for independent parole boards and therefore Committee needs to ensure that they functioned properly.

Women and women with children in prison

The Judicial Inspectorate of Prisons reported to the Committee that many women, especially those who are pregnant or have children, turn to crime so that they could be imprisoned as they believe, falsely, that conditions in prison are better than in society. Imprisonment has a very negative impact on the children and families of these women.

Youth and children in prison

The Committee remains committed to assisting in the creation of a better environment for juveniles who are in conflict with the law as well as to ensure that children in conflict with the law are not imprisoned. 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

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

1. Correctional Centre Statistics

I] Helderstroom Correctional Centre

Medium Centre: 

Sentenced Inmates = 1239 

Maximum Centre:

Sentenced Inmates = 910 

Unsentenced Inmates = 8 

Ratio of Staff to Inmate: 

Medium Centre: 1:25 

Maximum Centre: 1:19

Staff Totals: 

Medium Centre = 226

Maximum Centre = 172 

Administrative Staff = 101

II] Buffelsjagsrivier Correctional Centre 

Sentenced Adults = 270 

Unsentenced Adults = 44 

Sentenced Juveniles = 7 

Unsentenced juveniles = 8 

Ratio of Staff to Inmate = 1:8 

Staff Totals = 82 

III] Mossel Bay Correctional Centre

Lock Up totals as at the time of visit = 505 

Actual Percentage Accommodation = 152.56%

Sentenced Inmates: 

Children = 39

Juveniles = 230

Unsentenced Inmates: 

Children = 31

Juveniles = 106

IV] Knysna Correctional Centre 

Actual Approved Accommodation = 179 

Unsentenced Inmates = 198 

Sentenced Inmates = 147

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

Staff Totals = 97 

V] George Correctional Centre 

Actual Approved Accommodation = 535 

Sentenced Inmates = 681 

Unsentenced Inmates = 345 

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

Staff totals = 252 

Overcrowding affects both offenders and staff working within overcrowded centres. The centres visited during this oversight visit were not as overcrowded as many of the others the Committee has visited. The Committee believes that this is an indication of the continuous interaction between the DCS and other partners within the Intersecoral Justice Cluster.

Magistrates and courts are being urged to place unsentenced juveniles in the custody of their parents, to consider correctional supervision sentences, to apply correctional supervision sentences for unsentencedinmates as well as to consider sentence diversion. Unsentenced offenders are also being encouraged to consider plea-bargaining. In addition unsentenced offenders with further charges pending, are often placed in single cells to relieve overcrowding at centres.

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

The DCS, as part of a Crime Prevention initiative, is part of Community Policing Forums in many of the areas visited. This initiative has been very successful. The DCS also has case flow management meetings with the Department of Justice and meetings with SAPS to address the large awaiting trial population in centres in the Boland region.

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

A number of Development and Care programmes are being offered to offenders as part of the rehabilitation initiative and other life skills and needs-based programmes in partnership with external stakeholders and the Department of Labour. The importance of the personal wellbeing of offenders was highlighted and is being facilitated through rehabilitation programmes that fall within the prescribes of the Offender Rehabilitation Path. Offenders that are empowered and skilled when they are released are less likely to re-offend.

Concerns about the lack of availability of educational facilities, especially for juveniles, were raised. Most of the centres attempt to implement Unit Management, but because of the structure of the correctional centres, this is not always possible. Concerns were also raised about the fact that many offenders could not undergo the training courses offered by the Department of Labour, because they do not have identity documents. The correctional centre in George informed the Committee that although the Department of Home Affairs was meant to assist the DCS in this regard, its officials have never visited the facility.

2. Correctional Supervision Parole Boards

The Portfolio Committee met with the parole boards in the areas visited in order to investigate their composition, functioning and challenges.

The Overberg District parole board serves Helderstroom and Buffelsjagsrivier Correctional Centres. This Parole Board is still chaired by a DCS official (in an acting capacity). The SAPS and Justice representatives do not always attend the hearings. The Helderstroom Management Area has 57 expired cases of parole. The circumstances surrounding these cases vary from unavailability of accommodation and uncertain addresses to lack of acceptance and support from family members. The DCS indicated that it has regular Imbizos aimed at making communities aware of the role and functioning of parole boards.

The Southern Cape parole board serves the Mossel Bay, Knysna and George Correctional Centres. This parole board faces many challenges that were put into perspective when the Committee met with DCS management and staff. It was felt that the Chairperson of the parole board is biased and racist and did not consider the recommendations made by the Case Management Committees (CMC) or the offender profileprepared by the social worker and the CMC. There is a standard format to which the DCS must comply when drawing up the profile of an offender, but profiles are often sent back by the parole board Chairperson. TheSouthern Cape parole board is experiencing backlogs precisely due to the inconsistencies with which offenders are placed on parole.

Whilst interacting with inmates, the Committee found many had had to appear before the parole board, but failed to due to the profiles that had been prepared. Many CMCs seem to find the implementation of Section 276(i) of the Criminal Procedure Act problematic. The provision states that a person can be considered for parole after serving one sixth of the sentence, yet many sexual offenders, had to first complete module three (3), which is a three year sexual offences programme, before they could be considered for parole.

It was pointed out that the relationship between the members and the Chairperson of the Parole Board was also not good. The Chairperson often failed to show up for parole hearings or deliberately delayed the proceedings.

Comments and Recommendations

The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services agrees that parole boards should be independent from the DCS, but where they did not function properly, action should be taken. The Committee has always stated that parole should no be used to relieve overcrowding and that the interest of the public should always be taken into consideration. The Committee is also of the view that parole should not be automatic, but is a privilege and that inmates should be made aware of this. The Committee cannot condone the improper functioning of parole boards. The boards should be representative and unbiased. The Committee believes in a just and fair parole board and will never be soft on crime. 

The Committee recommends that the following matters be addressed immediately:
 

·         The case backlog must be dealt with and there should be proper communication around the completion of offender profiles.

 

·         The Minister’s urgent intervention in the matter of the alleged racist and biased conduct of the Chairperson of the Southern Cape Parole Board is recommended. Should the a Chairperson of a parole board not perform or carry out functions as prescribed in the Act, strong action must be taken against him or her.

 

·         The composition of the Parole Board of the Overberg region should be addressed and the DCS should ensure that the SAPS and Justice officials are present at Parole Board hearings.

 

·         The mayors and counsellors in the different areas must be involved in raising community awareness around parole and in assisting with the tracing of the offenders’ families.

 

·         Staff serving on the Case Management Committees must be sent for in-depth training as case officers as this will greatly assist Parole Boards.

 

3. Staff concerns

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

3.1 Salary Adjustments and Promotions

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

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

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

Comments and Recommendations

While the Committee commends the implementation of the interim promotion policy, it recommends that much more should be done in the area of promotions. No or too few opportunities for promotion is a key contributor to the decline in staff morale.

The Committee also urges the DCS to develop a promotion policy for staff at lower levels. Such an opportunity will boost morale which in turn would have a positive impact on offender rehabilitation.

3.2. Shortage of Professional Staff

The White Paper on Corrections highlights needs-based rehabilitation as an integral part of the sentencing process. The recently-developed Offender Rehabilitation Path is an integral guide that should inform all aspects relating to the inmate’s incarceration. The ORP’s successful implementation is dependant upon the assistance and dedication of professional staff.

Nurses, leave the Department in search of better work opportunities - some seek employment abroad while others return to the Department of Health which, as alluded to before, provides health care workers with better incentives. The shortage of social workers is problematic especially considering that inmates have to consult with a social worker before appearing before the parole board. The shortage of social workers results in parole hearings often having to be delayed. 

Comments and Recommendations

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

The Committee has on numerous occasions raised concerns about the salary packages for professional staff. These packages will not attract and retain the necessary and critical staff members. The DCS should, as part of the staff retention efforts, offer market-related salaries to professionals. 

3.3. 7 Day Establishment 

Although many of the staff members understand the provisions and procedures related to the 7-day establishment, it has created many problems within their working environment. Overtime has, up until now, served as a means of supplementing staff salaries. Staff do not want to work overtime as they are not sure when overtime will be phased out completely. They prefer that the Department make provision for other ways of adding to their compensation once the overtime has been phased out.

As working on a Sunday entitles staff to time off, the 7 Day Establishment has created many staff shortages especially over weekends. At the Helderstroom Correctional Centre the ratio of staff to inmates can at times be as dire as 3 staff members to 90 inmates over weekends. The three staff members are expected to guard inmates, register telephone calls and complaints, manage gates as well as perform other administrative tasks. Such grave under staffing poses a security risk to both staff and inmates. 

Comments and Recommendations

The Committee recommends that staff be kept informed of developments around the completion and phasing in of the 7 Day Establishment as well as whether the DCS will provide for alternative benefits.

3.4 Transport

Staff complained about the lack of transport provided especially to those staff members that work nights. The Knysna Correctional Centre is located in a remote area of the town where public transport is not freely accessible. Staff often have to walk long distances to the Centre and this is extremely dangerous.

Comments and Recommendations

Whilst the Committee recognises that the provision of transport to staff has budgetary implications, it is clear that when there is limited or no public transport available, and when it is dangerous for staff to travel at night, the DCS should ensure that transport is available to staff so as to ensure their safety. The Committee therefore recommends that the transport policy of the DCS be revisited so as to allow transport, especially for those working night duties. This should be prioritised in the rural areas.

3.5. Staff Accommodation 

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

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

The current ± R 400.00 per month housing allowance is also a matter of concern. Many Correctional Centres are situated in well established areas but Correctional Services staff cannot afford to purchase property in those areas. A town such as Knysna is a holiday resort and it is impossible for DCS staff to compete with international investors when it comes to housing.

Comments and Recommendations

The Committee finds it unacceptable that female and male officials have to share bathroom facilities and recommends that the DCS give serious attention to the situation outlined above. Separate bathroom facilities should be erected at the Centre concerned as soon as possible.

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

Facilities

Many of the centres visited questioned the practicality of the White Paper. Staff felt that the White Paper was written with reference to the New Generation Prisons. The current correctional centres were not build to rehabilitate offenders, but rather to detain people. These centres are very old and definitely not conducive to rehabilitation and at many of them the implementation of unit management is virtually impossible.

Staff were also concerned about the lack of classroom facilities at centres. Many potential students have to be turned away due to lack of space.

The Committee was also informed that the DCS aims to separate first-time offenders from other hardened criminals. Not separating these categories of offenders will counter rehabilitation efforts but due to space constraints, such separation is not possible.

A social worker informed the Committee that she often has to offer programmes for up to 12 offenders, in her office. This impedes the successful implementation of the programme and poses a security risk.

Comments and Recommendations

Rehabilitation should be seen as the DCS’ core function. The DCS will fail dismally in fulfilling its mandate if services such as education cannot be made available to inmates. The Committee views education as an integral part of the rehabilitation process especially in instances where large numbers of inmates are illiterate - at the Mosselbay Correctional Centre for instance only 12% of juveniles have completed Grade 12.

The Committee therefore strongly recommends that the DCS use its own labour force i.e. inmates to upgrade and maintain facilities.

This labour force should also erect temporary classroom facilities, in order for the DCS to accommodate more offenders in educational programmes. 

New Recruits 

Many new recruits/students have been deployed to the Western Cape region. Despite not yet having attended the training colleges, many of these recruits have started at the Correctional Centres. Many staff complained of difficulties as far as working with these students who often did not have even the basic knowledge and practical experience of Correctional Services but are often deployed to perform administrative tasks.

The DCS explained that students are selected randomly and that it has been decided that whilst one group receives theoretical training at colleges, another receives practical training at the centres.

E. CONCLUSION

The Portfolio Committee is very impressed with the management and functioning of the correctional centres it visited during the visit. Members were also impressed with the concerted effort made by DCS staff to address problems associated with the awaiting trial detainees and parole. The Committee would however like to see more community involvement and awareness of DCS programmes and activities. Entire communities need to be brought on board to ensure rehabilitation and to assist in crime prevention. The Committee applauds the officials of the region for their hard work under often very trying conditions.

The Committee will monitor the implementation of the recommendations contained in this report and expects the DCS to, within one month of the House’s adoption of this report, provide feedback on progress made in the implementation of the above-mentioned recommendations.