ATC150515: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services on Budget Vote 18: Correctional Services, dated 13 May 2015

Justice and Correctional Services



The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, having considered the Department of Correctional Services’ 2015/16 budget (Vote 18), and strategic and annual performance plans, reports as follows:


    1. Section 27 of the Public Finance Management Act, Act No. 1 of 1999, as amended, makes provision for a minister to table the annual budget for a financial year in the National Assembly before the start of the financial year. Section 10(1)(c) of the Money Bills Amendment Procedures and Related Matters Act, Act No. 9 of 2009 makes provision for a minister to table strategic and annual performance plans for their respective departments, public entities or institutions, which must be referred to the relevant portfolio committee for consideration and report.


  1. Following the tabling and referral of the above mentioned budget and planning documents in April 2015, the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services (the Committee) scheduled a series of interactions that informed its consideration of the 2015/16 to 2019/20 strategic plan, and 2015/16 budget and annual performance plan. The Committee received a political overview from the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services on 15 April and joint briefing by the DCS and JICS on 16 April. The Committee also benefitted from written input received from stakeholders.


  1. The Minister was accompanied by the Deputy Minister: Correctional Services and several senior officials from the departments reporting to the Ministry of Justice and Correctional Services. The DCS delegation included: Mr Z Modise (Acting National Commissioner), Ms N Mareka (Deputy Commissioner: Financial and Management Accounting), Mr N Ligege (Chief Financial Officer) and Mr T Raseroka (Acting Chief Deputy Commissioner: Strategic Management). The Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services’ (JICS) representatives who appeared before the Committee included: Judge V Tshabalala (Inspecting Judge), Mr M Masondo (Acting Chief Executive Officer) and Mr C Mushwana (National Manager: Financial Management).


  1. For the first time this year, planning information related to the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) was included in the DCS’s planning documents. The DCS reported that this was in line with an executive decision to bring the JICS’s reporting in line with various statutes, including the Public Finance Management Act of 1999.


    1. The President delivered the State of the Nation Address in February 2015. In it he announced the launch of a programme to fight tuberculosis (TB), including the spread of infectious diseases among inmates in correctional and remand centres. In 2014 the focus had also been in the area of health-care for inmates i.e. preventing HIV-infections.


  1. The fight against corruption also remains a major government priority. Although the DCS had reported a significant decrease in misconduct cases related to theft, bribery, corruption or any combination thereof - from 152 in 2011/12 to 82 in 2013/14 - corruption remains one of the DCS’s main challenges.


  1. Government also intends accelerating the delivery of school infrastructure in 2015. The Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998, and the Correctional Services Amendment Act 5 of 2010 compel the DCS to provide every sentenced child offender with education services, and those who are not subjected to compulsory education with access to such programmes. In order for the DCS to adhere to these provisions, it must meet the requirements set by the Department of Basic Education (DBE). These include adequate classrooms to cater to the streams on offer. To date only a few centres have been registered as fulltime schools. This has contributed to the DCS’s inability to meet targets set in relation to inmate participation in education programmes: in 2013/14 only 9 793 of the 11 372 offenders that were targeted, participated in programmes.



3.1  The Minister presented a broad outline of his vision for the DCS, and the correctional system, generally.

  1. The DCS’s ultimate goal was to ensure that those who exited the correctional system did not reoffend. He acknowledged that attempts to reduce or prevent recidivism were adversely affected by a number of long standing challenges including overcrowding, outdated and inappropriate infrastructure, vacancies, a staff establishment that did not address the DCS’s needs, and the stigma and labelling associated with incarceration.


  1. If the DCS were to contribute to South Africa’s development agenda, it would have to be an effective partner in the Integrated Justice System (IJS). Efforts to ensure greater coordination of the work done by the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security (JCPS) cluster departments were underway, but required each department to operate optimally. To this end the DCS’s senior management vacancies were being addressed, and the internal control environment strengthened.


  1. The Minister was responsible for considering the parole applications of offenders who are serving life sentences, and had had direct experience of the inefficiencies that negatively impacted on parole administration. Challenges associated with the dual role of the National Council for Correctional Services (NCCS); the operation of the Medical Advisory Board; and case management, generally, will receive his focussed attention.


  1. Some institutional arrangements may need to be reviewed to determine whether the status quo, specifically relating to the legal and institutional arrangements governing the relationship between the DCS and JICS which plays a critical role in monitoring, among others, the conditions of incarceration and the treatment of inmates, required review.


  1. Infrastructure development remained high on the agenda and, in the DCS’s case, focus would be on remedying long standing challenges that have delayed projects at great cost, both financially and in terms of the safe and secure incarceration of offenders. A bi-lateral meeting with the Minister of Public Works would be prioritised for the near future.


    1. The DCS’s strategic planning is underpinned by the objectives outlined in the 2005 White Paper on Corrections, and those in the White Paper on Remand Detention of 2014. It is also informed by the government-wide Medium-Term Strategic Framework (MTSF), which seeks to implement the National Development Plan’s (NDP) Vision 2030. According to its 2015/16 to 2019/20 strategic plan the DCS’s mission is to contribute to a just, peaceful and safer South Africa through the effective and humane incarceration of inmates, and the rehabilitation and social reintegration of offenders. In addition, it is also to ensure that the MTSF and the NDP’s strategic outcomes of ensuring that all people living in South Africa are and feel safe, are achieved.


  1. In the 2015/16 to 2019/20 period, policies will be developed and implemented to provide guidelines for the provision of palliative care by internal and external stakeholders (Policy in the Provision of Palliative Care in the Department of Correctional Services); to inform the delivery of services to inmates serving sentences of up to 24 months (Policy on Correctional Sentence Plans and the programmes for offenders incarcerated for 24 months or less); and to provide a uniform directive on the placement of persons under electronic monitoring (Policy on Electronic Monitoring).


  1. The DCS’s main objectives for the period are: increasing the percentage of sentenced offenders participating in correctional programmes from 68 per cent in 2015/16 to 80 per cent in 2019/20; reducing parole violations from 5 per cent in 2015/16 to 3 per cent in 2019/20; and reducing the number of probation violations from 6 per cent in 2015/16 to 3 per cent in 2019/20.



5.1  As illustrated in Table 1 below, the JCPS cluster is expected to receive approximately R157.5 billion i.e. 23.1 per cent of the national budget in 2015/16. The budget is expected to increase to R193 billion over the medium-term.

Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster   



% of Cluster Vote

Correctional Services

20 617.8


Defence and Military Veterans

44 579.4


Independent Complaints Directorate



Justice and Constitutional Development

14 984.0



76 377.1


Total for Cluster

157 535.3

23.1% of total national  budget

Total National Budget




Table 1: 2015/16 allocation to the Justice, Crime Prevention and Security Cluster (Source: Mathabathe, M (2015): Budget (2015/16) Analysis Vote 18: Correctional Services)

5.2  The DCS receives approximately R20.6 billion i.e. 3 per cent of the national budget, and 13 per cent of the JCPS cluster’s allocation. The budget is projected to increase by R895.8 million from the R19.1 billion appropriated in 2014/15. As a percentage of the JCPS cluster, the DCS’s allocation will decrease by 0.2 per cent.






Programme 1: Administration

3 697,3

3 937,6

4 182,6

11 817,5

Programme 2: Incarceration

13 080,9

13 841,5

14 437,5

41 359,9

Programme 3: Rehabilitation

1 152,0

1 248,5

1 412,5

3 813,0

Programme 4: Care

1 796,3

1 886,6

2 045,4

5 728,3

Programme 5: Social Reintegration



1 057,3

2 892,6

Total Expenditure Estimates

20 617,70

21 858,3

23 135,3

65 611,3


Table 2: Budget Allocation for DCS per financial year over the medium-term


  1. The DCS’s budget is distributed across five programmes. Programme 1: Administration; Programme 2: Incarceration; Programme 3: Rehabilitation; Programme 4: Care; and Programme 5: Social Reintegration.


  1. As in previous years the bulk of the allocation, about 80 per cent, goes towards the Administration and Incarceration programmes which receive 18 per cent and 62 per cent respectively. The Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration programmes receive the lowest allocations, combined only 10.4 per cent of the total DCS budget. The remaining 9 per cent goes towards the Care programme. This trend continues over the medium-term as illustrated in Table 2 above.







  1. Programme 1: Administration
    1. The Administration programme provides for the functions that underpin the DCS’s service delivery, and comprises administrative, management, financial, information communication and technology, research, policy co-ordination and good governance support functions. The programme has three sub-programmes: Management, Corporate Services and Finance.


  1. This programme receives the second largest allocation i.e. R3.7 billion, which reflects a 2.03 per cent increase on the previous year’s allocation. The bulk of the allocation will go towards the compensation of employees (73.8 per cent), goods and services (23 per cent), and computer services (3.8 per cent).


  1. The DCS intends filling 98 per cent of its funded vacancies in 2015/16. The target stood at 97 per cent in 2013/14 and was not achieved - only 56 per cent of its vacancies were filled. The DCS again reports that it has, in the hope of accelerating the recruitment process, decentralised the filling of vacancies to its regions. This intervention does not appear to have had any discernible impact since its introduction in the 2013/14 financial year.


  1. In 2013/14 the DCS succeeded in exceeding its target to train 15 000 officials in line with its Workplace Skills Plan by 6 063. In 2014/15 the target was set at 18 150 officials to be trained. The target remains the same for the 2015/16 financial year.


  1. The JICS is accommodated under the Management sub-programme. It will receive a budget of R46.026 million which will increase to R53.112 million over the medium-term. R37.506 million – the bulk of the allocation – will be spent on Compensation of Employees.


  1. In 2015/16 the JICS intends to inspect 33 per cent of correctional centres in order to report on conditions of incarceration and the treatment of offenders. This percentage will increase marginally between 2015/16 and 2017/18. Despite the marginal increase, the JICS will reportedly have reached a target of 100% of correctional centres by 2019/20. The plans presented do not detail how this massive increase will be achieved.


6.2.       Programme 2: Incarceration

6.2.1.    The Incarceration programme provides for services and well-maintained physical infrastructure that support safe and secure conditions of detention consistent with protecting the human dignity of inmates, personnel and the public. It also provides for profiling, compilation of Correctional Sentence Plans (CSPs), administration and other interventions. It comprises four sub-programmes: Remand Detention, Offender Management, Security Operations and Facilities.


6.2.2     At R13 billion, the programme receives the largest allocation – 62 per cent of the overall budget – and increases by 6.35 per cent from the 2014/15 allocation. In 2013/14 the DCS underspent slightly on this programme, and spending between September and December 2014 suggests likely underspending in 2014/15 too.


6.2.3.    The Security Operations sub-programme again receives 50 per cent (R6.6 billion) of the programme’s allocation. The Facilities sub-programme receives 29 per cent (R3.8 billion); the Offender Management, 14 per cent (R1.8 billion); and the Remand Detention, 6 per cent (R822 million).


6.2.4.    The DCS intends to keep the percentage of inmates assaulted in its centres at below 3.9 per cent of the overall inmate population. It also intends to decrease the percentage of unnatural deaths – which are mainly attributed to violent assaults and suicides – to below 0.034 per cent, and the percentage of escapes to less than 0.025 per cent in 2015/16. None of the targets set in 2013/14 were achieved.


6.2.5.    The DCS further intends to reduce overcrowding by 31 per cent. Efforts to do so include the upgrading of existing facilities to create an additional 518 bed spaces in 2015/16, and 4 787 by the end of 2017/18; further implementation of section 49G of the Correctional Matters Amendment Act, Act 5 of 2011; further implementation of section 63A of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977; and the rolling out of Electronic Monitoring.


  1. Programme 3: Rehabilitation
    1. The Rehabilitation programme is aimed at providing needs-based programmes and interventions to facilitate the rehabilitation of offenders, enable their social reintegration and reduce recidivism. It comprises the Offender Development; Psychological, Social and Spiritual Services; and Corrections sub-programmes.


  1. The programme’s allocation reflects a nominal decrease of 1.23 per cent, to R1.2 billion. Sub-programmes Offender Development; Psychological, Social and Spiritual Services; and Corrections are estimated to receive R751.1 million; R353.9 million and R47 million respectively. The DCS succeeded in reducing its underspending in relation to this programme from 13 per cent in 2012/13 to 4.8 per cent in 2013/14.
  2. Spending on this programme is projected to increase to R1.4 billion per year by 2017/18. The DCS hopes that this will make it possible to, amongst others, increase participation in education and training programmes from 11 007 inmates in 2015/16 to 13 319 inmates in 2017/18.


  1. The DCS intends to increase offenders’ participation in correctional programmes to 68 per cent; increase the number of offenders participating in Further Education and Training mainstream programmes to 548; and increase the percentage of offenders in Further Education and Training college programmes to 80 per cent. Participation in skills development programmes will also be increased to 80 per cent.
  2. The DCS intends to have 67 per cent of offenders – both those incarcerated and those under correctional supervision – receiving social worker-services. Only 15 per cent of inmates are expected to receive psychological services in 2015/16.


6.4        Programme 4: Care

6.4.1     The Care programme provides needs-based programmes and services aimed at maintaining the personal well-being of incarcerated offenders by facilitating physical fitness, social-functioning and health care, thereby ensuring their spiritual, moral and psychological well-being. The programme comprises three sub-programmes; Nutrition Services, Health Services and Hygiene Services. These sub-programmes receive R946.5 million, R734.5 million and R115.3 million respectively.


  1. The programme will receive just over R1.79 billion of the DCS’s total allocation i.e. marginally more than what was received in 2014/15. At 61 per cent, and 38 per cent respectively, the bulk of the allocation will be spent on Goods and Services, and Compensation of Employees. The Nutrition Services sub-programme will again receive the largest share of the programme’s allocation.


  1. Key targets for the 2015/16 financial year include increasing the number of inmates to be tested for HIV/AIDS to 80 per cent; the percentage of inmates on anti-retroviral therapy to 96 per cent; and the tuberculosis cure rate to 85 per cent. The number of management areas with contracted health care waste services will be increased by six.


  1. Programme 5: Social Reintegration

6.5.1     The Social Reintegration programme provides for offenders’ preparation for release; for the effective supervision of parolees; and for offenders’ reintegration to society upon their release. It comprises four sub-programmes; Parole Administration; Supervision; Community Reintegration; and Office Accommodation (Community Corrections). The Supervision sub-programme will receive the biggest allocation by far – 79.5 per cent of the allocation to the programme.


  1. The programme will receive R891 million i.e. 4.3 per cent of the overall DCS allocation. Of this allocation, 84 per cent will be spent on the Compensation of Employees. Over the medium term, the allocation to the programme will grow to just over R1.057 billion. The increase will be spent on the rollout of electronic monitoring, which will increase from the 500 inmates targeted in 2014/15 to 1 500 in 2017/18.


6.5.3     Key targets for the 2015/16 financial year include increasing the number of inmates participating in restorative justice programmes to 6 000, the percentage of parolees reintegrated through halfway house partnerships to 79 per cent, and the number of community corrections services points to 18.



The Committee invited written comment on the DCS’s budget and plans, and received input from the Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative (CSPRI), and the Detention Justice Forum (DJF). The views summarised below, are those of the above-mentioned stakeholders, and do not necessarily reflect the Committee’s position.


7.1        Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative submission

7.1.1     The CSPRI restricted its submission to the impact overcrowding had on remand detainees in particular. Inefficiencies in the management of the remand population contributed to overcrowding, which had major cost implications and adversely affected conditions of incarceration. The CSPRI believes that the merger of the Justice and Constitutional Development, and Correctional Services portfolios will have a positive impact on efforts to manage remand detention, but that more information should be provided on how institutional arrangements and practice will be improved.


7.1.2     The submission summarised legislative tools already in place to fast-track court trials, but which are not necessarily implemented with the necessary rigour. These include provisions that require the heads of correctional centres to report to the Director Public Prosecutions (DPP) on the detention of remand detainees every six months as per section 49G of the Correctional Matters Amendment Act; and the obligation on courts to investigate any delay in the completion of proceedings which appear to be unreasonable and may cause substantial prejudice as per section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1977. The CSPRI further submitted that existing provisions of the Correctional Services Act, and the Criminal Procedure Act are insufficient to ensure that trials are not unnecessarily delayed.


7.2        Detention Justice Forum submission


7.2.1     The DJF is a civil society coalition working to protect the rights and well-being of offenders, and others in detention in South Africa. Their submission focussed on the DCS’s ‘wasteful defence’ of civil claims against it.


7.2.2     In 2013/14 the DCS reported just over R984 million in contingent liabilities, and no information has been provided with regard to how much of that amount was eventually paid to the State Attorney for expenses incurred as a result of defending civil claims for damages.


7.2.2     The DJF recommends that rather than defending claims for which a precedent had been set in the Lee v Minister of Correctional Services matter, resources should go towards preventing TB infections.




8.1        Programme 1: Administration

8.1.1     The Committee again questions the accuracy of some of the information contained in the Annual Performance Plan and the Strategic Plan. In many instances information was vague; and targets appeared unrealistic. The concern is compounded as the plans provide few clear outcomes against which the DCS’s impact may be measured. This concern has repeatedly been raised and reported on during the Fourth Parliament too.


8.1.2     The Committee welcomes the recent appointment of a chief financial officer and that the internal audit committee is, reportedly, functional for the first time. This should go a long way towards improving the DCS’s financial management and internal control environment. Of continued concern however, is the long-outstanding vacancies in key senior management positions i.e. that of National Commissioner and the Chief Deputy Commissioner: Strategic Management.


8.1.3     The strategic objectives for this programme include improving the DCS’s image and performance-rating to improve its organisational capacity for enhanced service delivery; and providing effective financial and supply chain management. With over 2 000 of its funded posts still vacant, and the continued instability at senior management level, these objectives appear unattainable.


8.1.4     The DCS has included a new performance indicator – percentage of successfully defended legal cases – in the APP, and the target for the 2015/16 financial year is 75 per cent. The DCS has a long track record of poor performance in relation to its legal services. Although the Committee accepts that efforts are underway to address the challenges, we remain concerned about the contingent liability on the DCS. Of concern too, is that DCS appears to be continuing to pursue matters which are unlikely to be decided in their favour. This is not only a waste of resources, but also impacts on the DCS’s overall image.


8.1.5     That the JICS’s budget has been subsumed in the DCS’s overall budget, under the Administration programme, is noted with interest. This new development, while in line with legislative requirements, appears to be in total contradiction of what the Committee, and the Correctional Services Portfolio Committee of the Fourth Parliament had recommended.

8.1.6     Of particular concern is that the new arrangement and the JICS’s administrative dependence on the DCS appears to severely compromise the JICS’s mandate to perform autonomous oversight of the DCS’s care for, and treatment of inmates. In addition, the new arrangement will make it virtually impossible for the Committee to measure the JICS’s performance, and impact.


8.2        Programme 2: Incarceration

8.2.1.    The Committee accepts that because the DCS is a labour-intensive department, much of its budget will go towards the compensation of centre-based security personnel. Past recommendations included that the DCS should explore the option of installing CCTV cameras and cell-phone blocking technology to increase security, and to ensure more efficient use of centre-based personnel. The plans provided no evidence that this option is indeed being explored.


8.2.2     The DCS’s spending on infrastructure projects remains very high: expenditure on capital assets contributed to the increase to the programme’s allocation. Given the long delays in the completion of projects, the poor workmanship reported at some centres, and the lack of a clear strategy for maintaining facilities the Committee remains concerned about the DCS’s management of its existing infrastructure, and new infrastructure projects.


8.2.3     The remand detention population is a major contributor to overcrowding. We acknowledge that the remand population has declined dramatically from 50 511 in 2009/10 to 41 444 in 2014/15, and commend the DCS and the JCSP cluster as a whole for progress made in this regard. The development of the Policy on Electronic Monitoring for parolees and remand detainees mentioned above is welcomed as it should contribute to a further reduction in the inmate population.


8.3        Programme 3: Rehabilitation

8.3.1     Despite the White Paper on Corrections’ rehabilitation and reintegration focus, the DCS’s priorities remain skewed in favour of incarceration. While the budgets for the administration and incarceration programme increased incrementally each year, increases to programmes targeting offending-behaviour and offender development remain miniscule, and mostly affect the compensation of employees, and other basic services. The distribution of the budget across programmes again fails to convince us of the DCS’s commitment to prioritising rehabilitation and development. These programmes are key to reducing the risk of recidivism which is the only true measure of the DCS’s success.


8.3.2     The Committee notes with concern that per the third quarter 2014/15 expenditure report the DCS was 9.6 per cent behind in its spending of the 2014/15 allocation to this programme. Given the Committee’s position that the Rehabilitation programme is key to addressing recidivism, underspending of the already very small budget is a cause for major concern, and should be avoided at all costs.


8.3.3     The increase to the programme’s budget and the intention to expand its education and development programmes are welcomed. However, the Committee remains concerned that the DCS’s inability to attract and retain social workers, teachers and artisans will have an adverse effect on efforts to meet its rehabilitation objectives.


8.3.4     The Committee welcomes the increase to the number of inmates participating in social work programmes. Although the targeted participation in psychological service programmes remains low, we welcome the slight increase from 14 per cent in 2014/15 to 15 per cent in 2015/16. Every effort should be made to ensure that the target is met or exceeded.


8.3.5     The Committee is pleased to note that the DCS has appointed a head and two deputies to lead its psychological services programme. This should not only have a positive impact on the readiness of case files for appearance before the CSPBs, but should also place the DCS in a better position to meet inmates’ psycho-social needs. We hope that the appointments will result in steady and more significant increases to the budget for this programme.


8.4        Programme 4: Care

8.4.1     The Committee welcomes efforts to improve the detection and management of tuberculosis, which is crucial given the overcrowding experienced across centres. As in our previous report, the DCS is reminded that while managing communicable diseases is imperative, other health conditions should not be neglected.


8.5        Programme 5: Social Reintegration

8.5.1     The Committee reiterates that the services rendered under the Incarceration, Rehabilitation and Reintegration programmes are key to the DCS’s service delivery. The DCS’s success in the rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-offenders can only be measured by determining the rate and circumstances of recidivism. The continued failure to measure performance in this regard makes it virtually impossible to measure the true impact of its rehabilitation and reintegration activities.


8.5.2     The Committee reiterates that the DCS should supplement the resources available to it by partnering with non-governmental and faith-based organisations as well as with the Department of Social Development to better assist parolees, probationers and ex-offenders to reintegrate into society. Projects, such as the halfway house initiative, which rely on such partnerships should be increased as they assist those who lack support systems.


8.5.3     The continued commitment to victim-offender dialogues is noted but concerns about the appropriateness of limiting restorative justice efforts to such activities, remain. While victims should be consulted in parole proceedings, the outcome of applications should not centre on their participation and/or recommendations. The DCS should continue with its efforts to, with the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, increase consultation with victims.


8.5.4     The Committee welcomes the commitment to improve parole administration. Of particular interest is how case management will be improved to ensure timeous consideration of parole applications; how correctional supervision and parole boards will be capacitated to ensure greater efficiency; and how the responsibilities/mandate of the NCCS may be revised to ensure best use of its expertise.



9.1        Having considered the DCS’s 2015/16 budget, and strategic and annual performance plans, the Committee must reiterate previously-reported concerns that the budget does not in any way address the rehabilitation and social reintegration objectives and outcomes articulated in the White Paper on Corrections, and echoed in the DCS’s core mandate. Programmes aimed at addressing offending behaviour and promoting reintegration remain grossly under-funded. Failure to address this could impact negatively on the outcomes outlined the National Development Plan’s Vision 2030.


9.2        The ultimate measure of the DCS’s success is whether it succeeds in preventing re-offending. The Committee again implores the JCPS cluster to, as a matter of urgency, develop means whereby the rate of recidivism may be measured. In the absence of such a measure it will remain impossible to evaluate the DCS’s effectiveness at rehabilitating offending behaviour.


9.3        While the Committee welcomes the appointment of the chief financial officer, we remain convinced that the DCS should develop a turnaround strategy to permanently address its recruitment and retention-challenges, leadership instability, and the weaknesses in its organisational culture.


9.4        Fully-functional and reliable ICT infrastructure is vital to efficient administration, and especially financial management and internal control. The DCS should address the challenges that have caused delays, and fast-track the development and implementation of the required ICT strategies.


9.5        The DCS has an obligation to incarcerate inmates safely and securely. In light of security breaches and the high incidence of assault and smuggling of contraband, the DCS should take a decision with regard to the use of technology such as closed circuit television to better monitor activities within correctional centres, and cellphone signal jamming technology.

9.6        The Committee welcomes that over the medium term spending will focus on increasing the percentage of inmates tested for HIV. The plans were not very detailed regarding targets for lowering the rate of TB infection and more information will be required in this regard.


9.7        The JICS was established, and is mandated to provide effective and independent oversight of the DCS’s treatment of inmates, and the conditions of incarceration. We have noted the developments relating to the JICS’s reporting and accountability, and urge that the matter be resolved as soon as possible.


9.8        The above-mentioned concerns notwithstanding, the Committee recommends that the DCS’ 2015/16 budget be approved. Progress made as far as addressing the concerns highlighted in this report should be included in the DCS’s quarterly reporting.



The Committee wishes to thank all who contributed to its consideration of the DCS’s 2015/16 budget.


                        Report to be considered.





No related documents