Input by stakeholders on Department of Correctional Services Strategic & Annual Performance Plans 2013

Correctional Services

16 April 2013
Chairperson: Mr V Smith (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The submission by the Public Servants Association (PSA) stated that high levels of overcrowding in prisons were related to gang activity. The Department of Correctional Services (DCS) staff establishment did not provide for overcrowding. The DCS lacked staff to implement the seven day establishment. There were increasing attacks by gangs on officials. The PSA was in favour of electronic monitoring. Conditions for women in prisons had to improve. Case officers were used as security officers due to staff shortages, and rehabilitation suffered. The PSA advised that the staff component be increased by 23 000.

The Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) submission on the DCS Budget and Strategic Plan stressed health hazards and the difficult working conditions of officials. The DCS budget did not take rehabilitation as a serious challenge. There had been a decline in agricultural production and workshop activity in the DCS. There was lack of clarity about consequences for DCS officials for ill-treatment, abuse or torture of inmates. However, the safety of officials was also not taken seriously enough. The DCS were spending high amounts on security, but outcomes were low. POPCRU advised investment in low cost social security programmes. The need for staff development was stressed.

The PSA and POPCRU submissions were discussed together. It was remarked that an increase of 23 000 in staff, would mean that the entire DCS budget would go to employee compensation. There was general agreement among members that staff was not being evenly deployed, with too many in the offices, and too few at centre level. POPCRU maintained that the DCS structure was top heavy. The two unions were interrogated about the behaviour of DCS staff who were union members. There were concerns about gangs, and the DCS gang management strategy. The unions were asked what they were doing in terms of the Labour Relations Act to ensure safety of DCS employees. The unions were asked about their stance regarding the suspension of 122 DCS officials at St Albans for holding an unauthorised meeting.

The submission by the Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative (CSPRI) stated that there had been stagnation with regard to education in the DCS. It was advised that education be handed to the Department of Basic Education. There was an emphasis on high-tec security solutions, with dynamic security by staff in unit management systems, neglected. Access to health care in prisons was inadequate. It was suggested that health care be handed to the Department of Health. The DCS had a duty to prevent ill-treatment and torture. Staff had to be trained towards that end. The CSPRI suggested more NGO involvement in social reintegration of offenders. The effectiveness of halfway houses was questioned.

In discussion, a member argued that the halfway house system could be adapted to form agricultural communities. Members contested the notion that electronic monitoring was not truly effective. It could release officials for other interventions. There was concern about post-release support for offenders. The CSPRI submitted that the effect of offender programmes could be undone rapidly, in the absence of follow through upon release. There was interest in the capacity of NGOs to offer outside programmes. There was concern about the SAPS reaching arrest targets through resorting to a high volume of arrests for non-priority minor offences, and the consequences for overcrowding.

The submission by Sonke Gender Justice Network indicated that sexual abuse was not referred to in the DCS Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan. There was a lack of development of a screening tool for sexually vulnerable new inmates. The lockup system and minimal supervision of inmates had to be addressed. There was lack of clarity about rigorous TB testing. HIV policy had to be updated. It was submitted that the Judicial Inspectorate could not properly fulfill an oversight role while it still had no budget of its own.

In discussion, it was asked if the supply of condoms and lubricants could in fact encourage sexual abuse. There was interest in screening of the sexually vulnerable. Members expressed concern about the scourge of rape in the country and urged NGOs to think broadly on the issue.

The submission by National Institute for Crime prevention and Reintegration of Offenders (NICRO) advised that rehabilitation agencies be contracted in to help establish a more effective social reintegration system. There was a lack of focus on inmate families, victims and restorative justice. There was a need for programmes for unsentenced inmates. Rehabilitation had to be seen as mandatory for the DCS. The budget was skewed away from rehabilitation, care and social reintegration.

Discussion was limited due to time constraints. There was interest in family support and victim participation in restorative justice. The Chairperson suggested that sending inmates to centres where they could develop skills, could be more beneficial for offenders than merely placing them close to families. They asked about access to housing, and who had to budget for that, and the reason for assaults, and how many officials had been assaulted.
 

Meeting report

Submission by the Public Servants Association (PSA) on the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) budget and Strategic Plan
Mr Pierre Snyman, Chairperson, Public Servants Association (PSA), remarked that prisons had been built by the apartheid government for purposes other than rehabilitation. Over recent years it had become the norm to fit the average holding capacity plus at least 50 percent more prisoners into them. Overcrowding was related to gang activity. The staff establishment of the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) did not make provision for the overcrowding. 5000 posts had been cut during 2011, at a time when the DCS were saying that they needed 18 000 posts to implement the correctional services being a seven day establishment. Since January 2013 there had been numerous attacks by gangsters on officials.

The PSA welcomed the rollout of electronic monitoring. It could lead to more releases of parolees. Unsentenced detainees were the main contributor to overcrowding. Those who could not make bail properly had to be the responsibility of the South African Police Service (SAPS).

Conditions of incarceration for women had to improve, with educational and skills programmes offered.

Rehabilitation programmes in the DCS were compromised because case officers were used as security officers due to staff shortages. The seven day establishment could not get off the ground, and was contributing to staff shortages.

Assaults by gangs on officials, as had occurred at St Albans Prison, would increase if the staff component was not increased. Gang law prescribed the use of violence to deal with frustrations. Mr Snyman advised that 23 000 new officials be appointed.

Submission by Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) on the DCS Strategic Plan and budget
Mr Nkosinathi Theledi, General Secretary, Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU), noted that conditions for women offenders were still undesirable in some facilities.

South Africa had one of the highest incarceration rates in the world, but that did not lead to a fear to commit crime. Overcrowded prisons had become a public hazard. Inmates were infected with tuberculosis and HIV, and the working conditions of officials were hazardous.

POPCRU was disturbed by the fact that the 2013/14 DCS budget did not take rehabilitation as a serious challenge. It was a core function of the Department. Inability to rehabilitate offenders caused risk and overcrowding frustrated rehabilitation. Entirely improved facilities were needed, and the DCS had not prioritised that in its budget.

There was a need for offenders to be involved in productive activities in prison. There had been a decline in agricultural production, involvement in building centres and seeing to their own catering. The DCS had to regard the effective social reintegration of offenders as the most crucial aspect of rehabilitation.

The Judicial Inspectorate had raised concerns about abuse of inmates amounting to ill treatment and torture. It was not clear how many DCS officials were criminally charged or disciplined for assaulting inmates. Less lethal use of restraint equipment had to be reviewed by the DCS, but the safety of officials had also to be prioritised in that process. There was a need to fill scarce skills positions such as social workers and psychologists.

Overcrowding had led to a decrease in security. Officials were responsible for increasing amounts of inmates. DCS spending on security was very high, but the outcomes were low. A low cost investment in social security would be of more benefit to the Department.

Outsourcing and the use of consultants caused concern, especially with regard to IT. There was a lack of synergy between Corrections White Paper objectives and the DCS budget allocation across programmes. The budget was skewed towards incarceration and administration. The DCS had to take staff development seriously.

Discussion
Mr J Selfe (DA) remarked that he agreed with a lot of what had been said. There was a need to align the budget with White Paper objectives. The coalface staffing situation was a challenge. The PSA had called for 23 000 extra staff. That would decrease the staff-to-inmate ratio down to one staff member to three inmates. But the R12 billion currently spent on salaries would go up to R18 billion, which amounted to the entire R18 billion budget. Staff were not in the right places. Too many were desk-bound.

Mr Snyman replied that running a prison was labour intensive work. One official had to escort one inmate, and there had to be a driver. The one-to-four ratio did not reflect the reality of one official to as many as 300 inmates, inside the centres. There were too many staff in administration. On top of that, there was pressure on the DCS to increase its administrative component from government. The change to the seven day establishment had split staff, due to the 12 hour shift system. The PSA were not trying to say how to solve overcrowding. But electronic monitoring was commended, as it was not so labour intensive.

Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) agreed with the PSA that a solution had to be found to gangs.

Mr Theledi replied that the DCS could not deal with gangs on their own.

Ms Ngwenya said that she had expected more from POPCRU about the behaviour of their own members. Assaults were not only by inmates.

Ms Ngwenya asked POPCRU what they were doing to find solutions around the seven day establishment, as they had been part of its formulation.

Ms Ngwenya commented on the lack of professionals in the DCS.

Ms Ngwenya said that she had expected to hear more about staff salaries. Staff complained about low pay at oversight visits. Staff were tempted to smuggle and make friends with inmates.

Mr L Max (DA) remarked that both unions had spoken of gangs. The PSA had mentioned the need for separating gang members from the rest. He asked about the magnitude of the problem, and how it was addressed by the DCS. The DCS Annual Performance Plan (APP) mentioned a gang policy. He asked if the unions had had opportunity to peruse the policy, and whether they agreed with it.

Mr Snyman replied that the PSA had never heard of the gang policy, and had not been consulted. Gangs were responsible for assaults, because in terms of gang code only they could use violence in prison, and give orders to use violence.

Mr Max remarked that rehabilitation was a buzzword. He asked for hard figures related to the number of those among the 16 000 inmates who might be said to be rehabilitated.

Mr Max said that he wanted to align himself with Mr Selfe, regarding the staff/inmate ratio. The 40 000 staff were not well deployed. There were too many pen pushers. He said that there were principles guiding working agreements between employer and employee. The DCS had to ensure a safe environment for employees. Ground level staff were doing risky work. He asked what the unions had done in terms of the Labour Relations Act to hold the DCS responsible for that.

Mr Snyman replied that the PSA had at first attempted to procure allowances for members because of the dangerous nature of their work. The focus had then shifted to safety. Prison work was classified as essential services, and the application of the relevant Act was difficult. A letter had been sent to the National Commissioner about the matter, but it had been delegated downwards and no answer was received. The matter was mentioned to the Minister at the Ministerial Forum. The PSA would have to have attorneys draft a letter about safety.
 
Ms J Ngubeni-Maluleka (ANC) remarked on the decline of agricultural and workshop production. She asked about recommendations regarding women in prison.

Mr Theledi replied that the unions had made practical proposals about skilling. The DCS had agricultural land, but they were not using it. Inmates were idle and got drawn into gangs. Workshops were empty.  The infrastructure was there, but it was not utilised.

The Chairperson agreed that a gloomy picture had been painted about staff shortages. However, it could not be argued that 41 000 members was not enough. It could be a matter of staff having too many duties. He asked if the DCS would consider an outsourcing of rehabilitation functions to the National Institute for Crime prevention and Reintegration of Offenders (NICRO) and others, so that they could concentrate on security. 23 000 extra staff were seen as the panacea, but better use of available staff was not considered. Five inmates had recently escaped from LNM, with an unlicensed firearm and 11 bullets. Only officials could have smuggled the firearm in. There was negligence. Inmates had cell phones. There were gang leaders in Westbury who were sending officials to collect money sent through Money Market at Checkers. The official would receive a cut of the money, if he handed the money to an inmate. The unions were saying nothing about getting tough with staff. Staff members had been drunk on duty and had only received a written warning. If there were more staff, and they were still smuggling guns, there would be no benefit.

Mr Theledi replied that he agreed that staff could be better utilised. The POPCRU stance was that the DCS organisational structure was top heavy. There were too many people at Head Office, and there was duplication of functions. POPCRU wanted restructuring, with more people at the coalface. There had been 800 people at Head Office in 2000, but currently the office was almost bigger than the management areas.

The Chairperson remarked that restructuring was a deep word. Perhaps POPCRU meant redeployment to the coalface.

Mr Theledi replied that there had been a ballooning of the top structure. Human capital was being wasted through duplication. Currently if people were merely moved from office to coalface, it created vacancies.

Mr Snyman responded that with regard to outsourcing of rehabilitation, there was provision for NGOs to present programmes. But outsourcing would make security the sole DCS responsibility. The question was whether the NGOs had the capacity. If not, it would mean incurring risk.

Mr Theledi replied with regard to getting tough with officials, that the unions did not condone assaults by officials on inmates. There were systems in place to deal with those who transgressed. Yet when staff were charged, the unions had to represent them. It was essential that the principle of innocent until proved guilty, be adhered to. It was not for the unions to judge staff.

The Chairperson remarked that judgments had still been blatantly wrong.

Mr Theledi replied that the unions condemned ill discipline. Their role was to insist on proper process. The DCS did not follow proper procedure. There had been an escape at Harrismith two years before, and members had been summarily dismissed, then they had to be taken back as there had been negligence in the process. There had to be an arbitrator or a judge. The sanction had to fit the transgression.

Mr Snyman added that an agreement had been signed regarding how to deal with misconduct. The process allowed for circumstances like drunken behaviour. The PSA stance was that misconduct like smuggling in guns had to lead to dismissal. Even then, people had to be treated fairly. The majority of DCS staff were good officials.

Mr M Cele (ANC) asked for the PSA view on suspensions.

Mr Snyman replied that 122 staff members had been suspended at St Albans, for having an unauthorised meeting. Members had insisted on being addressed about stabbings by inmates. On their return to work they were suspended. There had been a disciplinary process, ending with the suspensions being lifted the previous week.

Ms Ngwenya asked if salaries were being negotiated for staff. They were complaining that the police did not have to stay with offenders, as they were supposed to. The unions had to negotiate salaries on behalf of staff.

Mr Theledi replied that the unions could only negotiate salaries for all departments.

Ms Ngwenya asked about the role of the SAPS in accommodating unsentenced offenders.

Mr Snyman replied that the PSA were not asking that the SAPS build new space. But the DCS understaffing had to be recognised. The SAPS had to assist. It was not for the DCS to look after the unsentenced.

Submission by the Civil Society Prison Reform Initiative (CSPRI) on the DCS Budget Vote
Dr Lukas Muntingh, Project Coordinator, CSPRI, emphasised that DCS officials had to be trained against torture. The budget vote did not allow for that. There was stagnation in the strategic plan regarding education. He suggested that education and training be handed over to the Department of Basic Education. Budget allocations were not rooted in policy positions. There was emphasis on high-tech security solutions like tracking devices, whereas the White Paper emphasised dynamic security exercised by staff in a unit management system. Targets were set on a broad front, but it was seldom explained how they would be achieved. Access to health care was a persistent problem in the prison system. He recommended that prison health care be handed over to the Department of Health.

The budget vote did not address overcrowding and building of capacity in female prisons. The DCS had a duty to prevent torture and other ill-treatment. The DCS approach assumed that gangs were solely responsible for violence in prisons, but the problem was more complex.

Dr Muntingh suggested that there be a move away from obsession with parole violation, toward effective intervention for social reintegration of parolees. NGOs had to have opportunity to experiment with providing reintegration services. The DCS was not giving money to NGOs for interventions, and the NGOs could not support their mandate.

Dr Muntingh questioned the effectiveness of halfway houses for reintegration

Discussion
Mr Selfe remarked that skills developed in prison could be utilised in halfway houses. He quipped that it could become a halfway farm.

Dr Muntingh responded that one had to be wary of expectations created by the halfway houses. There was the possibility that prison culture could be exported into them. The examples of New Zealand and Australia could be followed. But there had to be experimentation before anything was rushed into headlong. The same applied to skills development.

Mr Selfe asked about the stipulation that an inmate had to have an address to get parole.

Mr Selfe asked about inmate electronic tracking for probationers and parolees.

Dr Muntingh responded that electronic monitoring could be resorted to if someone did not have an address. But it could not replace services to parolees. Monitoring devices could not prevent crime.

The Chairperson referred to the statement that the White Paper required human contact, rather than electronic control. If that was so, the Portfolio Committee would lose the fight for Closed Circuit Television in centres. He did not intend to lose that fight. The question was if human contact was possible.

The Chairperson asked about tagging of parolees. He asked if they received rehabilitation services, or whether it was just a matter of signing in. It seemed that it was left to the inmate to rehabilitate himself. The DCS had stated that parole did not mean that the sentence was over. He asked if there were benefits to electronic surveillance besides tracking.

Mr Piko Mbambo, Parliamentary Liaison Officer (PLO), DCS, replied that there were rehabilitation mechanisms for parolees, but sometimes the capacity was not there. He advised partnerships with NGOs.

Dr Muntingh added that lack of post-release support could undo good programmes inside prison. Four percent of the budget went towards social reintegration, and yet that was the most important programme. People were being dumped on the streets without support. That did not contribute to safety. Recommendations by presiding officers did not get to the DCS.

The Chairperson remarked that the electronic surveillance rollout was commencing. It had to be asked if value would be added besides tracking.

Dr Muntingh replied that tracking was not cheap. It could only lessen escapes by 12 per year. With a staff/inmate ratio of one to 300, there could be no security. It would create technology dependent officials.

The Chairperson told the DCS members present that their Annual Performance Plan contained no how or why.  The Treasury had called for smart targets. The DCS had to say how targets were to be achieved. Dr Muntingh had said that education targets had gone down. The question was why the Minister was saying that those who did not have Grade 9 pass certificate would be compelled to obtain it. Did it have to be seen as telling everybody what they wanted to hear?
 
The Chairperson referred to the statement by Dr Muntingh that health care was not linked to overcrowding. He asked if 41 000 staff were enough.

Dr Muntingh replied that the ration of nurses per inmate population was better than outside the prison system. The Judicial Inspectorate were doing health care audits. He continued that overcrowding was related to the fact that although admissions to prison had gone down, longer sentences were being handed down. Remand detainees contributed to overcrowding. More than half were there for longer than three months. Police had made 1,4 million arrests in the previous year, many of them for petty, non-priority crimes. Half of the remand detainees would eventually have their cases thrown out, and be released without trial. Overcrowding had been well studied, but different players were not linking up.

The Chairperson referred to the statement that violence was not only gang driven. Yet the PSA maintained that that was indeed the case.

Mr Selfe referred to the outsourcing of health and education. He asked about DCS delivery, and whether they were merely warehousing inmates.

Dr Muntingh responded that sentence plans were in place, but the question was whether they were productive. Brandvlei at Worcester was well run, and offered activities for inmates, but Hawequa, close by, was not like that. There could be variance in the quality of individual managers.

Ms Ngwenya asked the NGOs what they could offer by way of outside programmes. She asked about relations with the DCS. She agreed that there was too little on offer for parolees.

Dr Muntingh replied that NICRO would say more about support to parolees. There were 20 NGOs to deal with 4000 releases, and budgets were low. Realistic work was being done in Mitchell’s Plain, where there was follow through on parolees.

Mr Max asked if NGOs would support the notion of the police having to explain the necessity of an arrest in court. 1.4 million arrests had to be avoided.

Dr Muntingh replied that the SAPS would then have to be permanently in court. Arrest targets had to be removed.

Submission by Sonke Gender Justice Network on the DCS Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan
Ms Emily Keehn, Policy Research Specialist, Sonke Gender Justice Network (Sonke), presented the submission by Sonke and Just Detention International (JDI). She noted that sexual abuse received no mention in the Strategic Plan or Annual Performance Plan. Plans should set specific targets for the reduction of sexual abuse. These should be included, for example, in the Strategic Plan under the sections outlining the departmental strategy to ensure effective security, the protection of the inmates’ human rights; in the strategic objectives under Programme 2, “Incarceration”; and in the corresponding parts of the Annual Performance Plan. The performance indicators included to measure levels of violence also made no mention of sexual violence, but were restricted to “assaults on inmates” and “gang-related incidents”. More generally, statistics on the reported rapes and sexual assaults of inmates in DCS facilities remained unavailable to the public, and were instead merged into the general “assault” category. This was despite numerous calls to DCS to gather and make available this information. These statistics should be disaggregated and reported as a separate category so as to build the understanding of the problem, identify it as a worthy and deeply serious issue, and establish a basis from which to measure its prevalence. The DCS provided no information on the development of a screening tool to assess vulnerability of newly sentenced inmates to sexual abuse.

The DCS was urged to incorporate the adoption of a framework to address sexual abuse of inmates into their policy framework. The framework had been awaiting final DCS approval since December 2010 and its adoption and implementation was required in order for DCS to meaningfully address the abuse of inmates in its facilities. In a positive development, in March 2013, JDI and Sonke had a meeting with senior management at the DCS Head Office. There, commitments were made to move the framework forward. To support these efforts, Sonke urged DCS to prioritise the framework as one of the Planned Policy Initiatives listed in the Strategic Plan.

The lockup practice and minimal inmate supervision had to be addressed. As noted in the JICS 2011/2012 Annual Report, there was a staffing crisis which left skeletal staffing in some facilities, resulting in inmates being “only cursorily monitored” for long periods of time. As noted numerous times by members of the Committee, response processes in cases of emergency were typically lengthy, cumbersome and may be fatal. Efforts were underway between DCS management and organised labour to agree on hours and ideal shifts to enhance the implementation of the seven day establishment, and a task team had been created to finalise all outstanding labour-related matters. However, it was unclear whether the shift models being negotiated sought to remedy the daily lock-up practice whereby dramatically reduced staffing left inmates virtually unsupervised from mid-afternoon until the next morning (as well as on weekends with reductions in centre-level staff). This practice combined with the substantial challenges staff faced in dealing with emergencies, pus inmates at greatly increased risk of violence, caused immense stress for inmates and staff, and contributed to staff demoralisation.

Elements of the strategic plan, such as the management of inmate identification through the automated personal identification system (APIS) for inmates, the establishment of a gang-management unit, the establishing of properly capacitated Emergency Security Teams, and improved incident management and reporting, were encouraging. However, no further information was given on how and when these goals were to be achieved. 

It was unclear whether TB testing was taking place in facilities. There was a need to update HIV policy to include the distribution of lubricants. Sonke and JDI welcomed the inclusion of plans to improve the systems and policies of remand detention. In this regard, they referred the DCS and the Portfolio Committee to research, recently completed by JDI, which could assist in these endeavours.  The DCS was committed to protecting the rights of special categories like children, women, the mentally ill and disabled, but there was a lack of specific targets and indicators. The Judicial Inspectorate was as yet not independent enough to exercise adequate oversight, because they did not have their own budget. An effective and fully independent oversight mechanism for DCS would help increase the Department’s accountability to its human rights mandate. Although the Judicial Inspectorate was meant to be independent from DCS, without a separate budget under its own control, its independence did not exist.

Discussion
Ms Ngwenya remarked that many inmates had been rapists on the outside. She asked about programmes for that on the outside, where it started. Old ladies and small children were being raped. NGOs had to think more broadly about this issue.

Mr Selfe agreed with Ms Ngwenya about rape. The DCS had to explain why there were no statistics on sexual abuse. He asked about blockages to addressing the challenge. He asked if the screen for vulnerable inmates was in place.

Mr Max asked if providing condoms and lubricants would not encourage sexual abuse.

Mr P Mnguni (COPE) noted that he had wanted to ask the same question. It was a touchy matter.

The Chairperson commented that the matter nevertheless had to be discussed. One could not pretend that it did not happen. He asked if NGOs had programmes to offer for sexual abuse inside prisons.

Ms Keehne replied that there was indeed a relation between sexual abuse on the outside and inside. Sonke discouraged gender based sexual violence. There were no services inside centres. Survivors remained invisible. Sonke were developing programmes to reduce HIV and sexual abuse. There was a plan for the national rollout of training programmes for staff. The supply of lubricants was part of an HIV national plan. Sexual activity was a fact in prisons. It would happen. The aim was to make it safer.

Submission by NICRO on the DCS Strategic Plan and Annual Performance Plan
Ms Venessa Padayachee, National Manager: Advocacy and Lobbying, NICRO, noted that released inmates were struggling. They had been locked up to their detriment, and found it hard to adjust to society on the outside.

There was little information on prisons in Africa, and what did exist was dominated by descriptions of poor, overcrowded conditions, brutality and suffering. There was very little discussion on what could be done to facilitate change in the prisoners, with the view to helping them lead crime-free lives upon their release. Yet, rehabilitation and reintegration of prisoners was acknowledged as one of the key functions of the prison system, even in Africa, and regional instruments considered it one of the most important aspects to consider in the treatment of offenders.

Ms Padayachee emphasised the need for evidence-based correctional programming, which looked at factors in the broader social context which may have an impact on crime and on the offenders ability to reintegrate into society. Most of these ideas had been developed and researched in the Western world, but African regional instruments showed an expression of intent on the continent.

There were a number of challenges hindering the rehabilitation and reintegration of prisoners. Prison systems often failed to separate prisoners sentenced for serious crimes from those convicted for less serious crimes. There was a failure to create an environment conducive to rehabilitation. Overcrowding had a negative impact on staffing and the management of a prison. Prisons were understaffed  and few personnel had received training that helped them understand their role in terms of facilitating development and reintegration; the calibre of correctional officials was often not up to scratch. At the time South African prisoners were staffed by people with matric and no criminal record, staff often had little respect for prisoners. Most countries in Africa, had  inadequate numbers of professional staff, such as social workers, psychologists, educators, and vocational trainers. Rehabilitation and reformation of prisoners was viewed very narrowly –most African countries focused on the provision of schooling, training or work opportunities seen as full extent of rehabilitation, and no other psycho-social aspects were catered for.
Prison provided an opportunity to reduce social exclusion risk factors such as low levels of education, unemployment, drug and alcohol addiction, and mental and physical health. Prison programmes could help to improve prisoners thinking skills and anger management. Instead of reinforcing experiences of institutionalisation and heavily structured regimes, or lack of activity which could damage prisoners’ ability to think for or act for themselves, prison could be a place to develop positive life skills. Prisons could get families to have input into prisoners rehabilitation needs, deal with poor family relationships, and stabilise financial needs and concerns.

The ideal correctional official should embody the values that the DCS hoped to instil in the offender, as it was the official who was to assist and facilitate the rehabilitation processes of the offender. Effective programmes should prevent and treat officials stress, caused by violence, low pay or understaffing. There should be a rigorous selection process and ongoing training.

Effective rehabilitation and reintegration strategies were keys to reducing overcrowding in the long term. Certain offenders could be sentenced to community-based therapeutic programmes and services designed to address their behaviour. In this way, the root causes of the criminal behaviour were addressed and offenders were afforded the opportunity to turn their lives around.

NICRO proposed earlier participation and input of civil society stakeholders before the Treasury budget allocation process began. Through these deliberations they hoped to find solutions to strengthen resource allocation to the rehabilitation and community reintegration components, and to achieve greater integration between the two. NIRCO also recommended grants for NGOs, a DCS family strengthening programme, improving the condition of female correctional facilities, alternative sentences and diversion-consideration of conversion of sentences for those inmates with sentences less than 24 months, gang management strategy, and greater coordination between rehabilitation in correctional facilities and community corrections.


Discussion
Ms Ngwenya referred to remarks about family support, on page 17. She remarked on the importance of family and victim inputs for restorative justice. She asked about NICRO relations with victims.

Ms Padayachee responded that there was still a gap in providing restorative justice. NICRO worked with families and victims. There had recently been the successful involvement in restorative justice by a victim who had been raped 20 years before.

Ms Ngwenya asked about access to housing, and who had to budget for that.

Mr Max asked about reasons for assaults (page 7), and how many officials had been assaulted. Unlawful assault was wrong, but the focus was on assaults on inmates. It had to be taken into account that DCS officials worked in a dangerous environment.

Ms Padayachee agreed that the environment for officials was dangerous. But that did not justify incidents of torture. The matter had to be seen in context.

The Chairperson cautioned against overemphasis on the family. An inmate had recently been transferred from Barberton to Johannesburg, to be closer to family. Shortly thereafter the mother complained that he had threatened to kill his mother and girlfriend on his release. The Chairperson advised that it could be better to send inmates to centres of expertise, where they could obtain skills.

Ms Padayachee replied that it was not just a matter of being close to family. There also had to be interventions. She commended the system of halfway houses, and agreed with an earlier remark by Mr Selfe that it could be used as a farming community. There could be a linked network of halfway houses.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
 

Share this page: