Academic and media reports suggest that many released prisoners commit another crime and are sentenced. However, South Africa lacks a standard definition for recidivism or a consistent way to measure it. This means that no one knows the true rate. Researcher Marelize Schoeman explains why tracking recidivism matters.

Why is the definition of recidivism so important?

Recidivism is not simply reoffending. The word comes from Latin. It means “to fall back”. It describes when an individual who has already served a sentence commits another crime and is arrested, convicted or sentenced again.

A high recidivism rate, therefore, reflects not only reoffending, but the criminal justice system’s failure to rehabilitate offenders and prevent further crime.

According to academic research, South Africa’s recidivism rate ranges from 55% to 95%. Media reports claim it to be as high as 80% to 97%.

These figures, however, can only be regarded as estimates. South Africa lacks a standard definition of recidivism. This has led to researchers and criminal justice institutions – including the Department of Correctional Services, the South African Police Service and the National Prosecuting Authority – using different definitions and measurement methods. This produces inconsistent data and inaccurate recidivism statistics.

The lack of a shared definition and common understanding has resulted in recidivism being used as a buzzword. This is done to create public sensation, score political points or claim programme success without any credible or generalisable evidence.

As a result, policymakers and service providers in the criminal justice sector don’t know whether:

policing, sentencing and rehabilitation programmes are effective

correctional centres are overcrowded due to repeat offenders

parole and reintegration efforts are successful.

This absence of reliable information hampers the criminal justice system’s ability to deliver effective prevention services, support parolees after release, reduce reoffending and build safer communities.

How can South Africa better define and address the problem?

The first step is to have a uniform definition of recidivism across the criminal justice sector. Then the rate can be measured accurately. Without accurate data, resources can be wasted on crime prevention and rehabilitation programmes that do not work. Effective initiatives will remain unnoticed or underfunded. You can’t manage what you can’t measure.

The second step is to improve record-keeping and create a central digitised databank for sentenced offenders. This databank would hold key information, such as personal details, previous convictions, the nature of each offence, and other risk-related factors that could influence an offender’s rehabilitation prospects.

This information should be accessible to the prisons, police and prosecutors. The courts, parole boards and accredited rehabilitation service providers should also have access.

Currently, there is no central record system. The police service maintains all criminal record information. To obtain a person’s criminal record, a form and the individual’s fingerprints must be submitted. An official then checks the database for any previous convictions, offence details and sentencing information. This largely paper-based system is prone to delays, human error and inaccuracies.

Many offenders use aliases or do not have identity documents.

A uniform identification system, using digitally captured fingerprints or iris scans, would be a more effective way of identifying and keeping records of individuals with a criminal record.

Digitising this process has been planned since 1996, but hasn’t happened. Fragmented systems, weak accountability, outdated infrastructure, governance bottlenecks and late deliveries have delayed it.

What difference will the database make?

Making these improvements would change how South Africa measures, understands and manages recidivism. A uniform definition would replace guesswork and political rhetoric with a clear, evidence-based standard.

Policymakers, researchers and practitioners could use a common language to make comparisons and coordinate strategies.

The focus could shift from viewing recidivism merely as individuals reoffending, to the criminal justice system’s effectiveness in breaking the cycle of crime.

A centralised, digitised offender database would reduce human error and improve data reliability, making it possible to identify and do what works.

Public trust in the criminal justice sector might improve, enhancing rehabilitation outcomes and building safer communities.

What countries have cracked this?

Countries like the United Kingdom, Norway, Finland and Sweden, Canada, New Zealand and Singapore have adopted a uniform definition of recidivism. They use it to measure the performance of their criminal justice systems.

The effectiveness of these steps is clear in Norway and Singapore. The two countries have some of the lowest recidivism rates in the world at 20% and 21%, respectively. The UK’s recidivism rates have declined from 31.6% in 2010 to 26.5% in 2023. In New Zealand, performance data is used to target high-risk groups and strengthen rehabilitation efforts.

These countries use biometric databases in law enforcement and correctional facilities. The databases help to identify offenders, track parolees and manage prisons. Authorities can identify ex-offenders who commit new crimes.

Recidivism statistics are also used as key performance indicators across the criminal justice system. They guide funding and programme development.

In South Africa, a review of the parole board system which began in September 2025 offers the Department of Correctional Services an opportunity to define what recidivism means.

This step could create the basis for developing a central record system for both incarcerated offenders and those under community corrections. The system could later be expanded across the entire criminal justice network.

Written by Marelize Isabel Schoeman, University of South Africa and republished with permission from The Conversation. The original article can be found here.

The post Thousands of criminals reoffend in South Africa – better data would show where the justice system is failing appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

GroundUp previously reported how the issue of remand detainees is a priority for the Bail Fund, a pilot project led by the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS), which aims to help detainees who cannot afford bail amounts under R1,000.

On Tuesday, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (DOJ) and the South African Law Reform Commission (SALRC) briefed Parliament’s portfolio committee for correctional services.

The Deputy Director-General of Court Administration in the DOJ, Lucky Charles Mohalaba, noted that there are about 60,000 people in remand detention across the country. About 26,000 have been in detention for less than three months. But about 5,000 have been awaiting trial for over two years.

A small number of people have been in remand detention for a concerning number of years, some up to and even longer than ten years. There are 430 remand detainees who have been in prison without being sentenced for five to seven years, 57 who have been in prison for seven to ten years, and five people who have been in prison for ten to 15 years.

Mohalaba acknowledged that the number of remand detainees is high, and it has increased over the past few years, from nearly 49,000 in 2021.

Mohalaba said the issue is discussed at provincial efficiency enhancement committees (PEEC), chaired by each province’s judge president. Each has a sub-committee set up to intervene and look at cases where bail is less than R1,000. He said the Department of Correctional Services would provide names of all remand detainees.

Mohalaba said factors contributing to the delays in finalising these cases include accused people changing legal representatives, requests for case-related documents, multiple co-accuseds, delays in securing court dates, loss of court records, and the failure of witnesses to appear in court.

Fanyana Mdumbe, of the SALRC, briefed Parliament on recommended additions to the CPA, which once “promulgated as law by Parliament, would add to options that are currently available to the courts”.

While the CPA does have provisions for bail, the SALRC believes that “there is room for improvement”, such as the release on bail on the basis of indigence.

Mdumbe said amendments would include the release of an accused person facing fine-only offences without having to pay money. It also included alternative security for bail for people who do not have residential addresses, such as people who live in informal settlements, whose bail applications are often denied due to this.

The amendments would also empower the courts to look into the circumstances of a remand detainee and to make a determination on whether their remand conditions are reasonable.

Some MPs were critical of the number of remand detainees, the conditions they were detained in, overcrowding, and potential failure of the judiciary to address the increasing number of remand detainees.

DA MP Kabelo Kgobisa-Ngcaba questioned how many correctional facilities officials from the DOJ had visited. “I don’t think you have a full appreciation of the horror in our prisons. Is it justice for people to languish in those conditions when they are unsentenced?” she asked.

EFF MP Nontando Nolutshungu said, “We can have the best policies, but if they are not implemented properly, we are not going to get the results.”

Nolutshungu said that the remand detainee population increase over the past five years “shows a deeper failure in the justice system”.

DA MP Janho Engelbrecht was also critical of the judiciary, saying, “Their independence is crucial to our democracy, however, the judiciary’s independence cannot be a shield against accountability. Their decisions on sentencing bail and case backlogs directly cause prison overcrowding and undermine our rehabilitation mandate.”

The Minister of Justice Mmamoloko Kubayi noted that the CPA does not give powers to the minister but to the courts.

“The judiciary is independent and does not account to the executive. We are responsible for the administration and financial support for the judiciary and the NPA. But I’m not accountable to nor are we allowed to get involved in court matters and in how a judicial decision is taken,” said Kubayi.

“Our only option is through policies, legislation and regulations,” she said.

The minister also said in response that she has been prioritising infrastructure challenges in courts, and therefore has not visited a correctional facility.

She said the CPA amendments would be completed before the end of the financial year, March 2026.

Written by Liezl Human for GroundUp and republished with permission. The original article can be found here.

The post Unsentenced detainees spending years in prison appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

Judge Denise Fisher wrote that transgender prisoners are entitled to access a greater standard of health care for their condition – gender dysphoria – than that to which other transgender persons outside of a prison environment are entitled.

Judge Fisher also ruled that the prisoner, Nthabiseng Mokoena, was entitled to express her gender identity, including the use of pronouns “she/her” and to be housed in a single cell or in a cell with other transgender prisoners.

Read the full judgment here
Mokoena was born a biological male but began expressing female identity at age seven. She was sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and robbery committed in 2010.

In her application, brought under the provisions of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA), she described how she was ostracised by her family and community, dropped out of school, mixed with the “fringes of life”, and fell into a life of crime.

She complained that while incarcerated her rights had been violated because she had been denied hormonal therapy, and she had been subjected to unfair discrimination and harassment.

She further complained that she was not allowed to wear “feminising clothing”, to use her chosen pronouns, and was not being accommodated in a single cell.

In her ruling handed down on Monday, Judge Fisher said: “The profound misery and distress that is experienced by transgender persons when their ability to exist in a state of psychological and emotional integration is denied to them, is accepted by all parties in these proceedings and the examination of rights proceeds in this context.”

Mokoena asked the court to order the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) to comply with and enforce its own standard operating procedures (SOPs) for transgender prisoners, and provide medical treatment for her gender dysphoria at state expense. Judge Fisher said the medical relief she sought was relatively modest, only confined to the hormonal therapy, prescribed by doctors in 2021 after she was diagnosed. But the department refused.

The judge said while Mokoena intended to eventually have breast augmentation and genital surgery, this was not the focus of the application because “she accepts that transitioning requires multidisciplinary interventions at appropriate stages”.

Initially Mokoena was housed in Medium A at the prison, where she was allowed to keep her hair long and wear women’s clothing. But she was then transferred to Medium B, kept in a segregated section reserved for high-risk prisoners such as police officers. She was not given a single cell.

After her gender dysphoria diagnosis and the Department of Correctional Services refusing to provide hormone therapy, claiming it was “cosmetic medication”, she took to self medicating with oral contraceptives.

In April 2023, she complained to the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS).

The Department of Correctional Services, in response to a query from JICS, said she could not be placed in a single cell because of overcrowding. It said it could place her with two gay men.

Opposing the application, the Department of Correctional Services said it had adopted special standard operating procedures relating to the rights of transgender prisoners. In terms of the policy, officials were required to respect, recognise and affirm diverse gender identities and expressions, use appropriate and inclusive language, avoid derogatory and hurtful words, not make assumptions about a prisoner’s gender identity, and to ask for and use a prisoner’s preferred pronouns.

The department agreed that prisoners should be accommodated in cells appropriate to their gender identity where feasible and safe.

The department said it had dealt with Mokoena’s complaints, conducted an investigation, and taken steps to remedy the infractions found.

But the department said it was only obliged to provide primary health care at state expense and that gender affirming health care was obtained at a secondary and tertiary level. So it must be sourced at Makoena’s expense.

“The department says her condition relates to mental illnesses,” Judge Fisher said. “This characterisation suggests a lack of understanding of what it entails and how it is treated. It however, concedes to an understanding, at least, that the treatment involves important psychological considerations which must be sensitively approached. It now accepts in these proceedings that the treatment is not cosmetic in nature.”

She said JICS had noted that in spite of the adoption of the standard operating procedures it had observed that the rights of LGBT+ prisoners were frequently violated in practice.

“[P]roperly implemented, the [standard operating procedures] have the potential to ensure dignified equal treatment of such prisoners. It has documented successful implementation at facilities at Durban Medium B, where a dedicated unit has fostered a respectful and affirming environment.”

Judge Fisher said Mokoena’s gender dysphoria was not disputed and withholding treatment worsened her distress.

“To my mind, the applicant has established the discrimination and harassment contended for.

“The limitations placed on her by the [department], are, to my mind, unreasonable and obstructive. They evidence a cynical disregard for her rights.

“I accept that the [department] is able to create an environment which is conducive to fairness by simply observing and enforcing the [standard operating procedures].”

Judge Fisher said Makoena had established that because of her transgender status, she had been subjected to systematic disadvantage undermining her rights and freedoms.

Withholding gender affirming health care amounted to unfair discrimination, the judge said.

“Thus, I find that adequate health care as envisaged under the Constitution and the Correctional Services Act includes the providing of hormone replacement therapy and all the supportive and associated treatment that this therapy entails and that the [department] is obliged forthwith to take all steps to accommodate access to such treatment at the cost of the state,” the judge ruled.

She ordered the Department of Correctional Services to allow Makoena to wear clothing that expressed her gender identity at all times in the prison, to ensure she is addressed as “she/her”, to accommodate her in a single cell, or with prisoners of the same gender identity, and to provide hormonal treatment on prescription.

Written by Tania Broughton for GroundUp and republished with permission. The original article can be found here.

The post Transgender prisoner wins right to hormone therapy appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

The DA demands that both the Western Cape Provincial Police Commissioner and the Minister of Correctional Services urgently appear before Parliament, said Nicholas Gotsell, DA NCOP Member on Security & Justice.

This incident comes on the back of the recent escapes at Wynberg and Strand Police holding cells. Those escapes occurred while detainees were in SAPS custody, whilst this escape happened inside a maximum-security correctional facility – the place where security is supposed to be at its strongest, he said.

Helderstroom is intended to house some of the most dangerous offenders in the country and it is tasked not only with detention, but with rehabilitation and the protection of the public. A breach at this level indicates a failure at the very heart of the Department of Correctional Services’ security and operational controls, according to the DA.

“When a prisoner serving a sentence for a serious crime walks out of a maximum-security facility, the public is justified in asking whether Correctional Services is capable of performing its constitutional mandate. The escape from a maximum security facility by a single inmate, points to a criminal justice chain that is failing at every stage; from arrest to court process to incarceration,” Gotsell said.

Last week, following the escapes from SAPS holding cells, the DA wrote to the Chairperson of the Select Committee on Security and Justice requesting the urgent appearance of both the Western Cape Provincial Police Commissioner and the Minister of Correctional Services to account for the repeated and escalating breakdowns occurring in both policing and correctional security environments. The DA has again written to the Chairperson to bring the latest incident to her attention and to request that the requested meeting be prioritised. Urgent and crucial interrogation is required.

Minister Pieter Groenewald must explain:

• How this escape was possible from inside a maximum security facility;

• Whether internal collusion is suspected or being investigated; and

• What immediate steps are being taken to prevent further breaches?

At a time when communities in the Western Cape are experiencing a surge of crime due to criminal justice failures, the State cannot allow violent, unrehabilitated offenders to return to the very communities they harmed, Gotsell concluded.

The post DA pushes for answers as third inmate escapes in three weeks appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

National Commissioner of Correctional Services, Makgothi Thobakgale, confirmed the incident during a media briefing on Tuesday 4 November.

The attack – which occurred last week – comes about a month after the authorities’ announcement of a management intervention at the prison in a bid to address systemic failures at the facility.

“Correctional officials Mr Wuve Rubushe and Mr Mendo Somdyala were performing routine duties in Unit D3 of the Remand Detention Facility, shortly after breakfast had been served. At approximately 08:47, remand detainee Bonginkosi Jali, aged 46 and detained for theft, requested to use the toilet facility and was unlocked from Communal Cell 208.

“At that time, two other remand detainees, Ricardo Krotz, aged 28 and charged under POCA-related offences, and Andre Gouws, aged 22 and detained for murder, were in the passage performing cleaning duties. Tragically, all three were armed with sharpened objects.

“The assault began when Jali emerged from the toilet facility and attacked Mr Somdyala, stabbing him. Despite his injuries, Mr Somdyala managed to run to the unit office for assistance, where Mr Rubushe was stationed. The three detainees pursued him into the office and continued their attack on both officials,” Thobakgale said.

Another official, who arrived at the scene, called for backup and the additional officials disarmed and removed the attackers.

“Force had to be used to stop the assault. The detainees were immediately taken to the facility hospital, treated by the resident doctor, and later transferred to an external hospital. Sadly, Bonginkosi Jali and Andre Gouws died on the same day, while Ricardo Krotz succumbed to his injuries on 31 October 2025.

“Both officials were also taken to Constantiaberg Hospital for further medical care and have since been discharged. We remain deeply thankful for their bravery and continue to support them and their families as they recover from this traumatic event,” the Commissioner said.

He added that the “use of force in this case was unavoidable to preserve life”.

“Every incident involving force is subject to full investigation to ensure compliance with the Correctional Services Act.

“Transparency and accountability remain cornerstones of our operations, and all relevant oversight bodies and the families of the deceased have been informed,” the Commissioner noted.

Cracking down

Thobakgale noted that the initial management intervention at the facility “disrupted entrenched practices and illicit networks that had thrived in the absence of proper control”.

“This inevitably provoked resistance and resentment among those who had benefited from the previous state of affairs, creating tensions that, regrettably, culminated in the incident of 29 October 2025,” he said.

Preliminary investigations indicate that the incident was gang-related and targeted at asserting dominance in the facility, following “the department’s renewed enforcement of discipline and order”.

“Jali was reportedly a self-proclaimed “General” of the 26 Gang [and] this incident serves as a stark reminder of the deep-rooted gangsterism challenge that continues to threaten safety within correctional facilities.

“Gang activities undermine security, disrupt rehabilitation, and endanger lives. Let me be clear: gangsterism has no place in our correctional system. It destroys the very essence of rehabilitation and corrodes the moral fabric of our centres.

“The department has been implementing a comprehensive Gang Combating Strategy focusing on intelligence-led operations to detect and neutralise gang influence, enhanced staff training to identify and prevent gang mobilisation, stricter internal controls to close security loopholes, and expanded rehabilitation and reintegration programmes offering inmates education, vocational training, and psychological support to break free from gang culture,” he said.

A new Area Commissioner – Ntomboxolo Kungune – has been appointed to the Pollsmoor facility to “reinforce leadership stability”.

“Her extensive experience, most recently as Area Commissioner of Drakenstein, will be invaluable in steering this Management Area toward renewal and improved performance. The team deployed by Head Office on 29 September 2025 will remain on site to sustain the momentum, oversee the implementation of corrective measures, and guide the transition toward a secure, compliant, and rehabilitative environment.

“We must confront this challenge not with fear, but with resolve and unity. Our mission remains clear – to restore order, uphold safety, and promote rehabilitation. Together, as a department and as a nation, we can defeat gangsterism, rebuild trust, and ensure that correctional centres remain places of transformation rather than turmoil,” Thobakgale concluded.

The post Pollsmoor inmate attack leaves three dead, two injured appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

Janho Engelbrecht, DA Spokesperson on Correctional Services, said the two inmate deaths at Pollsmoor Correctional Centre “are a tragic yet predictable consequence of a facility and a regional management structure in complete crisis.”

“Our correctional facilities are severely overcrowded, with almost 60,000 remand detainees, and they are financially crippled by terrible budget planning, inflated unfit-for-purpose contracts, and misappropriated funds,” Engelbrecht said.

The DA therefore calls for a full scale, national spending review across the entire Correctional Service Department. The DA will write to Minister Dr Pieter Groenewald to ask him for the full spending review to take place without delay.

The review must account for the spending that is taking place to house tens of thousands of remand detainees, who are not yet convicted of crimes, because the Department of Justice has lost the capacity to speedily handle criminal trials, Engelbrecht continued.

“The incident at Pollsmoor thrusts it back into the spotlight for all the wrong reasons, mere weeks after the facility was embroiled in the scandal of two erroneous releases.”

This is not an isolated incident, the DA said. “It forms a devastating pattern of failure across the Western Cape Region, coming hot on the heels of similar events at the Oudtshoorn facility. The management at Pollsmoor, the Area and the Regional level have proven themselves to be fundamentally incapable of ensuring basic safety, security, and order. The DA will not stand by while this vital institution crumbles. South Africa cannot have a Correctional Service that allows inmates to be killed, or to escape, on a regular basis.”

The DA has also submitted urgent parliamentary questions to Groenewald, demanding a full and transparent account of the circumstances that led to these two deaths at Pollsmoor.

“We will intensify our oversight visits and use every parliamentary mechanism at our disposal to hold the executive and the department’s failing management to account. The blood of these inmates is on the hands of a negligent management structure and a national department that has abandoned its duty to protect both its citizens and those in its care,” Engelbrecht said.

The budget available to the Department of Correctional Services must be fully reviewed, without delay, so that all waste and all misappropriation can be immediately stopped, to spend on the fundamentals of safer and more secure prisons, Engelbrecht concluded.

The post Full Correctional Services spending review needed as more Pollsmoor inmates die appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

This after security breaches at the facility revealed weaknesses in core operational procedures – compelling the National Commissioner to intervene.

“In recent months, Pollsmoor has experienced a series of serious security breaches that exposed weaknesses in the management of warrants, court appearances, and inmate identification processes.

“These incidents cannot be taken lightly, as they have the potential to undermine public confidence in the correctional system and compromise the broader criminal justice value chain,” Thobakgale noted.

The incidents include cases of mistaken release and an inmate assuming the identity of another.

Furthermore, in July, a raid at the facility led by the National Commissioner uncovered more than 110 cell phones, sim cards, sharp objects, drug paraphernalia, drugs and cash.

“[The] erroneous release of remand detainee John Henry Mpelo due to failures in verifying warrants, the mistaken release of Inganathi ‘Thembalethu’ Daba under another detainee’s identity, and the case of Jordan Adams, who exploited weaknesses in record management to assume a false identity.

“While all three offenders were subsequently re-arrested, these breaches point to deep systemic vulnerabilities in fingerprint verification, record reconciliation, and overall operational discipline. Investigations are underway, and there will be accountability and consequences for those found to have neglected their duties,” he said.

The management intervention is aimed at instituting “corrective measures, restore stability, and strengthen management practices at the facility”.

The intervention will be led by highly experienced department officials, Abel Mashaba and Michael Mafukata who will be deployed to Pollsmoor until the facility regains its footing.

“Pollsmoor is one of South Africa’s big five correctional facilities, strategically located to service numerous courts in the Cape Town metropole and surrounding districts. Its role in the criminal justice system is pivotal.

“Any instability here has a ripple effect across law enforcement, the judiciary, and community safety. We cannot afford to allow breaches of this magnitude to continue unchecked. This intervention is therefore not only necessary, but non-negotiable,” Thobakgale explained.

He added that the intervention is part of a broader plan to strengthen capacity and management at facilities across the country.

“The department has been making targeted appointments to stabilise facilities and strengthen governance structures. These interventions are not limited to management levels alone but also focusing on growing the frontline workforce that powers the correctional system.

“These developments demonstrate the zeal with which we are working to increase the pool of correctional officials, strengthen institutional capacity, and stabilise facilities. The intervention here at Pollsmoor must be understood in this broader context.

“We are committed to decisive action whenever lapses occur, while continuing to build a correctional system that is professional, accountable, and resilient,” Thobakgale concluded.

The post Correctional services commissioner vows consequences following Pollsmoor security breaches appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

The Constitution is the foundation of this country’s law. It is one of the finest legal documents ever written and we are justly proud of it.

The Bill of Rights applies to every person in the country, saint and sinner. That includes Thabo Bester.

Bester is a murderer, rapist, fraud and con-artist. But his rights and the rights of other people like him in South African prisons are protected by the Constitution, as they must be.

Section 35 of the Constitution says that every prisoner has the right to “conditions of detention that are consistent with human dignity, including at least exercise and the provision, at state expense, of adequate accommodation, nutrition, reading material and medical treatment”.

Bester and several hundred other prisoners are being kept alone in small cells 23 hours a day, with only an hour to exercise.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime published minimum rules for keeping prisoners. These are known as the Mandela Rules. They define solitary confinement as “the confinement of prisoners for 22 hours or more a day without meaningful human contact”. It may only be imposed in exceptional circumstances. Keeping someone in these conditions for 15 consecutive days is considered torture.

The Jali Commission in 2005 found that solitary confinement “is a product of our past and should not be resorted to as a norm by prison officials in the new democratic order”. The Commission found that “it is commonly accepted that solitary confinement is one of the worst forms of torture that can be imposed on another human being”. The Commission also found no scientific evidence to justify keeping people in these conditions.

Without meaningful human contact, and often without a way to keep the time, prisoners lose track of the days of the week. Their mental and physical health deteriorates. An inspection by the Judicial Inspectorate of Correctional Services of Ebongweni prison in 2021, found all the prisoners in isolation were on antidepressants. (See also The Impacts of Solitary Confinement.)

One does not have to have sympathy for Bester. Some of his many victims no doubt wish him the worst, understandably so. But the Constitution is unequivocal: everyone must be treated with dignity and not to be tortured. Upholding the Constitution, even for people we dislike, is the way to achieve a less violent, more humane society.

The prisoners being kept in these conditions are for the most part extremely dangerous. The state has to keep them in prison to protect everyone else’s rights. But prisoners’ rights should not be restricted more than necessary.

We degrade our society if we allow the state to torture people. Once we start accepting that human rights are for some but not for others, we start a descent into inhumanity.

The law in a constitutional democracy, the best type of state yet invented, is there to protect all of us from unrestrained state vengeance. It applies to you and me. And it even applies to awful people like Thabo Bester.

This article was reposted with permission from GroundUp. The original article can be found here.

The post The rights of prisoners must be protected, even if we dislike them appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

The offender, identified as Graine Martin, escaped from custody on 9 September, while working as part of facility’s Agricultural Programme.

He was serving a 12-year sentence for three counts of assault and theft, after being sentenced on 29 August 2023.

“Following an intensive search operation, involving SAPS and members of the community, the escapee was found deceased. Preliminary observations indicate that he took his own life through hanging,” the department said.

A police report has been opened with the SAPS with an inquest expected to be conducted “in line with applicable procedures”.

“A full-scale investigation is to be instituted to determine the circumstances surrounding the escape and subsequent death of the offender,” the department said.

Call for G4S termination at Mangaung

Meanwhile, the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services has called for the immediate termination of government’s contract with the private security service G4S, that manages the Mangaung Correctional Centre.

This follows a briefing from DCS on unnatural inmate deaths, with specific reference to Mangaung, Goodwood and Oudtshoorn correctional centres.

Committee chairperson Kgomotso Anthea Ramolobeng accused G4S of “acting as a law unto themselves,” highlighting the committee heard that G4S only provided a report last week on the unnatural death of an inmate that occurred in March 2025, in Mangaung.

According to the statement, in March this year, an inmate at Manguang died following a search operation in which “offenders were allegedly assaulted and tortured”.

The inmate – who was an asthma patient – sustained “severe injuries, including blunt force trauma from tonfas and complications from pepper spray exposure” and died the following day.

The committee heard the contractor presented pre-drafted statements to officials to sign off to ensure their versions aligned. Officials were allegedly also advised to assault the inmate on his body and not the face in order to hide the marks.

“In addition, the committee heard that throughout the investigation into the incident, G4S and its employees sought to conceal the truth and obscure the investigation. This is viewed in serious light as it is tantamount to defeating the ends of justice.

“G4S’s refusal to provide reports about the March incident to DCS and only complied on 4 September, which amounts to refusing to take responsibility,” Ramolobeng said in a statement.

The centre gained infamy following the escape and subsequent re-arrest of convicted rapist and murderer, Thabo Bester, in 2022 and 2023.

The post ‘Full-scale investigation’ to be launched after death of escaped inmate appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

What’s the difference between the two countries’ approaches?

About 9 out of 10 ex-offenders reoffend in South Africa. Expressed as a percentage of 90% of the prison population of roughly 260,000 at any one point in time, this is one of the highest and most unsustainable in the world.

The US has a rate of recidivism of around 67% while China, an authoritarian country where mass executions of recidivists are the norm, has a rate between 6% and 8%.

In Finland, a liberal democracy, the rate is a very acceptable 31%.

The primary cause of reoffending in South Africa appears to be the state’s unwillingness or inability to clear up areas of conflict in society which either breed criminality or fuel reoffending. Examples of these are inequality (a breeding ground for violent crimes), poverty in an otherwise affluent society, chronic unemployment and government practices that marginalise and stigmatise people.

Not only has the state failed to keep citizens safe from preventable crime and harm, but politicians have also used the issue to campaign on a “tough on crime” ticket.

South Africa also has a harsh stigmatising shaming culture, as opposed to an integrative shaming culture, when it comes to people convicted of crimes. In a stigmatising shaming culture, ex-offenders often experience discrimination and ostracisation. This drives them away from mainstream culture and its values and towards criminal subcultures. The US has a similar culture.

In an integrative shaming culture, ex-offenders are encouraged to reintegrate into society. They are provided with employment and other opportunities to ease their transition into mainstream society. China and Japan are examples of this.

This approach is also widespread in African cultures, such as those found in Mali, Kenya and even Nigeria. The reason for this? In most African countries with a history of colonialism, a connection has been established between imprisonment and slavery.

Significantly, the leading Australian comparative criminologist John Braithwaite has argued that stigma is “counter-productive” and fuels reoffending.

Though recidivism (reoffending) is a significant problem in criminology, there are no easy answers on how to fix it. The problem is both complex and nuanced.

Alternative approaches

In a recent paper, I looked at alternatives.

For example, Finland has a hybrid culture. It has a stigmatising shaming culture that is heavily influenced by integrative shaming features. A well-known Chinese proverb proclaims that nuance is everything. These characteristics are evident in the Finnish prison setting as well as the post-incarceration environment.

Strenuous efforts are made to provide ex-offenders with employment opportunities or financial assistance after their release from prison.

And offenders’ concerns are attended to during incarceration. Prison protests, such as hunger strikes, are unheard of in Finnish prisons. In South Africa they are common.

But the most glaring characteristic of the Finnish system is an admirable rate of recidivism of about 31% (with deincarceration at 53 individuals imprisoned per 100,000 in the national general population). Deincarceration is the result of efforts to limit recourse to imprisonment as much as possible. In South Africa the rate of recidivism (reoffending) is between 86% and 94%.

So, even though South Africa’s rate of incarceration (the number of convicted criminals who go to prison) is almost five times higher than that of Finland, Finland has only one third of South Africa’s reoffending rate. The question is why, since both these countries exhibit stigmatising shaming cultures.

In my research I identified specific features within the Finnish system that makes it a good model for the South African Department of Correctional Services to follow. These include:

• Punishment as a mere loss of liberty. Other features of incarceration, such as torture, forfeiture of privileges (such as family visits), degrading or insulting treatment and solitary confinement are not evident in the Finnish system. All of these are evident in South Africa.
• Reintegration into society. Offenders are provided, as far as possible, with employment opportunities and other measures to help them return to mainstream society. This helps them survive in a harsh stigmatising shaming culture.
• Promotion of normal humane conditions in the prison environment. Prisons in Finland are not surrounded by barbed wire, and prison wardens are dressed in normal civilian clothing. Everything possible is done to normalise the prison environment.
• Just and respectful treatment of prisoners, upholding their human dignity. Research has shown that treating offenders in humiliating ways damages their sense of self and complicates their integration into society.
• Responsiveness to offenders’ concerns. Understanding their problems allows them to feel they are part of the system and breaks down their resistance to cooperation with authorities.

What lessons can be learnt

My research shows that South Africa could benefit from Finland’s approach.

South African academic Gavin Bradshaw, an expert on deep-rooted societal conflict as well as social cohesion, notes that:

“Most recent research work on negotiation also supports the fact that integrative approaches are usually far more effective [than power bargaining].”

Recognition of the formerly incarcerated’s basic human needs, as Bradshaw indicates, is bound to have a significant impact on South Africa’s rates of recidivism.

I found that Finland’s great achievement is a result of recognising the basic human needs of offenders and ex-offenders, thereby eliminating this primary source of human conflict. Those needs include employment, where possible, basic accommodation, dignity, and responsiveness to their concerns.

In a country where 9 out of every 10 offenders reoffend, it is perhaps time to reevaluate the rehabilitation paradigm. Finland’s experience shows the value of applying sensible conflict transformation perspectives in the management of crime.

Reposted with permission from The Conversation. The original article can be found here.

The post Nine out of 10 South African criminals reoffend, while in Finland it’s 1 in 3. This is why appeared first on ProtectionWeb.