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.

The government has about 81,000 properties in total, but only 56,000 have had assessments done to estimate maintenance costs. The current backlog will cost R30-billion — money the department doesn’t have. The longer it takes to clear the backlog, the more it will cost as buildings grow older and their conditions deteriorate.

The departments with the biggest maintenance backlogs are those responsible for the country’s safety and security:

Buildings used by the South African Police Services require R8.8-billion to maintain and repair.
Those used by Correctional Services, including prisons, require R8.4-billion.
The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, including court buildings throughout the country, requires R4.6-billion.
The Department of Defence requires R4.1-billion.
Of the government’s 81,000 buildings, only 1% are in excellent condition. 13% are in a good condition, 77% in fair condition, and 9% in poor or very poor condition.

Written by GroundUp and The Outlier and republished with permission. The original article can be found here.

The post Billions needed to fix courts, prisons and police buildings 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.

A New Vision for African Prisons

The theme of the workshop, “Philosophy as the Driving Force Behind Prison Design,” underscored a growing consensus that correctional facilities must move beyond punitive legacies rooted in colonial-era practices. Historically, many African prison systems were designed to serve colonial ideologies focused on containment and discipline rather than rehabilitation. Today, the imperative is to reshape these systems around dignity, reintegration, and human rights.

Jules Amoti, head of ICRC Southern Africa, opened the session by invoking the biblical principle of grace and redemption, linking spiritual values with the physical space of incarceration. He called on delegates to embrace the belief that prison buildings can embody a vision of hope, change, and justice. This tone set the foundation for discussions that followed, which consistently called for a reimagining of infrastructure as a tool for restorative justice.

A Shared Challenge Across the Continent

Speakers from across Africa echoed the same core challenges: overcrowded facilities, outdated infrastructure, and underfunded systems. Many noted that the physical conditions of prisons, often unsafe, unhygienic, and inhumane, compromise not only the well-being of inmates but also the effectiveness of rehabilitation efforts. The need for investment in new facilities, alongside the renovation of existing ones, was universally acknowledged.

Importantly, participants emphasised that these reforms must be contextually grounded. Facility design should reflect local climatic conditions, cultural practices, and community dynamics. Rehabilitation is not an abstract concept, they said, but one that requires practical, evidence-based implementation tied to local realities.

Namibia as a Model for Reform

Namibia was praised for its steady progress in transforming its correctional system. Since 2010, the NCS has adopted an offender risk management strategy rooted in evidence-based rehabilitation. The Correctional Service Act of 2012 (Act No. 9 of 2012) has served as the legal framework supporting this transition, enabling a gradual shift from punitive incarceration to holistic correctional care.

The construction of modern facilities such as the Hardap, Elizabeth Nepemba, and Windhoek Correctional Centres were highlighted as tangible results of this strategy. These prisons reflect principles of unit management and are designed to facilitate more effective rehabilitation, social reintegration, and staff-inmate interaction.

The Role of the ICRC and International Partners

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), a key partner in the workshop, presented its work on improving detention conditions globally. In 2024 alone, the ICRC visited approximately 660 detention facilities across 67 countries. Their assessments span access to clean water, healthcare, ventilation, and the ability to run effective rehabilitation programmes, many of which remain deficient in African settings.

The ICRC also introduced a new Prison Maintenance Guide developed in collaboration with African nations representing over 65% of the continent’s prison population. The guide aims to assist governments in maintaining humane conditions through practical and scalable maintenance plans.

The Path Forward: Collaboration and Accountability

Throughout the workshop, there was a strong call for African-led reform, drawing from indigenous knowledge systems, community-based justice traditions, and the involvement of religious and civil society groups. Speakers called for the inclusion of formerly incarcerated individuals in the design of programmes, stressing the value of lived experience in informing policy.

A representative from the African Union highlighted the need to move away from imported penal models that no longer serve the continent. He argued that rehabilitation and reintegration must be embedded in national correctional policies and legislative frameworks.

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) and faith-based collaborations were cited as effective mechanisms to address budgetary limitations while enhancing rehabilitation services. The case of Zambia was referenced as an example, where the government had actively engaged a wide range of stakeholders in reform efforts.

Official Opening and Call to Action

The workshop was officially opened by the Minister of Works and Transport, Veikko Nekundi. In her keynote, she reiterated the government’s commitment to transforming the correctional system and expressed gratitude for Namibia being chosen as host country. Nekundi noted that Namibia stands to benefit significantly from the knowledge-sharing and technical insights expected to emerge from the event.

Delegates were encouraged to seize the opportunity for collaboration, explore innovative approaches, and share practical experiences that can be scaled across the continent. The workshop was framed not only as a platform for technical exchange but as a call to leadership, courage, and vision in reshaping African correctional services for the 21st century.

This fifth African Prison Infrastructure Workshop marks a pivotal moment in the collective rethinking of incarceration across the continent. By aligning infrastructure with rehabilitative philosophy, African nations aim to build correctional systems that are humane, effective, and sustainable. The workshop affirmed that the future of justice in Africa will not be measured by how many are imprisoned, but by how many are restored to society as changed individuals.

The post Fifth African Prison Infrastructure Workshop Opens in Namibia appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

The court ordered that the constitutional invalidity be suspended for a year and directed the National Commissioner of Correctional Services to promulgate a revised policy.

Pending that, the court said that any inmate registered as a student with a recognised tertiary or further education institution and who reasonably needs a computer to support their studies, would be entitled to use their personal in their cell, but without the use of an internet modem.

Such inmates would be required to make the computer available for inspection at any time. In the event of a breach of rules and after considering representations from the inmate, the head of a correctional centre may direct that the inmate may not use their computer in their cell.

Wednesday 30 April’s order is to a large degree the same as a ruling handed down by the Supreme Court of Appeal which, in November 2023, also found that the blanket ban was unconstitutional.

That order was taken on appeal by the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and the National Commissioner of Correctional Services.

Justice Steven Majiedt, who penned the Constitutional Court ruling, said the issue in the matter was the right to further education.

He said the blanket ban emanated from a departmental policy approved in February 2007.

The initial challenge to it was launched in the high court by Mbalenhle Sydney Ntuli, represented by Lawyers for Human Rights, who was serving a 20-year sentence for robbery. Ntuli had complained that he was struggling to complete his data processing course because he could not work from his cell where he spent most of his time.

While conceding that prisoners had a right to further education under section 29 of the Bill of Rights, the Minister and Commissioner argued that allowing prisoners to keep laptops in their cells would create a security threat.

Justice Majiedt said it was common cause that Ntuli had since passed and graduated. “Almost the entire factual matrix is undisputed,” he said.

After Ntuli had been transferred to Medium C from Medium B, his laptop was taken away and he was told to use the computers in the computer room.

However, the computer room was only open during certain hours, only occasionally at weekends and never on public holidays. It was exceptionally noisy.

Ntuli said he was being deprived of sufficient time to study.

The Minister and the Commissioner, in opposition to the application, expressed concern that inmates might smuggle modems into their cells or use illegal cell phones to create hotspots.

“The high court took the view that the applicants had not provided any evidence that, where computers have been allowed in cells, even with a modem, there had been any security breach,” Justice Majiedt said.

“It further held that the respondent had the right to study as much as he pleased, within the legitimate limitations that prison life inevitably presents.”

In the first appeal, the SCA held that the policy infringed the right to further education.

In the Constitutional Court, the Minister and the Commissioner argued that Ntuli was not being divested of his right to further education, but that the right was merely being regulated in a reasonable manner.

Ntuli had only been allowed to use his computer in his cell in Medium B because there was no computer room at that time.

Their security concerns were justifiable and the court should not “second guess” the authorities on this issue.

Ntuli’s lawyers, however, argued that the policy is antiquated, that a personal computer was critical to success in his field of study, that electronic versions of books cost less than hard copies and that downloading study materials from the website was much faster than the conventional postal service.

The Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services, which was admitted as an amicus curiae (friend of the court), submitted that in terms of international law, South Africa was obliged to adopt and implement education policies that meet the needs of incarcerated persons to be part of an equal, fair and just society.

The policy should not unreasonably infringe the rights to education by prohibiting the use of necessary tools.

Justice Majiedt said: “Incarceration does not take away or limit fundamental rights like education, dignity and access to reading material.”

He said the virtues of education had rightly not been disputed.

“We are concerned here with a limitation of the right of a person pursuing further education to have access to electronic study material. It matters not that the person is an inmate, because he enjoys all the rights accorded to non-inmates, save as they are reasonably limited in consequence of his incarceration,” he said.

“The duty of the state is to remove barriers to education and actively allow access to necessary resources to realise the right to education.”

The blanket ban limited that right, he said.

Regarding the justification for the limitation – that the right to further education does not mean having a personal computer at all times in a cell – Justice Majiedt said: “The simple answer to this is that access to the computer room is wholly inadequate and in effect boils down to an unjustifiable limitation.”

Regarding fears of security breaches, he said, “this attempted justification does not get out of the starting gate” because the Minister and Commissioner had not produced evidence to back up their claims.

“There is simply a glaring dearth of evidence to substantiate these security concerns. That is not what is expected of those responsible for the policy,” he said, which applied to “all and sundry” without any regard whatsoever to personal circumstances and study needs.

He said the Minister and the Commissioner had complained that the SCA had “ventured into the exclusive policy terrain of the executive”.

“This argument is ill-conceived. Courts have a constitutional duty, as a check and balance on executive power, to determine the constitutional validity of any law or conduct. They (the Minister and the Commissioner) do not have unfettered power to implement policies which undermine the Constitution.”

Justice Majiedt said the case was only concerned with the rights of prisoners to personal computers for educational purposes.

“Nothing in this judgment should be regarded as expressing a view on the justifiability of restrictions on the use of personal computers in cells for any other purpose.”

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

The post Prisoners can use computers to study in their cells, says Constitutional Court appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

This was the gist of Correctional Services Minister Pieter Groenewald’s response to a question asked by MKP (uMkhonto weSizwe Party) National Council of Provinces (NCOP) Member of Parliament (MP) Edward Nzimande. The Gauteng public representative of what is the official opposition in South Africa’s seventh democratic administration sought clarification on the issue of private prisons as well as risks and benefits involved.

The private prisons are the Mangaung Correctional Centre in Bloemfontein, managed and operated by British security company G4S, and the Sinthumule Correctional Centre outside Louis Trichardt, where United States (US) private corrections company CEO Group has the management contract.

Mangaung has the dubious reputation of being the place of incarceration the so-called “Facebook rapist” Bester escaped from in 2022 while the Limpopo facility was rocked by a violent riot which damaged it last year.

Groenewald told his questioner his department will not renew the two management contracts when they expire.

He is not pro privatising prisons because all powers are relinquished to a private company allowing them to perform all custodial functions. These include implementing policies and prescripts relating to, among others, safe custody; rehabilitation programmes; security/custodial personnel and facility management.

Nzimande was further told even where prisons are privatised, DCS retains overall responsibility for the contracted company’s operations. This responsibility goes to a DCS controller permanently at the facility for the duration of the contract.

The post Days of private prisons in SA numbered appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

On Tuesday 29 October, the committee met to discuss the findings of a Public Protector’s report into Bester’s escape. Many MPs raised concerns about implementing recommendations made by the Public Protector before they have finished their own oversight process.

Bester escaped from the Mangaung Correctional Centre in Bloemfontein — a privately-run maximum security prison — in May 2022 by faking his death in a cell fire with the help of celebrity doctor Nandipha Magudumana and several prison officials. He and Magudumana were arrested in April 2023 and are awaiting trial.

Days after the duo’s arrest, the committee held a two-day hearing into Bester’s escape which was televised. The hearing was attended by ministers, top police and prison officials, representatives from Integritron Integrated Solutions, and multinational security company G4S, which runs Mangaung prison.

Janho Engelbrecht (DA) said the committee’s inquiry into Bester’s escape had not been completed. “There’s public expectation that the parliamentary process we started in the previous term will be concluded.” He said that the ongoing court case between the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) and G4S over control of the Mangaung prison “does not preclude us from pursuing the matter”.

Committee chair Anthea Ramolobeng (ANC), told MPs that though the hearing was held over two days there was “so much to absorb” and “too much information”. She noted that there was outstanding information needed by some departments.

Meanwhile, the Public Protector found there was “undue delay” in how the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) handled the escape. Remedial action included giving the National Commissioner of Correctional Services 90 days to create an Escape Prevention Strategy and Guidelines for the Mangaung prison, and to set guidelines for handling reports of corruption within 120 days.

Mogodu Moela (ANC) said, “We need to ensure that we play our role to ensure that the [Public Protector’s] remedial action is implemented because there are legal consequences if we fail to play oversight”.

He also highlighted the financial implications of prolonging an inquiry. “The remedial action is clear about what must happen. We need to close the matter so that we don’t cause a lot of expenses to the point where we think of broadening it and bringing in commissions and other things that will drag out the process and cost us money we don’t have,” he said.

Kabelo Kgobisa-Ngcaba (DA) suggested that Parliament’s researchers review past findings and ensure any unresolved issues are included in the current committee’s work. “Ultimately, our goal is to make sure that nothing like this happens again and that those involved are held accountable,” she added.

Ramolobeng assured MPs that she would ask Parliament’s research team to collate the outstanding reports of the previous enquiries into Bester’s escape. Ramolobeng suggested that the department first present to the committee before submitting its final report to the Public Protector.

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

The post Parliament debates report on Thabo Bester’s prison escape appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

Pieter Groenewald, who took over the Correctional Services ministerial portfolio in the government of national unity (GNU) post the May election, provided an answer to Nombuso Mtolo with information starting in the 2019/20 financial year. At that time Ronald Lamola, now International Relations and Co-operation minister, headed up the Correctional Services portfolio along with the Justice ministry.

All told, starting in 2019/20 and through to 2023/24, 1 679 Correctional Services officials were suspended with 586 dismissed. The suspensions were all precautionary.

Some have not been finalised with 36 of the 357 cases reported in 2019/20 still under investigation. Similarly, there are 31 outstanding from 2020/21, 83 from 2021/22, 77 from 2022/23 and 50 from 2023/24.

Dismissals reflect termination of service, while suspensions fall into two categories. Some charges come with an automatic suspension based on the seriousness of the offence, while other suspensions are considered if the presence of the employee poses a danger to the investigation.

Groenewald’s spokesperson Euné Oelofsen said, “The minister has said on record that, by far, the majority of employees within the department are hard-working, honest employees with integrity. Incoming employees should take note of the zero-tolerance approach towards corruption. New appointments should be based on merit and persons should be fit for purpose.”

The post Almost 600 Correctional Services officials dismissed over five-year period appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

Despite being informed of the escape in June 2022, it wasn’t until January 2023 that the Department of Correctional Services formally opened an escape case with the police.
Two officials have been implicated and face disciplinary measures.

The Minister of Correctional Services must acknowledge the findings of improper conduct against the officials, and the National Commissioner of Correctional Services must develop an Escape Prevention Strategy and a documented guideline for handling corruption, the Public Protector said.

Bester escaped from Mangaung Correctional Centre, a privately-run maximum security prison, in May 2022 by faking his death in a cell fire with the help of celebrity doctor Nandipha Magudumana and several prison officials. He and Magudumana were arrested in April 2023 and are currently awaiting trial.

The Public Protector launched an investigation in March 2023 after receiving a complaint from a member of the public that the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) had failed the public in its handling of the escape.

The report by the Public Protector, which GroundUp has seen, concludes that the conduct of two DCS officials, Roseline Phahlane and Chris Mahonono, “constitutes improper conduct as contemplated in terms of section 182(1)(a) of the Constitution and amounts to undue delay as envisaged in section 6(4)(a)(ii) of the Public Protector Act.” (Section 182 of the Constitution gives the Public Protector its powers.)

Phahlane, the DCS’s Director of Contract Management, oversaw the contract with Bloemfontein Correctional Contracts, the private company that runs the prison with multinational security company G4S.

Although the DCS had already been informed of the escape by the police by June 2022, it was only in November that Phahlane alerted the National Commissioner of Correctional Services Makgothi Thobokgale.

Thobokgale then instructed that an escape case be opened with the police. Mahonono, the DCS’ controller at Mangaung Correctional Centre, was designated to do this.

But according to the report, Mahonono “took a casual approach” and it was only in January 2023 that the escape case was opened.

Mahonono claims that the police refused to open the case, which SAPS denies.

The Public Protector found that it was “improbable” that the police would have refused to open a case. The investigating officer, Lieutenant Tieho Flyman, told the Public Protector’s investigators that he had advised Mahonono to open the case in November 2022.

Both Phahlane and Mahonono have been subjected to disciplinary processes, have received final written warnings, and are now placed in alternative positions. Phahlane was charged with misconduct in prejudicing the administration and efficacy of the DCS.

Mahonono was charged with two counts of misconduct, to which he pleaded guilty: gross negligence because he did not revoke Bester’s transfer to the Broadway segregation unit, from which Bester escaped; and dereliction of duty for failing to visit the segregation unit after being informed of Bester’s transferral. This oversight resulted in Bester’s escape.

Remedial action ordered by the Public Protector includes:

The Minister of Correctional Services must “take note of the findings of improper conduct” against Mahonono and Phahlane.
The National Commissioner of Correctional Services must develop a DCS Escape Prevention Strategy and Guidelines for the Mangaung Correctional Centre within 90 days of receiving the report, and develop a Documented Guideline on how reports of corruption are to be dealt with by the department, within 120 days of receiving the report.
The Speaker of the National Assembly must bring the report to the attention of the Chairperson of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services within 30 days of receiving the report.

The report says that because disciplinary processes had already been instituted against Mahonono and Phahlane, no further remedial action was necessary against them.

Written by Marecia Damons and Daniel Steyn for GroundUp and republished with permission. The original article can be found here.

The post Public Protector blames Correctional Services for prolonging Thabo Bester escape appeared first on ProtectionWeb.

During a recent briefing by the Department of Correctional Services, one of the members of the committee brought up the fact that up to 40% of parolees go on to reoffend and commit serious crimes. These crimes include rape, murder, assault and robbery. “With shocking crime stats still fresh in our minds, it is harrowing to realise how many of these crimes would have been avoided if dangerous parolees had been kept off the street,” said Action Society spokesperson, Juanita du Preez.

“To make matters worse, last year SAPS revealed that they do not keep records of parolees nor are they aware of their whereabouts. These shocking facts were revealed in a two-page response in August last year on a request for access to information that Action Society sent to the South African Police Service (SAPS) on 18 January 2023,” the civil rights organisation said.

“In August last year, President Ramaphosa granted a special remission, resulting in the release of approximately 14 651 offenders, both conditionally and unconditionally, and the freeing of an estimated 20 855 probationers and parolees. This decision, taken in the absence of a robust and accountable criminal justice system, underscores the need for comprehensive reforms in our approach to law enforcement and criminal justice. In the meantime, strengthening community engagement and empowering provinces to manage their own policing can provide immediate relief and a path forward to a more secure and just South Africa,” Action Society said.

“We believe that the overhaul of the parole system is one of the key points that should receive immediate attention in the fight against crime. Dangerous offenders cannot even be considered for parole. The current parole system doesn’t lead to rehabilitation, it leads to reoffenders and this cannot be allowed. The parole system is being abused to cheat justice. There needs to be reform and change to keep the people of South Africa safe and we hope that this committee will take these matters seriously and come up with effective solutions,” said du Preez.

Another concern raised was medical parole acting as a type of ‘get out of jail free card.’ According to some members, inmates who are released on medical parole after being declared ‘terminally ill’, oftentimes completely slip out of the system and are found years later to be back in society and completely healthy. Former president Jacob Zuma is an obvious example, Action Society pointed out.

The Committee all agreed that parolees that reoffend is one of their biggest challenges. They also said that they will involve the Minister of Justice and promised that any new legislation or changes to legislation will be done in the next 24 months so that they do not fall behind.

“We urge the committee not to delay for 24 months, but to prioritise the parole issue for the next 12 months,” Action Society concluded.

The post Action Society calls for immediate parole reform to keep violent criminals out of communities appeared first on ProtectionWeb.