Minister of Correctional Services on National Commissioner's accommodation investigation, Department's legislative programme

Meeting report

The Minister of Correctional Services was accompanied by a delegation composed of the Deputy Minister Ms Hlengiwe Mkhize, Lirrete Louw (Legal Advisor), Sonwabo Mbananga (Media Liaison Offiicer), Gcinumzi Ntlakana (Political Advisor).

The Minister, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, told the Committee that the last time they had met, the Ministry undertook that the matter of the suspension of the National Commissioner would be resolved by August 2009. However because of due processes there had been challenges that prevented them from fulfilling that promise.

Despite that there had been interviews that had taken place and a report was produced on 31 July 2009. The report stated that there was a need for further investigation. They believed that by 15 August 2009, the investigation would be complete; however having a report was not enough to find a person guilty.

They were no longer handling the matter, but the Department of Public Service and Administration was. The Minister of Public Service had been given a deadline, as DCS wanted a commissioner in their Department by 1 September 2009.

The Minister told the Committee that they were happy with the way that things were going at that moment.  They had findings and recommendations. At that moment the report was not favourable to the suspended Commissioner. However she could not tell the Committee anything beyond that as the Minister of Public Service and Administration had requested so.

Accommodation was a real problem in the Department, the Minister told the Committee, and what made it worse was the fact that there was no policy on the matter. However it was also not acceptable that the Commissioners were making the Department pay so much rent for their residences. However they were not the only people who were guilty of that, there were many others. The Department had given them three months notice to find alternative accommodation.

Discussion
Mr Z Madasa (ANC) voiced that he was impressed by the fact that the Committee had been given a report as promised by the Minister. The Minister was urged by Mr Madasa to speed up the conclusion of the matter pertaining to the suspension of the National Commissioner by engaging with her counterpart, the Minister of Public Service and Administration. The Committee was really curious about hearing about the findings. However he was satisfied to hear that the report was not favourable to the Commissioner and that there were no cover-ups. 

Ms B Blaai (COPE) added that there was a need to have a permanent National Commissioner in Correctional Services so it was important for the process to be completed soon. Having no permanent National Commissioner would present instability.

Ms Mapisa-Nqakula, Minister of Correctional Services, said that she appreciated what the members had said, and that if it was up to her, she would speed up the process, however they were limited by due process that needed to take place. The Commissioner was allowed 7 days to respond to the report. And that was a lot of time, however there was nothing they could do about it as they did not want to prejudice her.

Mr J Selfe (DA) said that he understood that the matter was still being investigated and there were certain things that the Minister could not say, however he wanted to know what the terms of reference were with regards to the case.

The Minister said that she was sorry that they did not have the terms of reference, but they would be sent to the Chairperson who would then distribute them to the members.


Mr Selfe said that based on what the media had been saying, he understood that the National Commissioner had received permission to rent the accommodation from the previous Minister, and also had give permission to the Gauteng Regional Commissioner   to also rent the property she was living in and the Provincial Commissioner had a relationship with the Minister’s predecessor. Mr Selfe wanted to know if this had been looked at in the case.

Mr Selfe added that the Regional Commissioner of Gauteng had also been accused of other things such as the hiring of motor-cars and going to the Grahamstown Festival, he thus wanted to know if these matters were covered by the investigation, and if not what was being done?

The Minister replied that she was aware that there were many other matters that had come out subsequently to the National Commissioner case. However the Department had responded to those allegations. But the one matter that she had been personally involved in with the acting National Commissioner was the issue raised around the Gauteng Regional Commissioner.

The Minister added that Correctional Services had inmates performing at the Grahamstown Festival and the Gauteng Commissioner had been invited to the festival. She added that the Commissioner was not the only person from the Department who attended the festival; there were many other DCS people.

Mr A Fritz (DA) supported the matter of the due process, however the one issue that baffled him was the fact that there were serious allegations made against the Gauteng Commissioner, however the Commissioner was not suspended. So why was the Gauteng Commissioner not suspended?

The Minister reminded the Committee that when she suspended the National Commissioner, there was initial information at the disposal of the public. The Minister had written a letter to the National Commissioner and the National Commissioner responded. Some of the matters that were in the public domain regarding the Regional Commissioner of Gauteng were internal issues and should not have been made public. There was a lot of information leakage from the Department, some of which were purely administrative matters, which should have never been in the public domain

The Department acted by studying information, verified the information. If they acted on the basis of media reports on matters, which clearly had no substance, there would be instability in the Department. The Minister said that if she believed that there was substance, the person involved would be put on precautionary suspension and the matter would be investigated. The fact that the Regional Commissioner of Gauteng was not suspended, was not a move to cover up or to protect her.  

Mr N Fihla (ANC) said that the problem with accommodation did not lie only with the Correctional Services Department, but also with the Department of Public Works. Correctional Services could not take a unilateral decision with about to the provision of accommodation.

The Minister replied that Mr Fihla was correct to say that the matter of accommodation was a joint responsibility of the Department in conjunction with Public Works. But the truth of the matter was that there was no housing policy. And thus they would have had to develop a housing policy. The issue of rental accommodation was not acceptable. All members who were occupying private properties that were rented by the Department should have received letters from the National Commissioner instructing them to vacate those premises and move to the premises of the Department. The Department was also developing a policy about what was a reasonable rental.

The housing problem also existed in the Eastern and Western Cape, but the two Regional Commissioners were staying in houses that were not too expensive to rent. Other people were living in state houses and not necessarily Correctional Service properties.

The Minister said that all of the challenges about accommodation had arisen in the Department because there was no housing policy. But the two Commissioners were renting very expensive houses and that is why the Department started its investigation with them. 

Mr Selfe said that he asked the question about the Regional Commissioner of Gauteng because he had seen a notice from Mr Manzini inviting people who had information about the Commissioner to report it to the Public Service Commission. However with regards to the Minister saying that there were many leakages in the Department, he hoped whatever steps the Minister took, would not result in the shooting of the messenger.

What Mr Selfe wanted to know was, when would the Minister meet with the Committee again to give them a report. 

The Minister said that the matter regarding the leaking of information was not about shooting the messenger. When the report was ready, the National Commissioner would have to present it to the Committee. The Minister stated that it was better to brief the Committee when the Department was ready and not give bits and pieces of information, as that would cause unnecessary problems and tensions. So she certainly could not commit to appearing before the Committee until the report was completed.

With regards to the statement made by Mr Manzini, the Minister said that she did not recall seeing it.

Mr Fritz said that he thought the allegations against the Regional Commissioner of Gauteng were very serious and that is why he believed that the Commissioner should be suspended. The Minister should apply her mind and see that, suspending her would be based on the fact that it would prevent her from interfering with the investigation.

The Chairperson said that the Committee was really eager for the matter to be finalised sooner rather than later. The Committee wanted stability in the Department. The Chairperson welcomed the fact that the Minister was hoping to have the matter concluded by the end of September or October. The Committee had a meeting set for 18 November with the Department of Correctional Services and perhaps they could conclude all these matters at that meeting.

The Minister said that it was the Ministry that really felt the pinch. There issues were happening at a time when they had just signed an Occupation Specific Dispensation and there were challenges at the correctional centres including hunger strikes. Furthermore the Department needed an accounting officer, but when could they get an accounting officer, in the light of the situation they were in.

 Department of Correctional Services legislative programme
The Minister said DCS did have ambitions to pass certain bills. However, the Department was aware that it was impossible to pass all the legislation it wanted this year due to time constraints. It was impossible for Parliament to pass the legislation during the current Parliamentary session.

However there was work that had began in the Department with regards to developing policy. The Department had agreed that they needed to clean up the Correctional Services Act. The Correctional Services Act had been passed without a white paper, so the Department needed to see that the Correctional Services Act was in line with the Constitution and the White Paper. So there was a process taking place at that moment aimed at identifying which sections of the Act needed cleaning up.

The second area that the Department wanted to look at was the issue of remand detainees. The Department wanted to set up a branch dealing with remand detainees. However the whole matter of remands detainees was not a matter for Correctional Services alone, but it was supposed to be a responsibility of the Justice Crime Prevention and Security Cluster (JCPS). This is because it was mainly a responsibility of the Department of Justice. However, Correctional Services was dealing with the matter. And the Minister had set up a task team.

The Department wanted to remove the section on remand detainees in the Correctional Services Act and set up a stand alone section to deal with remand detainees.

Furthermore Correctional Services was consulting with its legal team to determine whether it was necessary for the Department to regulate the use of Electronic Monitoring. This was because one of the Department’s strategies to reduce overcrowding in prisons would be to tag prisoners. However they were not sure if they would need regulation to have this in place.

Other legislation that the Department wished to bring forward to Parliament was legislation that would allow women with children to have their sentences converted, so that they could go and serve community corrections. The Minister said that that did not mean the Department did not take note of the nature of crimes that these women had committed. However they had to deal with overcrowding in the prisons. It was also wrong to punish a child because the mother had committed a crime. When one looked at the situation, there were many children in prison because their mothers were there.

The fact that there were many young people in prison serving lengthy sentences was an indication that there was something wrong. The Minister had thus requested that the National Commissioner together with academic researchers carry out research to see if the very same children who were born in prison are not the young people who ended up in prison later on in their lives.

Another matter that they wanted to look at was the issue of Medical Parole, the Department wanted to develop policy around the issue. The ACT at that moment only referred to people who were terminally ill. A team was going to be requested to carry out the development of the policy, however it was not going to work alone. The team would also consult specialists such as medical practitioners and NGOs.

So it was not possible for the legislation to be passed in 2009, as it was August already. The Minister said that there could be more areas identified for legislation. However at that moment they were focusing on what had been mentioned.

Discussion
Mr Madasa agreed with the Minister, remand detainees was a cluster issues. He also voiced that he was not happy that many who were on trial were put together with people who were already sentenced.

Mr Fihla said that prisons must aim at normalising prisoners and not punishing them. This was because secluding people was already a punishment in itself. South Africa had to look at what was happening in other countries such as Denmark where there were open, semi open and closed prisons

The Minister replied that it would have been good if the Committee actually had an insight on the various forms of prisons available. So that when the Department visited the Committee it would be aware of the various Correctional concepts. She stated that they relied a lot on the Portfolio Committee. There were various types of prisons that were available but they would take time to implement in South Africa.

Mr Fritz asked the Minister when would the Correctional Services Amendment Act of 2008 be brought into operation?

The Minister said that the proclamation of the Act would occur on 1 October 2009. The sections that were not going to enter into operation by 1 October 2009 were Section 48 and 49 of the Act, which dealt with the Incarceration Framework.

Ms Ngwenya said that she thought that it was about time that the Committee dealt with legislation about women and children in prison. She knew a few people that were born in prison and were not criminals. She asked the Minister when would the research actually be put in place.

The Minister replied that she hoped that there would not be a delay with the Department carrying out the research. However the problem was that people in the Department never followed directives until they were given written notice to do so.

Mr Abram (ANC) said that there were many illegal substances in prison, numerous detainees were dealing in drugs and some were even becoming millionaires while in prison. He asked if the legislation that was being proposed was going to clamp down on such activities.

The Minister replied that there was a lot happening in prisons that Mr Abram did not want to know about. If he wanted to know then he should visit Pollsmoor Prison.

Another member of the Committee said that it was sad to see women with children in prison, and thus supported the Minister on the fact that the law had to be amended so that women with children could have their sentences altered. However she believed that there were habitually criminal women in prison who could not be taken out due to the nature of their crimes.

The Minister said that the actual issue was the ability to separate. When a woman committed a crime while she was pregnant, she had to be given the opportunity to give birth outside and allowed two years to look after the baby and then be taken to prison. Looking after children was not the core mandate of DSC.

The Minister then provided another example, saying that the Department of Correctional Services was providing health facilities at its centres even though it was not their responsibility, but the responsibility of the Department of Health.

Mr Selfe said that a deferred sentence would give women an incentive to remain pregnant just to stay out of prison. There were some very dangerous women out there. There had to be accommodation provided for women with children in inside prison. That accommodation had to appear as a normal environment but yet be secure.

The Minister said that these were some of the things that the Department was looking into. There had to be broad consultation. The whole cluster had to come up with proposals. The issue was not about the mothers, but about the children as it could not be right for a child to not know grass. And it could not be right for children not to know men.

The Minister said that she was not looking at improving what was happening in prisons, but at transforming the system. She was aware of the fact that some of the crimes committed by women were very serious and those women could not just be left to roam freely.

Ms Ngwenya said that there were many reports that were still due to the Committee and these included the report on the unnatural death that had occurred at Kokstad Prison.

The Chairperson also acknowledged that, and requested that the Department of Correctional Service should arrange for a day where they could give a report on all unnatural deaths in prison including the Kokstad one.

The meeting was adjourned.