Deputy Chairperson, the answer to the first part of the question is no. Although international law, as per the judgment of 23 May 2011, to the effect that the state of California must decrease the level of overcrowding to 137,5% during the next two years, is taken into account, it is not compulsory to implement such judgments in South Africa. According to the most recent available official statistics, as on 31 December 2009 the 33 correctional centres in California had a capacity to hold 79 818 inmates, whilst they had 151 482 inmates in detention, therefore constituting a population level of 189,8%.
On (a), the norm is 3,5 inmates per square metre. On (b), in terms of section 84(2)(j) of the Constitution, the President has the power, amongst others, to pardon or reprieve offenders and to remit any fines, penalties or forfeitures.
The answer to the second part of the question is yes. The problem of overcrowding in the South African correctional system has been identified as a key challenge which negatively affects the ability of the South African correctional system to rehabilitate offenders. Correctional centres are on average 34% overpopulated, as per the statistics of 2010-11.
Initiatives to relieve overcrowding are interdepartmental in nature. It is widely recognised that the solution to overcrowding does not reside solely with the Department of Correctional Services. The Integrated Justice System Development Committee, its substructure, known as the case management task team, and the Intersectoral Committee on Child Justice are responsible for identifying and addressing backlogs that result in overcrowding. Role- players in these structures include the Department of Correctional Services, State security, Justice and Constitutional Development, Social Development and the National Prosecuting Authority.
Legislation to facilitate the possible placement of offenders serving sentences of less than 24 months after one quarter of the sentence, as against one half on parole, as well as to facilitate the possible placement of offenders sentenced to compulsory minimum sentences after one half, as against the current four fifths, is receiving attention by means of the Correctional Matters Amendment Act, Act 5 of 2011.
During 2004 the department implemented a multipronged strategy consisting of the following dimensions: managing levels of remand detainees through the integrated justice system's case management task teams and the Intersectoral Committee on Child Justice; managing levels of sentenced inmates through improving effective and appropriate use of conversion of sentence to community correctional supervision, release on parole, and transfer between correction centres to attempt to establish some degree of evenness with regard to overcrowding; ensuring progress with the department's capital works programme to upgrade correctional facilities and to build correctional centres that are both cost-effective and rehabilitation-oriented; encouraging debate in South Africa about reasons for incarceration as a sentence, and encouraging an approach to appropriate sentencing that is focused on facilitating rehabilitation; enhancing community correctional supervision so that it can be better utilised as an appropriate sentence for less serious crimes; improving corrections and development programmes in the department to ensure and enhance facilitation of rehabilitation that targets offender behaviour; encouraging improvement of first and second levels of corrections in the family and social institutions, including economic sector government departments, commensurate with entry into the criminal justice system; and, finally, encouraging community involvement in social reintegration of offenders back into the community in order to assist in reducing levels of repeat offending.
On 31 May 2005 the President granted a specific period of special remission of sentence to sentenced offenders, amongst others, to enhance the humane detention of inmates. The impact of that decree was a decrease of 24,6% in the overpopulation rate from 62,51% during 2004-5 to 37,91% during 2007-08.
The effective use of section 62(f) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977, which allows for a court to release an accused on bail, with the provision that the accused is supervised by a probation officer, a correctional official, or a community corrections office, is actively propagated. It is hoped that more awareness of this section will succeed in alleviating the fears of courts regarding the granting of bail and thus ensure that more accused persons are granted supervised bail instead of awaiting trial in correctional centres. As we speak, of the approximately 160 000 inmates in our facilities, a third are awaiting-trial inmates.
According to section 63(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Act 51 of 1977, the head of a correctional centre may apply to a court to release certain awaiting-trial detainees if the conditions in the correctional centre will result in a material threat to the human dignity, physical health or safety of the accused; or the accused is charged with an offence for which a police official may grant bail; or the accused was granted bail by the court but could not afford to pay the bail amount.
The impact of the initiatives mentioned is that they managed to further decrease the overcrowding rate of 37,91% during 2007-08 to 34% in 2010-11, as against a target of 38%. Thank you, Deputy Chairperson.