Minister and Deputy Minister of Correctional Services on Ministerial Task Team findings and recommendations; Legal Advisor on the amendment of Correctional Services regulations: briefings

Meeting report

Presentation by the Minister on Ministerial Task Team findings and implementation of recommendations
The Hon. Noluthando Mapisa-Nqakula, Minister of Correctional Services, noted that the Ministerial Task Team had been appointed in February 2010. It visited all 239 correctional centres. Its mandate was to look at the use of legislative provisions, particularly the Bail Protocol, and vulnerable groups like the elderly, mothers with babies, and the mentally ill. The overarching framework was to look at overcrowding in centres.

It was found that legislative provisions were underutilised. There was lack of understanding and physical capacity to use them. Correctional supervision and parole was hampered by under resourced Case Management Committees (CMCs) and Parole Boards lacking training. Community corrections were under resourced to monitor parolees and probationers. The Bail Protocol was of limited use as a tool to reduce overcrowding. The needs of vulnerable groups were not catered for.

The Minister recommended that Department of Correctional Services (DCS) staff levels be increased. DCS staff had to receive ongoing training. The legislative framework for bail applications had to be reviewed. There had to be alternative custodial arrangements for vulnerable groups, and cooperation with the Department of Health on the management of the mentally ill.

The Minister referred to her budget speech to Parliament on 12 April 2011, in which she had spoken to 12 key themes for the DCS during 2011/12. She had made 56 pronouncements embedded in the 12 themes. She proceeded to take the Portfolio Committee through the 12 themes.

With regard to overcrowding, she noted the proposed electronic monitoring of parolees and probationers, implementation of the Bail Protocol, and the intent to divert those sentenced to less than 24 months to correctional supervision. There were magistrates who resisted the call for bail of under R1 000. Some had fixed bail at R1 050.

An inter-departmental evaluation committee had to be set up for Public Private Partnerships (PPPs).

There was to be the establishment of a remand detention branch, and a new system for the management of remand detention. There would be a White Paper that would guide amendments to the Act.

52 parole boards had been appointed. The law stated that they were to be appointed by the Minister, but management remained on the regional level. There were inconsistencies in the interpretation of the law. Inmates were requesting transfers to places where parole boards were known to be more flexible.

The Minister noted with regard to development programmes, that an offender labour policy framework was ready to roll out. The establishment of a trading entity was being discussed with the Treasury, to market and sale workshop goods. There was work towards declaring 13 youth facilities full-time centres of learning.

As to care programmes, the emphasis was on pharmaceutical services and striving for self-sufficiency in nutrition through farming, and catering.

There was a commitment to fill all vacant posts by 31 March 2012, and to in-service training of officials.

The Minister noted with regard to the 7-day establishment, that the 2x12 shift system had been embraced by the unions, but in February 2010 regional commissioners reported that it was not working. Heads of centres could determine whether it was feasible at a centre, depending on capacity.

Concerning finance resources, the Minister said that one of four key qualifications over the preceding 10 years had been assets. The DCS had performed better in 2010/11. Finance control and compliance had improved.

The Minister noted that planning was under way for using information technology (IT) to increase security of processes, controls and operations. She said that IT had for a long time been the Achilles heel of the DCS. New technologies would be search based, including access to Home Affairs and police fingerprint records. There were still challenges around the implementation of IT in the DCS.

Regarding security, she noted that a Chief Security Officer would be appointed. A gang intelligence unit would be set up. The DCS would establish an own vetting field. The backlog of disciplinary cases had to be cleared.

The Minister noted that the Repair and Maintenance Programme (RAMP) budget for maintenance of facilities had been underspent year after year. Only R100 million of an allocated R800 million had been spent. Kitchens were in a dilapidated state. Officials held the Department of Public Works responsible. The DCS Head Office was currently being leased on a month to month basis at a cost of R2 million per month. It had since been agreed that the DCS had to build its own office or have a permanent lease contract, as the arrangement was too expensive.

The Minister continued that community corrections were the stepchild of the DCS, and were still governed by estimates based on 1993 requirements. There had to be a branch created for community corrections. Halfway houses would be established. The fact that a permanent address was required for parole had to be reviewed. The majority of prisoners were from disadvantaged backgrounds, many were from informal settlements. It was a challenge to be discussed in the Justice cluster. Mother with children facilities were being developed towards greater effectiveness. A first dedicated facility of that kind, within the Pollsmoor precinct, was opened by the Minister on 18 August 2011.

Under general aspects, the Minister referred to the Van Vuuren Judgement, in terms of which there was consideration for parole for 385 lifers sentenced prior to 1 March 1994. The implication was that lifers who had served 13 years and 4 months, were eligible for parole. There was an anomaly in that, seeing that there were prisoners who had served 20 years who were not yet legible. It was a difficult decision to challenge.

The Minister continued that an Executive Programme Management Office (EPMO) would be set up. DCS programmes were being run without coordination.

The electronic monitoring system had been considered as early as 2001, but it was never implemented. Documents on key policy issues could be tracked down by that means.

The Minister turned to the renaming of centres. There had been queries about resources spent and reasons for changing names. But the process had been taken to the public and welcomed by them. Names had emerged from the process.

Discussion
The Chairperson commented on the 385 lifers sentenced prior to 1 March 1994, who were being considered for parole. Lifers were being considered for parole who had only served 13 years. Some of them had committed heinous crimes that flew in the face of a feeling of safety among the public. There was a need to reconsider the decision. The minimum sentence requirement had caused people who had committed lesser crimes to stay in prison longer. He did not intend it as a challenge to the judiciary, but it did not sit well.

The Chairperson told the Minister that the R24 million per year paid for rental of the DCS Head Office, had predated her. He was confident that he expressed the feeling of the Committee when he advised that the time had come for the Department to buy, rather than rent. The current building was dilapidated, as an oversight visit had proved. Things could not continue like that. The DCS had to address the matter.

The Minister responded that the DCS had worked with IDT to seek space elsewhere. The National Commissioner had advised that the DCS build its own building. She was happy about the agreement with IDT. An implementation plan was under way.

The Chairperson referred to underspending on IDT. He said that he was flabbergasted that only R100 million out of R800 million allocated, had been spent. Oversight visits had revealed that there were centres without lights. There were burst pipes and dining rooms under water. The DCS inevitably held the Department of Public Works (DPW) responsible. There had been a service level agreement with the DPW. The Portfolio Committee would lend its support to better spending to revamp facilities.

The Chairperson asked about the matter of male officials in female centres and vice versa. Males in female centres were unacceptable. Events reported on by the media three weeks before confirmed that. He asked about progress with the suspension of officials. He did not desire details, but asked where it occurred.

The Minister replied that difficult decisions had to be taken regarding males in female centres. Regional commissioners, area managers and heads of centres had to engage with officials, to perhaps reconsider the deployment of females to maximum facilities. She would not say that there was discrimination against women. Over the preceding 2 years there had been a sex syndicate for men at Kokstad super maximum facility. There had been instances of unethical interactions between males and females. Female officers spoken to wanted to remain at maximum facilities because they received an allowance for working there. That had to be corrected. It was difficult not to be seen as discriminating against women. There had been instances of males providing favours to maximum inmates. In the end there was corruption on the side of male and female. There had been a sex video involving an official. It was being sold in Cape Town on the streets. The National Commissioner had received the video and approached her. At that point the Minister was informed that an official had been dismissed the previous day. She said that she was embarrassed; she should have been told earlier.

Mr Tom Moyane, National Commisioner: DCS, apologised to the Minister. The date had been brought forward and the culprit dismissed.

The Chairperson noted that the Committee welcomed that. The DCS had proved that it could take urgent action.

The Chairperson noted that the Treasury was adamant to offset R540 million against the future DCS budget. The Committee had pleaded with it to reconsider. The matter had to be finalised, because it qualified the audit report. The question was whether the DCS could start with a R540 million deficit the following year.

The Minister replied that the R540 million had been for overtime, with a view to the 7-day establishment. The agreement to Occupation Specific Dispensation (OSD) had been signed in 2007, to be implemented on 1 May 2008. That gave a year to implement an agreement with labour, but OSD was only implemented in September 2009. The Treasury then did not agree to grant money for overtime, and insisted that it come from other DCS funds. It had become a problem for the Auditor-General and the Treasury.

Ms M Phaliso (ANC) asked if the proposed trade entity would only be for agricultural production, or also for other forms of production like carpentry. If it only applied to agriculture, she recommended engagement with the National Agricultural Marketing Council.

Mr Moyane answered that the trading entity would effect cost recovery on the basis of buying to sell. Materials would be bought to produce furniture, for instance, to move towards self-sufficiency for the prisons and so reduce the role of the fiscus. If prison furniture were produced by inmates, money would be saved for the fiscus. Inmates also produced artworks that could be exposed to the public and sold. An inmate who sold art had to be able to get a portion. The DCS had obtained permission to sell art. The trading entity had to provide the ability to fund self-sufficiency projects.

Ms Phaliso referred to challenges of education in the DCS. During oversight visits the Committee had been told that educators did not want to work for the DCS. In terms of the OSD they were in fact penalised for agreeing to work with prisoners. They did not receive the benefits of other educators who worked for Education.

The Minister replied that it was not only educators who had been affected, but also nurses and health practitioners. It was not just a matter between the DCS and Education, but a Mandate Committee matter.

Ms Phaliso turned to vacancies. She was convinced that the management of the DCS was male dominated. The intended 50/50 proportion did not happen. Males were allowed through a trial and error process, but not females.

The Minister responded that statistics at management level would be supplied. Efforts were being made. There were area and regional commissioners who were female. Posts had been advertised and women interviewed. Appointments would be made. Progress had been made with the process with the filling of management positions. Parliament had been approached and jobs lobbied. There were women who had complained that they had applied but had not been interviewed. The DCS had in the preceding month appointed four women at the Chief Director level. The Minister remarked that she herself was a gender activist and a product of a women empowering process.

Ms Phaliso said that, as regards assets, it was the same gramophone record played over and over.  The DCS showed no appetite to improve. The Committee had been told in 2010 that there would be a report about vetting in the DCS. The Committee wanted detail, according to areas, and numbers. In Kimberley it had been picked up that an official was a member of the 26 gang. If there was already a process for vetting in place, the Committee had to be told.

The Minister responded that there had been four areas of qualification for the DCS. There had been remarkable progress made with assets, as the Committee would yet see. The only challenge that still remained was performance information. The Auditor General had remarked on the improvement regarding assets. For  2010/11, there had been no qualification on assets, as it became evident four weeks previously.

Mr Moyane remarked that vetting was a long standing problem for the DCS. The DCS was a security organisation and everyone had to be vetted. The approach would be to start at the senior management level and then cascade the process down. It was no mean task to vet 41 000 people, and it would have to proceed in phases. Officials had been appointed whose main business would be vetting. Where people with criminal records had been employed, the process had failed in the first stage. It had first of all to be ensured that officials at senior management level were clean.

The Minister added that there were pockets of resistance to vetting in the DCS, even at the management level. A record would have to be provided. There were difficulties. She had told the National Commissioner that there would have to be consequences. The majority of the DCS still had not been vetted, and officials who had served for 10 years asked why they had to be vetted now. Officials had to be informed that security clearance expired over time, and that they would have to be subjected to the process again.

Ms Phaliso concurred with the Chairperson that the renting of the Head Office could not be supported by the Committee. The Head Office had to be secure, the DCS was situated in a dangerous building. The best would be to build a new office.

The Minister replied that the plan was indeed to build. That process was already under way. The National Commissioner would provide a detailed report. A person had been appointed to deal specifically with facilities.

Mr Moyane noted that a 12 month lease had been signed, in stead of a five year one, to prepare for a new facility. Time-lines had been shortened to have the facility ready by November 2012. It had been made clear to the project manager that matters had to move fast. Plans were in place.

Ms Phaliso suggested that statistics around the equity plan be made available to the Committee by 13 September.

Mr V Magagula (ANC) asked if people were agreed about the renaming of centres.

The Minister replied that there had been public hearings. There were pockets of displeasure, but the public had participated, and had been welcomed to do so.

Mr Magagula asked in isiXhosa about people with unusual sex orientations and confusing sexual identities. He asked about events at Boksburg.

The Minister answered that there were a group of vulnerable people in prison of different sexual orientation, who had Constitutional rights that had to be protected. Gay men had been subjected to abuse in centres and had to be protected. It was a Constitutional duty. She was not aware of what had happened at Boksburg, and why certain decisions had been made.

Adv Ngoako Ramatlhodi, Deputy Minister of Correctional Services, agreed that the Boksburg matter presented a challenge.

Adv L Max (DA) remarked that he had been involved with fighting crime, and that crime had never been reduced to the level where it had been when he joined. He referred to staff shortages in the DCS. The Committee wished to assist, rather than criticise. Oversight visits had been made to Kroonstad, Boksburg and Umtata. At one centre there were two officials for 480 inmates. At Umtata, there were three officials to 550 inmates. That state of affairs made it easier to corrupt officials. Inmates knew them and knew their movements, and they had no backup. They were under pressure to accede to inmate demands for their own safety. Commissioner Modise had stated that a staff complement of 46 000 had been budgeted for, but the DCS needed 60 000. There had to be capacity, officials had to feel assisted. Proper recruitment had to be considered, and planning for more than 46 000. Inmates would continue to increase. The police and courts were under pressure to obtain convictions and clear away cases. People were losing jobs under current economic conditions, and were turning to crime. Apart from the Public/Private Partnership (PPP) centres, there was overcrowding everywhere. Plans had to be made to make other centres available. 550 inmates at Umatata were doing nothing but eat and sleep. There were no programmes, and no artisans. An excellent job had been done at Boksburg with artisan training. The position of artisans was critical. Officials with special trades were earning less salary than ordinary officials. They were being penalised. They had to be helped to train people to assist correction.

The Minister replied that it was difficult to fill vacancies. 4 000 vacancies could not be filled at one go. Three officials to 550 inmates caused concern. There was a process geared towards filling vacancies to increase staff to 46 000, with targets for each year. Treasury was reluctant to provide funds because there was no guarantee that they would be spent. Recruitment was a tedious process. By May 2011 all senior management positions had been advertised, interviews had been done and candidates shortlisted, but the question was if the DCS could attract good people. There was a prolonged period between advertising of posts and the final product.

The Minister continued that the problem with artisans was the same as with teachers. It was hard to attract artisans and teachers. Artisans would end up working as ordinary officials, to earn a better salary. They had to be paid market-related salaries. The next Mandate Committee meeting would be an opportunity for people to apply their minds to that. Skills development was crucial to rehabilitation.

The Minister noted with regard to increased facilities, that one could not make pronouncements without having seen all the centres. The situation was uneven. Centres had to be rationalised. There were centres where there only 1.5 to two inmates per official. Human and financial resources were needed. She proposed an audit for merging centres, in the near future. Pre-release centres had to be established. Offenders with sentences shorter than 24 months did not belong in maximum facilities. Elsewhere there were other ways of serving sentences. The local trend had been towards the custodial option, with community correction neglected. Elsewhere inmates were housed in ordinary apartment buildings. That principle could be applied locally for offenders serving less than 24 months. In the UK there were prefabricated facilities built in six months. There had to be a change in thinking to move with the times. There was a need for more space, but incurring building costs of R1 billion would not do. The Kimberley Centre had been projected to cost R400 million, but the final cost was R900 million. There had been an agreement with Defence about obtaining military barracks. There were underused facilities.

The Minister continued that there were issues around overcrowding that had to be dealt with. There was a high rate of police arrests, and the judiciary was struggling to eradicate backlogs. The DCS consequently had to deal with high numbers. Legislative provisions had to be used to deal with categories of people. The setting up of the EPMO plan could reduce overcrowding.

Adv Max said that it had been the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) who had complained to the Committee at St Albans. With regard to proper training for security, he asked if there was a plan to review. Heads of centre could decide, but the question was if the 7-day establishment benefitted service delivery.

The Minister responded that a review of the 7day establishment was currently not planned, but that his suggestion could be taken up. Relations with POPCRU had been affected by the by the late implementation of the 7day establishment, in September 2009, in stead of May 2008. When the decision was initially taken, everyone welcomed it. The continued paying of overtime was not the solution. The question remained whether POPCRU had canvassed with ordinary members prior to signing. The leadership signed in 2007, but they may not have gone to the ground level.

Ms W Ngoaka (ANC) remarked that electronic monitoring was a challenge in the rural areas. She asked how it could be implemented to work there also.

The Minister answered that different models had been looked at for a tagging system.

Mr Moyane added that more technology was currently available for electronic monitoring. The model proposed by the DCS could work in rural areas. It was based on defined parameters, and would work according to exclusive and inclusive zones. The technology selected was based on the needs of the country. It was tailor-made for the DCS.

Ms W Ngwenya (ANC) noted that compliance with bail protocols was a challenge in centres. Committee oversight had revealed that there were many inmates in St Albans with R300 bail. She asked if that was the responsibility of the DCS or a magistrate.

The Minister replied that she had received a report on bail protocol the week before. There were 5 965 inmates with bail of less than R1 000. The EPMO had to be applied. There was the need for a workstream dealing specifically with bail protocol issues, on a day to day basis. Heads of centres were reluctant to implement bail protocol. They were inclined to hold the magistrates responsible. There had to be daily monitoring. The Justice, Crime Prevention, and Security (JCPS) cluster could intervene when bail was R1 000 or less. There had been cases where magistrates fixed bail at R1 050. Magistrates still had to be returned to about R300 bail. The DCS knew where the bottlenecks were.

Ms Ngwenya continued that parole boards were a challenge. The Committee had found that if inmates could not obtain parole from certain parole board, they would ask for a transfer. There was no clear policy for parole. Members said so too. It was hard for them. A good third of them did not know how to proceed, heads as well as members.

The Minister did not agree that there was no clarity on who was eligible for parole. Heads and parole boards had to work pro-actively, and take Case Management Committees (CMCs) on board to assist parole boards with interpretation of legislative provisions. There had to be training. The structure of the Case Management Committees presented a challenge. If they did not comply, they could not be effective. CMCs did not have capacity dedicated to them at Head Office.

Ms Ngwenya related that at St Albans the brother of an offender had been killed by staff in front of him. The Committee had to know what had happened with regard to prosecution. She referred to the fact that the Minister had been informed during the meeting about the dismissal of an official in the sex video matter. She wondered if it was media pressure that had made the Department quick to deal with the matter.

The Minster responded that the DCS had demonstrated a capacity to move with speed. In terms of labour law a charged person had to be represented. A way had been found to deal with that. It showed that, if the DCS wanted to, things could get done. She applauded the quick resolution of the issue. There was pressure on the DCS to deal with outstanding cases.

The Chairperson noted that there had been reports of victimisation of people who had spoken to the Portfolio Committee. The Committee had encouraged people to talk, and if they were victimised Parliament would deal with it. South Africans had to be assured that people would not be victimised if they spoke to Parliament.

Mr Moyane added that all complaints were investigated. Information was verified, and then it was presented to the Minister and the Deputy Minister, especially where an inmate had been killed. Where there was a criminal case, the question was what the head of centre had been doing.

The Minister noted that where someone had been killed, it was a police matter. It was not sufficient to only have the DCS investigating itself. The police had to come in. There had been an incident in Pretoria where there were reports of a man being tortured, with screams heard on the radio.  An investigation was concluded with a report. There had to be a look at cases investigated that in the current year. She felt that the brother of the inmate killed, should have been transferred. The National Commissioner had to say where to. The man had begun to act unpredictably.

Ms Ngwenya referred to the master key system. Once that was locked, inmates were out of reach for 12 hours.

The Minister replied that people were under the impression that the master key could not be changed. If the key went lost, a security company had to change the locks and supply a new key. At a certain facility, there had been no move to change keys after the master key had been lost, after a week. It was the responsibility of the chief security officer. There had to be no unqualified access to the master key. In that case the key had disappeared and no one would take responsibility. That amounted to non-compliance with minimum security requirements. Locks had to be changed immediately.

The Deputy Minister noted that there was a need for the ability to monitor in cells and to move in. There would be a look at the laws that allowed the Department to act.

The Chairperson remarked that the Committee was also considering the idea of monitoring in the cells through electronic means. The issue of privacy had been raised, but privacy could not be chosen over health.

The Minister opined that the debate had to be taken to the South African public. There would be arguments to the effect that it was an invasion of privacy, and that the DCS would not be able to use the information. It was not only the DCS who would be affected by the outcome of such a debate. Inmates knew their rights. They knew the exact date on which they would become eligible for parole. Parliament had to initiate the debate. Laws had been passed by Parliament that made it difficult to monitor inmates.

Ms M Nyanda (ANC) referred to an incident at Boksburg where officials had stood next to the door of a cell talking, and inmates had removed keys from an official, without his even noticing. When the keys were found to be missing, a search was made of the cell, and the keys were found on the roof. IT was said to be on the way. She requested a time frame for that.

Ms Nyanda said that Durban Westville was too big to be run by one commissioner. There had to be two. Mr Modise was at Durban temporarily. She asked why people could not work there. At Umtata there were 58 inmates with two educators. At 12h00 the inmates were told to go back to their cells and study, but there was a scarcity of books. The only books available were old ones.

The Minister responded that the Regional Commissioner of KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) had been suspended. There would be a report. Mr Modise was acting, but Durban Westville was regional. Monama had been transferred to Pretoria Central.

Problems with tuition had been discussed with the Directorate of Development. When the DCS Head Office was approached for a list of critical vacancies, teachers were sometimes not mentioned. It was not a prioritised area. There had to be a focus on finance for filling teaching vacancies. Tuition and skills development were not prioritised. There had been a performance agreement with the President to the effect that tuition had to increase. In terms of the OSD, teachers had to work as officials. It was the fault of the DCS not to have foreseen the implications beforehand.

The Minister asked the Portfolio Committee to assist with oversight in programmes. Treasury had to be approached. The Department could not face the Treasury alone over the R540 million that was to be offset. The DCS needed support to engage the Treasury. The DCS at times did not provide enough information to the Committee, and had to improve in order not to undermine Committee oversight. She invited the Committee to escalate problems to her and the DCS.

The Minister thanked the Portfolio Committee for its support and leadership.

Department of Correctional Services. Amendment of Correctional Services regulations. Presentation
Dr Lirette Louw, Legal Adviser, DCS, noted that amendments were brought about by Act 25 of 2008 and Act 5 of 2011. Regulations made under Section 79 (8) of Act 5 of 2011, concerning medical parole, were submitted to Parliament for approval. (Regulations 29A and 29B).

Amended regulations discussed included the following:

Regulation 7(4)(a) had been amended to include specific reference to Remand Detainees (RDs) pregnant women and the mentally ill.

Regulation 8(4) had been amended to include reference to electronic communications and to mandate cellular phone blocking.

Regulation 10 had been amended to provide for professional educators, and to provide for compulsory education up to the age of 25 years or grade 9.

Regulation 19 had been amended to specify that officials had to be trained before using non-lethal incapacitating devices.

Regulation 26 had been introduced in a new Chapter  to cover persons not falling into the definition of Remand Detainee, but who had to be treated the same.

Regulations 26A to 26I had been introduced to regulate conditions and services for the custody of RDs and pregnant women.

Regulations 29A and 29B provided a process for the processing of medical parole applications, and the appointment and composition of the Medical Parole Advisory Board.
(For full details, please refer to the presentation document.)

Discussion
Mr Magagula asked about the situation with regard to cell phone blocking, when work was performed outside the centre.

The Chairperson remarked that it was thought that access to cell phones was only a problem during a riot. The Committee was in favour of no access at all. There had been a proliferation of cell phones in centres. He advised that if it was possible to block, the DCS should do so. He suggested that it be made standard procedure.

Mr Zach Modise, Chief Deputy Commissioner: Corrections, DCS, responded that there was already a policy to have no cell phones inside centres. Officials had to leave their phones outside.

The Chairperson repeated that if the technology was there to block, it should be used.

Dr Louw replied that it would be necessary to go back to the Regulation of Interception of Communications Act (RICA) to see if it would constitute a legal restriction of inmate rights.

Mr L Jafta, Deputy Regional Director in The DCS, responded that the DCS sought the ability to jam communications of all kinds in centres.

The Chairperson noted that remand detainees were also kept in police cells. The police would say that they had instructions not to provide food to them. That had to be aligned with regulations for remand detainees. The question was whether remand detainees who never went to centres could be provided for over a period of one or two months by the police.

Dr Louw responded that the period that a remand detainee could remain in a police cell had been shortened to seven days. The police had their own rules.

The Chairperson remarked that no South African who had gone to court, whether he had received bail or not, could be sent back to the police. The problem was that a person may be a remand detainee in Johannesburg, but in Putsonderwater he was something else. If a magistrate would not grant bail, the question was if that made one a remand detainee or not. It had to be clarified.

Mr Jafta responded that if there was no remand detention facility nearby, a person would be placed in police custody. There had to be a service level agreement with police about how they would manage that. The law stipulated that police custody should not proceed beyond seven days. The police had to provide clothes for a person to visit a crime scene or go to an identification parade. Even if that person was only kept for three days, clothes had to be provided.

Ms Ngwenya referred to Regulation 26E, about the regulation of labour by remand detainees, and asked if they were paid a gratuity for work performed. It seemed that the police would not allow them to work.

Ms Louw responded that there was a gratuity policy. Orders would be brought in line with regulations.

Ms Nyanda asked about grants.

Mr Modise replied that offenders were not entitled to gratuities or grants. There would be a grant when the offender left prison. The only labour performed by remand detainees was the cleaning of their cells and clothes.

Ms Ngwenya asked what happened when children were cared for by family on the outside, and the mother could not apply for a grant.

The Chairperson told Ms Ngwenya that the grant was to the child, not the parent. The Government decided about applications.

Dr Louw noted that work was in progress to provide distinctive clothing for remand detainees. It would be bright yellow with black markings to identify the wearer as a remand detainee. The clothing would be available by June the following year.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.