Progress: Implementation of Correctional Supervision and Parole Board Grootvlei Building a caring correctional system that truly belongs to all Presentation to Port Folio Committee 5 September 2006
INTRODUCTION Seipati Dichabe Chairperson of Correctional Supervision and Parole Board A divorced mother of three, a girl (pharmacist), boy (engineer) boy (economist) Qualification; MA in Neuro-Linguistic from the University of Ottawa (Canada) Hobbies: Music (Gospel Opera) , Writing, ( School Language books) Boards serving: SA Geographical Names Council (Deputy-Chairperson) Free State Provincial Geographical Names Committee (Chairperson) Setswana Lexicography Board (Member)
LOCATION OF PAROLE BOARD Groenpunt Grootvlei
Composition of the Board • CHAIRPERSON: S DICHABE • DEP CHAIR: VACANT • SECRETARY: G G NAMANE • TWO CLERKS: C KOTZE M M METSING • TWO COMM MEMBERS: VACANT (Interim Members: M D Pahlane and LM Padi)
Composition of the Board (Continue) • Deputy Chairperson: Full time posts to be filled at ASD level posts have been advertised, currently occupied by a DCS member. • Both community members are on a three monthly contract appointments the initially appointed members both resigned. (M D Pahlane and L M Padi: Interim Members). • The members of the SAPA and DOJ have not yet been appointed to the board.
OPERATIONS • CASE LOAD PER MONTH THE PAST YEAR: 155 • TOTAL FOR THE PAST YEAR : 1868 • NUMBER PLACED ON: * Parole: 568 * Day Parole: 18 * Correctional Supervision: 61 * Medical Parole: 0 * SED: 51 * Further Profile: 1150 • Special Remission: 16 - Possession of dangerous weapon: 4 (4 x 3 months) - Possession of drugs: 6 (6 x 2 months) - Theft cell phones: 3 (3 x 1 month) - Negligence with keys: 2 (2 x 2 months) - Good performance: 1 (1 x 3 months)
PROCEDURES THAT THE BOARD FOLLOWS • Preparation for the hearing * Submission of G326 by CMC * Ensures that calculations of dates are correct * Compilation of agenda * Ensures that notices of sittings are send 14 days before sitting to Offender, Offender Representative ( If indicated) Victim, Victim Representative (If present) All Board members
PROCEDURES THAT THE BOARD FOLLOWS (Continue) • During the parole hearing * Role of representatives are explained * Ensures that all sittings constitute a quorum * Consult with other CSPB’s in cases of co-accused * Each offender’s case must be treated according to its own merit * Questions addressed during the sitting are based on info from G326 * The chairperson allows members to vote for placement of non placement of offender.
INFORMATION RELEVANT FOR DECISIONS TAKEN • Each offender must be considered individually on own merit. • Whether the offender has undergone rehabilitation and developmental programs • Type of crime is taken into consideration especially age of victimsin rape related crimes. • Value and mass of drugs is taken into consideration. • Remarks of the presiding magistrate play an important role. • Consistency must be practiced in similar cases • Offender’s historical criminal background • General behaviour of the offender whilstincarcerated • Information provided by both victim and offender and their representatives. - Positive support system
ROLES OF CMC. OFFENDER AND VICTIM • CMC: - Must ensure that all relevant information is provided in the G326 - Provide recommendations for placement/non placement of offender - Provide condition for the parolee during the parole period - Ensure that all documentation are included in the report (G326) - Prepare document for special remission of offender for the CSPB.
ROLES OF CMC. OFFENDER AND VICTIM (Continue) • OFFENDER: - To arrange for a representative for the hearing - Must be informed by the CMC about its recommendations forwarded to CSPB and must sign to acknowledge. - The offender must be provided with a chance to provide information to the CSPB - All decision taken by CSPB must be forwarded to the offender - The offender may request through the HCC to forward a review of decision taken by CSPB to the Review Board.
ROLES OF CMC. OFFENDER AND VICTIM (Continue) • VICTIM: - Must be allowed to provide a representative during the hearing - May be present at the hearing if he/she so wish - Must be informed within 14 days about the date, venue, and time of the hearing - Must be informed about the decision of the CSPB regarding the placement of offender on parole.
LESSONS LEARNED • There has been a tendency of officials towards the lack of eagerness to implement policies and the Act. Through the quarterly meetings of all stakeholders held, the awareness and education of officials to implement policies and the Act has been positive. • Most of the offenders placed on parole have skills but lack knowledge on how to make use of these when been placed out on parole. The establishment of parolee skills and development centres to encourage them to be entrepreneurs • Due to the un-acceptance of and perception about offenders in some communities resulted in recidivism. The establishment of Restorative justice centres to address the a standing conflict between the offender and victim
LESSONS LEARNED (Continue) • The community lack information related to the incarceration of offenders. The appointment of community members for the placement of offenders on parole has assisted with the implementation of the White paper on Corrections through Imbizos and public awareness meetings. • Establishment of offender support groups has been put in place to assist with community re-integration process.
CHALLENGES - Incomplete profiles reports G326 from CMC. • Lack of important documents such as SAP 62, Sentence Remarks • Lack of contact details of victims • Vacant posts of SAPS and DOJ representatives • G326 profile report from private prisons • Incarceration of short term offenders at Mangaung Max prison • Lack of sentence plans for offenders especially at DCS centres • Programs offered not related to the crime of the offender. Offenders been taken through Life skill programs despite the type of crime committed. Professional officials feel that the CSPB is interfering with their expertise and responsibilities. - Training of community members
CHALLENGES • Offenders from communities outside the jurisdiction of the CSPB - Lack of acceptance and support for offenders from family andcommunities - Offenders having been incarcerated for a long period with having undergone rehabilitation and/or developmental programs
ADDRESSING OF CHALLANGES • The CSPB has taken a stance to return back all incomplete G 326 • This still creates a problem as the CSPB relies on information provided by the offender during hearing • In some cases where the offender knows the victim the chairperson and the community members visit victims and request them to provide written reports if they can not personally attend hearings. • The chairperson would request the SAPS of the community where the offender comes from to try assist in tracing the victims. • A request has been made to the regional office to assist in • correcting the information currently available on the private prison systems
ADDRESSING OF CHALLENGES (C0ntinue) • Request are made for transfer of these offenders to DCS centres • This problem makes it difficult for the CSPB to make concise decisions because the offender rehabilitation path is not implemented. This however is not the case at private prisons. Implementation of the unit management system has been enforced • Recommended programs are still been requested by CSPB from professionals • The CSPB in consultation with Community corrections where Offenders come from are addressing the problem • Currently the CSPB has taken upon itself to liaise between families and communities through the assistance of professionals. • The enforcement of offender to be engaged in rehabilitation programs by CSPB before decision on placement is considered.
Thank you Building a caring correctional system that truly belongs to all