The current status of correctional system in South Africa is a result of many changes that have occurred in the past. During the 1600s most sentences were aimed mainly at deterring other citizens from offending; hence the punishment was carried out in public (Coetzee, et al., 1995). It is believed that the first correctional centre to be established in South Africa was Robben Island, which was characterised by severe punishment. The first correctional centre in the Cape was established in 1781 and by 1848, 22 correctional centres had already been developed around the Cape. In Natal, the first correctional centre was established between 1838 and 1842 in Pietermaritzburg and after 1854, the Orange Free State and Bloemfontein also built their own prisons. The first correctional centre in Pretoria was established in 1865. By 1873, there were already 33 prisons in the Transvaal (Neser, 1993).
109
5.2.1. South African Correctional Centres in the early 1900s
According to Van Zyl Smit (1992), the unification of South Africa that took place on 30 May 1910 led to many changes regarding the operations of prisons. Many changes started after Jacob de Villiers Roos, who had at the time been working as the Director of Prisons for the Transvaal since 1908, was appointed as the Secretary of Justice and Director of Prisons for the Union. His first major role was to come up with legislation that would regulate the operations of prisons. The outcome of his work was the Prisons and Reformatories Act 13 of 1911.
The 1911 Act had many shortcomings when it came to the administration of correctional centres, as described by Coetzee, Kruger and Loubser (1995). A few of the weaknesses of the Act include the lack of clarity with regard to the aims of imprisonment. This led to correctional centres focusing more on safe custody and prisoners were detained under harsh conditions. Punishment and forced labour were the order of the day within the prisons. In addition, section 9(1) of the Act made specific provision for racial segregation, which on its own was a problem.
5.2.2. The 1947 Lansdowne Commission on Penal and Prisons Reform
Owing to the high level of recidivism amongst prisoners, there was a need to investigate the operations of the prisons so that changes could be made where necessary. The Lansdowne Commission was appointed in 1941 and only released its findings in 1947. One of the major findings of the report was the problems that were associated with the Prison and Reformatories Act 13 of 1911. It emerged that, instead of introducing a whole new era of the operation of prisons, the Act continued to support the previously used harsh sentences and inequitable prison system (Van Zyl Smit, 1992).
Coetzee, Kruger and Loubser (1995, p. 31) also mention that the Commission had the mandate to investigate the following:
The whole structure of the Department of Prisons
Methods of recruitment used by the Department as well as the qualifications of the prison officials
Classification and control of prisons
110
Various forms of programmes aimed at educating and training offenders in various skills
The remuneration of offenders for the work that they did
The use of prisoners for labour by private institutions or individuals The transfer of prisoners from prison to society
After a few years of investigating, the Commission finally released its findings and recommendations. Amongst others, the Commission made the following recommendations: “It did not support the hiring of prisoners to private institutions or individuals, it emphasised the rehabilitation of prisoners and the provision of education and training and it discouraged the military approach to management followed by the Department, as this was not conducive to the rehabilitation efforts” (White Paper on Corrections, 2005, p. 44).
5.2.3. The Era of South African prisons from 1959 to 1993
In 1959, the Prisons Act 8 of 1959 replaced the Prison and Reformatories Act 13 of 1911, which was believed to be a failure since it did not even state the aims of imprisonment, to begin with. This Act was influenced by the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners developed by the United Nations in 1955. The Act did manage to set out the responsibilities of the DCS as follows: safe custody of offenders, development and rehabilitation of offenders, efficient management of the DCS and the performance of other duties that can be assigned by the Minister.
However, the Prisons Act later called the Correctional Services Act 8 of 1959, also had its own shortfalls. Even though it attempted to be in line with the Standard Minimum Rules, some provisions were in conflict with these rules (Human Rights Watch, 1994, p. 1). For example, Rule 6(1) of the Standard Minimum Rules states that all the provisions should be applied impartially without any discrimination on one or more of the following grounds, i.e. race, colour, gender, language, religion or other opinion, national or social origin, property or other status. However, the Correctional Services Act 8 of 1959 itself stated in section 23(1) that: “as far as possible, white and non-white prisoners shall be detained in separate parts thereof and in such manner as to prevent white and non-white prisoners from being within view of each other; and wherever practicable, non-white prisoners of different races shall be separated”.
111
Van Zyl Smit (1992) mentions that the racial segregation of offenders continued even after the introduction of the 1959 Act, which was supposed to be a replacement of the 1911 Act. In addition, corporal punishment was retained as a means of punishment for disciplinary offences committed by male prisoners, even though the Standard Minimum Rules strictly opposed this type of punishment. The Act did not promote the principle of transformation in the prison system either.
Throughout the years there have been many changes in South Africa, be they political, economic, social or technological. These changes influenced the day-to-day running of prisons. For example, political control of the past as characterised by the rule of apartheid also extended to the operations of prisons because prisons are government institutions. The separation of white offenders from non-white offenders and the dominance of white people in the management of prisons are some of the examples of the apartheid rule. However, the reversal of racial segregation which had been part of South African prisons for more than a century began in 1988 owing to amendments to a number of regulations that referred to race (Van Zyl Smit, 1992). In 1990, a national peace accord that led to the end of all discriminatory laws was signed. The end of discriminatory laws also extended to prisons, where racial discrimination was abolished.
5.2.4. The Correctional System in South Africa since 1994
According to Coetzee and Gericke (1997), the history of the South African correctional system as represented by the apartheid regime led to the mistreatment of offenders and staff members in general. Important developments occurred in South Africa immediately after the 1994 elections. After the elections, there was a need to develop a new set of laws that would regulate a non-racial South Africa not only within the correctional service but in every government unit. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa of 1996 was then implemented, and it introduced a culture of human rights for everyone, including offenders. The first step taken by the National Cabinet was to remove Correctional Services from the Department of Justice to become an independent department with its own Minister (Gxilishe, 2004). Correctional Services also had to make changes in its legislation so that its operations were in line with the Constitution and, more specifically, to meet international standards. As a result, the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998 was drafted.
112
The changes that occurred in 1996 with the appointment of a Minister of Correctional Services led to a whole new phase in the correctional system of South Africa. In the mission to do away with the past, the Department of Correctional Services has redeveloped itself into a whole new system which pays attention to the rehabilitation of offenders (Muthaphuli, 2008). In addition, the establishment of major organisations such as the Police and Prison Officers Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) and the Correctional Officers Union of South Africa (COUSA), which protects the interests of correctional officials, as well as SAPOHR, which promotes offenders’ rights, has played a significant role in revolutionising the correctional system of South Africa (Muthaphuli, 2008).
The mandate of the Department is currently drawn from the 1996 Constitution of South Africa (incorporating the Bill of Rights), the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998 (as amended), and regulations, subordinate policy and institutional orders, the National Crime Prevention Strategy and the White Paper on Corrections in South Africa. The introduction of both the Constitution of South Africa of 1996 and the adoption of the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998 (as amended) saw the Department of Correctional Services moving away from the old methods of operation (Muthaphuli, 2008). New policies and procedures were introduced which recognise the rights of inmates, thereby ensuring the effective functioning of the Department. In his foreword to the White Paper on Corrections in South Africa (White Paper on Corrections, 2005, p. 7), the former Minister of Correctional Services Mr BMN Balfour confirmed that “it took the political metamorphosis of 1994 to introduce the first steps along the path of respect for human life and human dignity. The transformation programme of this country’s first democratic government necessitated that prisons shift from institutions of derision to places of new beginnings”.
5.3.Provisions of the Constitution of 1996 in Relation to the Rehabilitation of