"Prisons can be an expensive way of making bad people worse." This argument was documented in the British White Paper on Crime Justice and Protecting the Public produced in 1990.1 Critics of imprisonment for petty offenders have expanded on this theme. Vivian Stern writes: "After a spell in prison the young man involved in petty crime has become a person who rejects society’s values as society has rejected him."2 Such arguments seem to have been ignored in England and Wales, where Conservative Home Minister Michael Howard’s ‘get tough’ policy is still implemented by Jack Straw, his Labour successor, and the prison population continues to rise. It would be a pity if the South African government were to emulate these policies, for this would reduce the existing alternatives, such as the use of the suspended sentences, probation and community service. If South Africa wants to achieve a more flexible and varied system, in which punishments are both ‘deserved’ and ‘tailored’ to the individual offender, an expansion and variation of punishment are certainly desirable. In addition, alternative sanctions have treatment components directed at employment, addiction and family/relationship problems. Such treatment appears to have a significant effect on the reduction of recidivism. The expense of such alternative sanctions, however, must be taken into consideration. Unfortunately, there is no easy solution to the provision of such alternatives, since many government departments are hindered by the persistent lack of resources.

The building of more prisons through privatisation is high on the government’s agenda, but this raises a number of issues of political and moral principle, which go well beyond questions of performance or cost. For example, is it correct for the state to delegate the delivery of punishment to private enterprise? And if delegation is proper, on what basis should accountability be secured in a post-modern society where ‘public’ and ‘private’ domains are becoming less and less easy to separate? In addition, is it ethical to make a profit out of punishment? Hopefully, such questions suggest other areas of debate for policy-makers.

The proactive initiatives, including the prisons at Goodwood and Malmesbury, and the Pre-trial Services Offices, will help to alleviate the crisis of overcrowding. Yet, there is a danger that the Department of Correctional Services is focusing the prison debate purely on the provision of more facilities and improved security at existing ones. This means that little attention will be given to rehabilitative forms of justice, alternative forms of sentencing and other innovative ways to reduce pressure on the prison system. Indeed, in contrast to the debate on justice, safety and security, there has been surprisingly little consideration of new options for the corrections authorities. The long-term solution is not the construction of more, bigger and better prisons, but prioritising the reformation and the reintegration of the offender. A point often forgotten, is that most prisoners will return to society with the high probability that they will commit crime again. Somehow, the cycle of recidivism has to be stopped if the incidence of crime and the number of people being sent to prison are to be reduced. Such interventions are urgently required, as it can be expected that law enforcement initiatives in the run-up to the 1999 election will deliver more offenders to be processed through the criminal justice system.

As highlighted earlier, the crisis of overcrowding in South African prisons is the result of many factors. It is the number of awaiting trial prisoners, however, that should be of particular concern to the government. Such persons, who have not been convicted, are exposed to the most horrific prison environment. Stern’s statement about alienation and rejection is also relevant to awaiting trial prisoners, since it is inside penal institutions rather than outside that many learn the most about criminal activity. Such a cycle has to be broken if offending is to be reduced. Yet, the tougher bail laws, whatever their other effects, will increase the number of awaiting trial prisoners. In addition, the implementation of the minimum sentencing legislation will compel the Department to respond to the crisis of overcrowding of sentenced offenders.

Surely, prison’s only justification is its lack of realistic competitors in the provision of punishment. Yet, the prison environment itself may create or aggravate the very behavioural and psychological problems underlying much criminal activity. Boredom, though it may constitute an important aspect of punishment, must not go unrelieved. Arts and crafts, drama, music, dance and sport need to be readily available within prisons. These activities also have a clear ‘socialising’ aspect. If the prison offers inmates opportunities that are of interest and importance to them, the social climate of the prison is likely to be improved and tedium and frustration alleviated. Thus, the reformation of prisons into more humane and less damaging institutions provides the only way to give prisoners a more secure and cohesive environment inside, with all the concomitant advantages of re-establishing their self-esteem and promoting their reintegration into society at large.

The recent appointment of Dr Ben Skosana as Minister of Correctional Services should ensure that the Department continues to address fundamental problems and focus on developing reintegration programmes for prisoners. Skosana has a major task ahead, as he will be trying to change the poorly managed prison system during the run-up to the next general elections. The pre-election period in 1994 was characterised by simmering prison disturbances. While the political context has changed dramatically, continued over-crowding, poor relations between wardens and prisoners and the availability of few alternatives to imprisonment, mean the possibility exists that prisons will once again be characterised by unrest.

South Africa has the potential to learn from the mistakes of other countries. There is no single solution to the crisis in the prisons. Only a mixed and flexible package of providing humane penal institutions and alternatives to imprisonment will contribute to the reducing of offending in the long-term.

Endnotes

V Stern, A Sin Against the Future, Penguin Books, London, 1998, p. 337.



Ibid., p. 338.