Chapter 4

IMPRISONMENT ISSUES IN SOUTH AFRICA

In order to assess offender reintegration realistically, it is necessary to consider briefly what happens in prisons, who are incarcerated there and the reasons for their incarceration. Many of the problems experienced by prisoners and former prisoners can be related to structural issues such as overcrowding and sentencing policies.

Large-scale imprisonment is a fairly recent phenomenon and prisons only became a structured form of punishment in the late 18th century. According to Foucault, the establishment of this system of punishment was completed in 1840 with the opening of Mettray Prison:

These characteristics are still visible in most contemporary prisons. The key in understanding imprisonment and thus offender reintegration, is understanding discipline and the consequent loss of power.

Overcrowding

Crime and punishment have always been part of human society, but in the past 200 years may have taken on a political dimension not known before. Politicians and the private sector have become keenly interested in these phenomena with millions of people world-wide sitting out time in prisons, often under the most deplorable conditions. There are few issues as popular with prospective politicians as the pre-election proclamation to the public that they are going to be ‘tough on crime’ — tougher sentences, more secure prisons, indefinite incarceration and the lowering of age limits are often utilised to lure the electorate. Across the world, people are being imprisoned at unprecedented rates (figure 1). In the United States, there are currently 1.5 million prisoners, or 615 prisoners per 100 000 of the population. In some of the states, this figure is as high as 1 000 per 100 000 of the population. In South Africa, the imprisonment rate was 368 per 100 000 of the population in 1992 and by 1999, rose to 390 prisoners per 100 000 of the population.

The world-wide trend in imprisonment is reflected in South African statistics. In July 2000, the prison population reached a total of 169 486. However, more than 34% of the prison population is awaiting trial, placing enormous strains on resources. In July 1996, the average detention cycle for an awaiting trial prisoner was 76 days. By July 2000, this figure had increased to 138 days. For regional court cases, the average period is 221 days or seven and a half months. The current estimated cost of imprisonment is R86 per day per prisoner or R31 390 per year. It is therefore not surprising that the Department of Correctional Services’ budget grew rapidly from R751 million in 1989/90 to R3.51 billion in 1997/8, and R5.78 billion in 2000/1.42 Despite these massive increases, the ratio of staff to prisoners did not improve and was reported in 1997/8 as being 1:4.54, an increase from the previous year’s 1:3.47.43 Under these conditions, it becomes nearly impossible to render quality services to prisoners in general.

The sentence distribution of prison admissions indicates that large numbers of prisoners are sentenced to serve short sentences of less than six months (table 1). This figure has changed significantly over the last few years from 78.54% of admissions in 1984/5 to 55% in 1997. The table clearly shows that the length of prison sentences is increasing, with sentences of longer than two years especially showing the most dramatic change: from 9.78% in 1984/5 to 30.78% in 1999. The effectiveness of a sentence of less than six months under the current prison conditions is dubious, and it is often contended that such sentences serve as a practical training ground for gansterism and criminality.

South Africa is experiencing a rapidly increasing prison population for two reasons. Firstly, the number of awaiting trial prisoners is continuously increasing with no real prospect for a substantial decrease due to the apparent inability of the criminal justice system to finalise cases speedily. Secondly, the duration of sentences is also increasing, with more people having to stay in prison for longer periods. Overcrowding and staff shortages have a severely detrimental effect on prisoners and limit the prospects of rendering services that will assist prisoners upon their release. Apart from staff shortages and overcrowding, the physical structures of prisons are also rapidly deteriorating. South African prisons were not built for the numbers of people currently accommodated, or for projected numbers in the near future. The result is that the basic infrastructure in prisons, such as water supply, sewage and kitchens, cannot cope with the demand.

The age, gender and sentence profile of the sentenced prison population presented in table 2 shows that 98.6% are male and 1.4% are female. It is interesting to note that nearly 63% of the sentenced population are over the age of 25 years. It is cause for concern that nearly 1 748 children (under the age of 18 years) were serving prison sentences in July 2000, with some of them of extremely long duration. Children continue to present a particular problem to the government despite numerous efforts by several roleplayers, and changes in policy and legislation to remove children from prisons.44

Figures available for 1996/7 indicate that approximately 10 000 prisoners are released every month in South Africa.45 Table 3 provides a summary of the data for the period June 1996 to May 1997.

The entire purpose of sentencing and imprisonment (when used) should be the successful reintegration of the offender. Seen against the backdrop of releases per month, the scope and extent of such reintegration services required to have any real impact are enormous. A much more comprehensive strategy, starting with sentencing itself, is required to address reintegration. Providing more services at the end of the line, or developing programmes for exceptional cases will not be successful. This is not impossible to achieve, provided that the various functionaries in the criminal justice process share a common vision. It will require a dramatic redirection of resources to crucial stages in the criminal justice process so that informed decisions can be made. Appropriate sentencing, proper release preparation and effective post-release service will be the key strategies to be followed.

Apart from the statistics and numbers, qualitative aspects of imprisonment should also be considered. Imprisonment undoubtedly has an impact on mental health and stability. A French team of researchers, led by Dr Henry Gonin, undertook a five-year study at Lyon prison to assess the health conditions of prisoners. The notion of health adopted by the team was that of the World Health Organisation. The following are some of the key findings of what can be described as ‘carceral suffering’:46

The meaninglessness of time is disorienting and 33% of prisoners were unable to concentrate.



After one year of incarceration, 50% of prisoners could not control their memory adequately and 40% experienced sudden ‘mind voids’.



Some 75% experienced dizziness that was sometimes described as a ‘menacing emptiness’.



The feeling or experience of emptiness was linked to self-negation with prisoners trying to make themselves invisible in an effort to avoid being under constant observation.



Bodily functions and senses atrophied. For example, eyesight deteriorated as a result of the confined space and it took double the effort to focus (there is also no reason to look around).



Prisoners’ sense of hearing was over-developed and they became hypersensitive to noise.



Tactile senses tended to disappear in an apparent effort to deny the threatening environment in which prisoners found themselves.



Many prisoners suffered from ulcers and fatigue.



The suicide rate in prisons is six to seven times higher than outside.

Every year, thousands of mainly young men are sent to prison, often for very short periods of time. Even a short prison term can have a dramatic effect on the emotional and personal well-being of any person. Apart from exposure to hardened criminals and prison gangs, a young man leaving prison after only six months has probably experienced some of the worst situations and conditions in his life so far. The fact that much of South Africa’s prison population is serving sentences of less than six months and that, in all likelihood, no services will be provided to assist them upon their release, is concerning. This no doubt is partially to blame for the current recidivism rates.

A day in Pollsmoor prison Providing 3 000 prisoners with three meals a day in a prison that was built for 1 500 inmates is no mean feat. In order to serve breakfast between 07:30 and 08:30, the staff have to start with breakfast preparation at 02:30. Preparation for lunch and dinner, which are served at the same time, also starts hours in advance. Prisoners are allowed to take their dinners with them to their cells to eat it at a later stage. Due to staff constraints and working hours, prisoners must be locked up in their cells by 15:30, where they remain until the next morning.

Imprisonment is an extremely expensive sentencing option and generally ineffective in terms of preventing further offending. It succeeds merely in removing certain individuals temporarily from mainstream society, but does not create a sustainable and lasting intervention against crime. Prison is a society in and of itself, operating with its own rules and mechanisms. The patterns of behaviour learned in prison are generally not in line with those that are acceptable in society. The power wielded by gangs in prisons and perpetuated outside prison is indicative of the pervasiveness of the gang culture in prisons and its effects on prisoners and former prisoners. Learning new rules and standards of behaviour and applying them in everyday decisionmaking are essential in offender reintegration. It also has to focus on unlearning, for example, that violence is an accepted solution for conflict, that responsibility can always be shifted to someone else, and that immediate gains always supersede long-term goals.

The structural condition of South African prisons (such as overcrowding, staff shortages and infrastructural collapse) severely undermines the potential positive outcome of a term of imprisonment. When people are living in conditions that are inhumane and are often treated as something other than human, it is unlikely that they will treat other people humanely. Treating and respecting prisoners as human beings, with all their rights and responsibilities, form the foundation of all offender reintegration initiatives. Without this, the chances for success are severely diminished.

Legislation

Section 2 of the South African Correctional Services Act (no 111 of 1998) states that:

"The purpose of the correctional system is to contribute to maintaining and protecting a just, peaceful and safe society by -

(a) enforcing sentences of the courts in the manner prescribed in this Act;

(b) detaining all prisoners in safe custody whilst ensuring their human dignity

(c) promoting the social responsibility and human development of all prisoners and persons subject to community corrections."47

Chapter 4 gives further guidelines on how section 2(c) should be implemented. It places the emphasis on the goal of encouraging prisoners to lead a socially responsible and crime free life. The Act also encourages the participation of prisoners in designing programmes for their sentences.

Section 38 stipulates that an assessment of every prisoner needs to be conducted in terms of:

security classification;

health needs;

educational needs;

social and psychological needs;

religious needs;

specific development needs;

work allocation;

allocation to a specific prison; and

needs regarding reintegration into the community.

With regard to prisoners serving a sentence of 12 months or longer, the manner in which the sentence should be served must be planned based on this assessment and particular comments put forward by the sentencing court.

Section 41 of the Act further states in terms of services to prisoners that would facilitate their reintegration that:

The Department must provide or give access to as full a range of programmes and activities as is practicable to meet the educational and training needs of prisoners.



Sentenced prisoners who are illiterate or children may be compelled to take part in the educational programmes offered in terms of subsection 1.



The Department must provide social and psychological services in order to develop and support sentenced prisoners by promoting their social functioning and mental health.



The Department must provide as far as practicable other development and support programmes which meet the specific needs of sentenced prisoners.



Sentenced prisoners have the right to take part in the programmes and use the services offered in terms of subsection 1, 3 and 4.



Sentenced prisoners may be compelled to participate in programmes and to use services offered in terms of subsections 1, 3 and 4 where in the opinion of the Commissioner their participation is necessary, having regard to the nature of their previous criminal conduct and the risk they pose to the community.



Programmes must be responsive to special needs of women and they must ensure that women are not disadvantaged."

The above sections of the Correctional Services Act clearly place an enormous responsibility on the Department of Correctional Services. If the requirements of the Act are seen in the context of the available resources and capacity of the Department, it begs the question whether the Act is realistic. The Act is written in the liberal human rights-based tradition of the South African Constitution and despite the laudable aims of the Act, it is questionable whether the Department of Correctional Services can comply with these standards. The sheer number of prisoners and the increasing pressure on the Department as a result of the criminal justice system’s inability to process cases speedily make it virtually impossible, however good its intentions, for the Department to render a service approximate to the standards laid down in the Act. The essential resources to facilitate reintegration, as shown in table 4, are in short supply in the Department. The table also presents the staff to sentenced prisoner ratio. It should further be noted that not all positions were filled. For example, only 39 of the 64 posts for psychologists were filled at the time of writing.

The position of the Department of Correctional Services in the government’s National Crime Prevention Strategy (NCPS) published in 1996, and specifically the lack of priority given to offender reintegration is rather perplexing. Prior to the partial enactment of the Correctional Services Act, the NCPS was formulated and adopted by the government departments concerned. This policy pays virtually no attention to offender reintegration. Rather, the emphasis is placed on the prison construction programme and how the Department of Correctional Services will deal with high-risk prisoners.48 It would not have been far-fetched to include offender reintegration as a key strategy in the NCPS, since the target group is a captive audience and probably presents the highest risk group in terms of reoffending. British research indicates that at least 50% of all men and a third of all women released from prison will be reconvicted for another crime within two years.49 Estimates for recidivism rates in South Africa are higher. At Johannesburg prison, 2 000 of the 3 000 prisoners were recidivists in 1997. Other sources estimate recidivism of released prisoners to be between 85% and 94%.50

The impact of any offender reintegration initiative will be greatly enhanced by a legislative and executive framework that is facilitative and shares a common vision. In the South African situation, offender reintegration is undermined by two important factors: firstly, the limited status it enjoys in the NCPS, and secondly, the fact that current sentencing policy and practice dump large numbers of young men in prison for short periods where they idly sit out their sentences.